Concurrent OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment of Cervical Dystonia and Concomitant Migraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the clinical benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX®) treatment on the symptoms of cervical dystonia and the frequency, severity, and associated symptoms of migraine in patients with cervical dystonia and concurrent migraine. BACKGROUND: Botulinum toxin is established as first-line treatment of cervical dystonia. Recent clinical trials have shown onabotulinumtoxinA to be an effective prophylactic therapy for patients with chronic migraine, and onabotulinumtoxinA has been approved for use in this patient population by the Food and Drug Administration. Patients with headache associated with cervical dystonia have been identified as a specific subpopulation of patients in whom botulinum toxin treatment may be effective for controlling the symptoms of both conditions. METHODS: An open-label pilot study was conducted for 7.5 months in patients at least 18 years old with primary cervical dystonia of moderate severity (baseline rating of at least 20 on the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale) complicated by migraine headache meeting the International Classification of Headache Disorders-II criteria for migraines with or without aura. Each patient received 2 cycles of treatment at Visit 3 (baseline) and Visit 6 (Day 90). For cervical dystonia, each patient was injected with a maximum of 175 units. At the same visit, a maximum of 125 units was also injected for migraine using a fixed-site, fixed-dose injection paradigm, with additional cervical dystonia injection-site treatment to a maximum dose of 300 units. Patients were assessed following onabotulinumtoxinA injection and at follow-up on Visit 4 (Day 30), Visit 5 (Day 60), Visit 6 (Day 90), and at Visits 7, 8, and 9 (Days 120, 150, and 180). The primary outcome measures for this study were change in Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale total score for cervical dystonia and frequency of headache episodes per 28-day period. Migraine episodes were defined as at least 4 hours of sustained pain with no upper limit. An episode was considered new if the patient was pain free for at least 24 hours. Secondary study end points included number of headache days per month, headache intensity, headache disability (assessed using Headache Impact Test-6 and the Migraine Disability Assessment score scales), acute headache medication use, resource utilization, and allodynia pain. Adverse events were reported. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients (24 women, mean age 50.5 years; mean age of disease onset 21.9 years) were enrolled in the study. Patients experienced improvement in cervical dystonia symptoms with significant reductions from baseline in Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale scores at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180 days (-9.84 ± 8.49, -12.67 ± 8.22, -13.63 ± 7.27, -14.92 ± 7.05, -14.76 ± 6.97, -14.49 ± 6.14, respectively, P < .0001 at all time points from a baseline of 31.03 ± 3.61). Changes from baseline were assessed using the t-test. Reductions in the number of headache episodes from baseline on concurrent onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for coexistent chronic migraine did not attain significance. However, patients experienced significant reductions from baseline in the number of headache days at 90, 120, and 180 days (-3.39 ± 6.78, P = .0289; -4.29 ± 7.94, P = .0194; -4.38 ± 7.99, P = .0178, respectively, from a baseline of 15.33 ± 6.76). Changes from baseline were assessed using the t-test. The change from baseline in Headache Impact Test-6 total scores was significant at 30, 60, 90, 150, and 180 days (3.21 ± 4.14, P = .0009; -3.04 ± 4.04, P = .0012; -2.41 ± 2.79, P = .0006; -2.59 ± 3.87, P = .0050; -3.09 ± 3.80, respectively, from a baseline of 22.68 ± 3.20). Changes from baseline were assessed using the t-test. The change from baseline in Migraine Disability Assessment was significant at 120, 150, and 180 days (-38.09 ± 47.87, P < .0001, Wilcoxon signed rank test; -16.91 ± 62.69, P = .0358, Wilcoxon signed rank test; -23.73 ± 40.57, P = .0122, t-test, respectively, from a baseline of 56.68 ± 50.41). There were no serious adverse events or treatment-related discontinuations. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA is effective and well tolerated in controlling the symptoms of cervical dystonia complicated by concurrent migraine.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".