OnabotulinumtoxinA Modulates Visual Cortical Excitability in Chronic Migraine: Effects of 12-Week Treatment
, Laura Pilati 1,2, Salvatore Di Marco 1,2, Simona Maccora 1,3, Paolo Alonge 1, Lavinia Vassallo 1, Antonino Lupica 1, Serena Coppola 1, Cecilia Camarda 1, Nadia Bolognini 4,5 and Filippo Brighina 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Manuscript entitled „ Onabotulinumtoxin A modulates visual cortical excitability in chronic migraine: effects of 12 weeks treatment” is an interesting, well-written and well-planned experimental work. However, the text needs the little corrections according to the following comments:
Introduction
Line 73 – should be written allodynia
Line 82 – write [18]
Results
Line 114 Table 1 – please explain all the abbreviations in full name
Materials and Methods
Line 234 – use only abbreviation MMHDs
Line 238 - use only abbreviation VAS
Line 239 - use only abbreviation MDMs
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The Authors evaluated the effect of a single administration of BoNT-A therapy as prevention in chronic migraine and focused their attention on a possible neurophysiological marker: change in visual cortical excitability after 12 weeks. The manuscript is clear and presented in a well-structured manner. The cited references are relevant. The experimental design is suitable for testing the hypothesis but, as correctly highlighted by the Authors, a control group would have improved it. The sample included in the study is limited but the Authors highlighted this aspect in the discussion. The manuscript’s results could be reproducible based on the details given in the methods section. The figures and tables are appropriate. The conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented if limitations are taken into account. Ethical statements are adequate.
Minor spell check: line 194 "can be effectively used"
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors have taken into account my suggestions
