MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404844985 · doi:10.14740/jocmr6054

Direct Comparison of Treatment Outcome Between the Botulinum Toxin and Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody in Migraine Patients

2024· article· en· W4404844985 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Majed Alabdali, Nazish Rafique, Deena A. Aldossary, Rahaf S Alalloush, Haya A AlHemli, Mohammad Zeerak, Rabia Latif, Lubna Ibrahim Al Asoom, Ahmed Alsunni, Ayad Mohammed Salem, Mohammed Alshurem, Dana Aljaafari, Aseel Salah Alabdulhadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalcitonin gene-related peptideMedicineMigraineMonoclonal antibodyCalcitoninBotulinum toxinPeptidePharmacologyToxinAntibodyMonoclonalInternal medicineMicrobiologyImmunologyNeuropeptideAnesthesiaBiochemistryBiologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Migraine is a genetic disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of headache that are throbbing in nature. The objective of this study was to directly compare the efficacy and safety of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) and botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. Methods: This quasi-experimental comparative study was conducted on 80 "chronic migraine patients" at King Fahad University Hospital, Dammam, KSA. Chronic migraineurs were divided into two groups (40 patients/group) and were treated with the standard doses of BoNT (group I) and anti-CGRP (group II). All the patients filled out the migraine pain scale, migraine disability assessment score, headache impact test (HIT-6), and adverse drug event questionnaire before the start and at the end of 9 months of treatment. Results: Most of the patients were females (76.3% vs. 23.8%) and were suffering from migraine for more than 24 months (66%). The mean age of the participants was 39.07 ± 10.01 years. Both BoNT and anti-CGRP groups showed a statistically significant decrease in mean HIT-6 and pain scores after 9 months of intervention. A direct comparison between the two treatment groups showed that the anti-CGRP drug caused a higher decrease in HIT-6 and pain scores as compared to the botulinum drug, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.075 and 0.07, respectively). The most common adverse effect was "headache", reported by 45% and 40% of patients, followed by "pain at the site of injection" reported by 27.5% and 32.5% of BoNT and anti-CGRP groups, respectively. The two groups did not differ significantly in the frequency of adverse effects such as nausea, vomiting, visual problems, etc., except "joint stiffness". A significantly higher number of anti-CGRP patients experienced joint stiffness as compared to the BoNT group (17.5% vs. 0%, P = 0.006). Conclusion: A direct comparison between the two treatments indicated that neither of the two interventions is statistically superior to the other in terms of efficacy and both are equally effective in the management of migraine. However, BoNT can be preferred over anti-CGRP because of its cost-effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.327
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research→Same topicMigraine and Headache Studies→French-language works237,207→