ArticleEuropean journal of neurology2026
Erenumab and OnabotulinumtoxinA in Chronic Migraine: A Comparative Analysis.
Article in European journal of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare response (reduction in headache frequency and differences in patient-reported outcomes) between Erenumab and OnabotulinumtoxinA from two phase-IV trials after 6 months of treatment. MATERIALS/
methodsA prospective cohort study included two parallel cohorts of chronic migraine patients treated with either Erenumab 140 mg/month or OnabotulinumtoxinA 195 U every 3 months. Participants had no additional preventive therapies or comorbid psychiatric or chronic pain conditions. Baseline data collected included demographics, monthly headache (MHD) and migraine days (MMD), impact scales (MIDAS, HIT-6, MSQ), and anxiety/depression scores (BAI, BDI-II). Assessments were repeated at 6 months. Baseline characteristics were balanced. Efficacy analysis (measured by reduction in MHD/MMD and impact scales) was conducted using paired t-test, and linear regression models compared treatment-related changes between groups.
resultsA total of 114 patients were analyzed (57 per group), with no significant baseline differences. Both treatments produced significant reductions in headache frequency at 6 months (Erenumab: -7.93 MHD and -5.36 MMD, p < 0.001; OnabotA: -6.00 MHD and -4.31 MMD, p < 0.001), without statistically significant differences between therapies. Significant improvements were observed in HIT-6 and MSQ scores in both cohorts (p < 0.05). The Erenumab group showed significant reductions in MIDAS, BDI, and BAI scores (p < 0.05). Differences between treatments were significant for MIDAS improvements at three and 6 months (p < 0.05).
conclusionErenumab and OnabotulinumtoxinA are effective preventive treatments for chronic migraine. No significant differences were found in the magnitude of headache reduction at 3 or 6 months when comparing both treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.