Characterizing gaps in the preventive pharmacologic treatment of migraine: Multi-country results from the CaMEO-I study.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze data from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes-International (CaMEO-I) Study in order to characterize preventive medication use and identify preventive usage gaps among people with migraine across multiple countries. BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the preventive treatment of migraine are available from scientific organizations in various countries. Although these guidelines differ among countries, eligibility for preventive treatment is generally based on monthly headache day (MHD) frequency and associated disability. The overwhelming majority of people with migraine who are eligible for preventive treatment do not receive it. METHODS: The CaMEO-I Study was a cross-sectional, observational, web-based panel survey study performed in six countries: Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. People were invited to complete an online survey in their national language(s) to identify those with migraine according to modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, criteria. People classified with migraine answered questions about current and ever use of both acute and preventive treatments for migraine. Available preventive medications for migraine differed by country. MHD frequency and associated disability data were collected. The American Headache Society (AHS) 2021 Consensus Statement algorithm was used to determine candidacy for preventive treatment (i.e., ≥3 monthly MHDs with severe disability, ≥4 MHDs with some disability, or ≥6 MHDs regardless of level of disability). RESULTS: Among 90,613 valid completers of the screening survey, 14,492 met criteria for migraine and completed the full survey, with approximately 2400 respondents from each country. Based on the AHS consensus statement preventive treatment candidacy algorithm, averaging across countries, 36.2% (5246/14,492) of respondents with migraine qualified for preventive treatment. Most respondents (84.5% [4431/5246]) who met criteria for preventive treatment according to the AHS consensus statement were not using a preventive medication at the time of the survey. Moreover, 19.3% (2799/14,492) of respondents had ever used preventive medication (ever users); 58.1% (1625/2799) of respondents who reported ever using a preventive medication for migraine were still taking it. Of the respondents who were currently using a preventive medication, 50.2% (815/1625) still met the criteria for needing preventive treatment based on the AHS consensus statement. CONCLUSIONS: Most people with migraine who qualify for preventive treatment are not currently taking it. Additionally, many people currently taking preventive pharmacologic treatment still meet the algorithm criteria for needing preventive treatment, suggesting inadequate benefit from their current regimen.

Prevalence and burden of migraine in the United States: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This study reviewed migraine prevalence and disability gathered through epidemiologic survey studies in the United States conducted over the past three decades. We summarized these studies and evaluated changing patterns of disease prevalence and disability. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of US studies addressing the prevalence, disability, and/or burden of migraine, including both episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM). A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol was used in conjunction with the PubMed search engine. Eligible studies were published before February 2022, were conducted in the United States, included representative samples, and used a case definition of migraine based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD). The primary measure of disease burden was the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS). The MIDAS measures days lost due to migraine over 3 months in three domains and defines groups with moderate (Grade III) or severe disability (Grade IV) using cut-scores. RESULTS: Of the 1609 identified records, 26 publications from 11 US population-based studies met eligibility criteria. The prevalence of migraine in the population has remained relatively consistent for the past 30 years: ranging from 11.7% to 14.7% overall, 17.1% to 19.2% in women, and 5.6% to 7.2% in men in the studies reviewed. CM prevalence is 0.91% (1.3% among women and 0.5% of men) in adults and 0.8% in adolescents. The proportion of people with migraine and moderate-to-severe MIDAS disability (Grades III-IV), has trended upward across studies from 22.0% in 2005 to 39.0% in 2012, to 43.2% in 2016, and 42.4% in 2018. A consistently higher proportion of women were assigned MIDAS Grades III/IV relative to men. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of migraine in the United States has remained stable over the past three decades while migraine-related disability has increased. The disability trend could reflect changes in reporting, study methodology, social and societal changes, or changes in exacerbating or remediating factors that make migraine more disabling, among other hypotheses. These issues merit further investigation.

Machine learning identifies factors most associated with seeking medical care for migraine: Results of the OVERCOME (US) study.

OBJECTIVE: Utilize machine learning models to identify factors associated with seeking medical care for migraine. BACKGROUND: Migraine is a leading cause of disability worldwide, yet many people with migraine do not seek medical care. METHODS: The web-based survey, ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care Of MigrainE (US), annually recruited demographically representative samples of the US adult population (2018-2020). Respondents with active migraine were identified via a validated diagnostic questionnaire and/or a self-reported medical diagnosis of migraine, and were then asked if they had consulted a healthcare professional for their headaches in the previous 12 months (i.e., "seeking care"). This included in-person/telephone/or e-visit at Primary Care, Specialty Care, or Emergency/Urgent Care locations. Supervised machine learning (Random Forest) and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) algorithms identified 13/54 sociodemographic and clinical factors most associated with seeking medical care for migraine. Random Forest models complex relationships (including interactions) between predictor variables and a response. LASSO is also an efficient feature selection algorithm. Linear models were used to determine the multivariable association of those factors with seeking care. RESULTS: Among 61,826 persons with migraine, the mean age was 41.7 years (±14.8) and 31,529/61,826 (51.0%) sought medical care for migraine in the previous 12 months. Of those seeking care for migraine, 23,106/31,529 (73.3%) were female, 21,320/31,529 (67.6%) were White, and 28,030/31,529 (88.9%) had health insurance. Severe interictal burden (assessed via the Migraine Interictal Burden Scale-4, MIBS-4) occurred in 52.8% (16,657/31,529) of those seeking care and in 23.1% (6991/30,297) of those not seeking care; similar patterns were observed for severe migraine-related disability (assessed via the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale, MIDAS) (36.7% [11,561/31,529] vs. 14.6% [4434/30,297]) and severe ictal cutaneous allodynia (assessed via the Allodynia Symptom Checklist, ASC-12) (21.0% [6614/31,529] vs. 7.4% [2230/30,297]). Severe interictal burden (vs. none, OR 2.64, 95% CI [2.5, 2.8]); severe migraine-related disability (vs. little/none, OR 2.2, 95% CI [2.0, 2.3]); and severe ictal allodynia (vs. none, OR 1.7, 95% CI [1.6, 1.8]) were strongly associated with seeking care for migraine. CONCLUSIONS: Seeking medical care for migraine is associated with higher interictal burden, disability, and allodynia. These findings could support interventions to promote care-seeking among people with migraine, encourage assessment of these factors during consultation, and prioritize these domains in selecting treatments and measuring their benefits.

Impact of headache frequency and preventive treatment failure on quality of life, disability, and direct and indirect costs among individuals with episodic migraine in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate unmet needs among individuals with episodic migraine (EM) in the United States (US). BACKGROUND: Data are limited on the impact of headache frequency (HF) and preventive treatment failure (TF) on the burden of migraine in the US. METHODS: A retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 2019 National Health and Wellness Survey (NHWS) data was conducted from an opt-in online survey that identified respondents (aged ≥18 years) in the US with self-reported physician-diagnosed migraine. Participants were stratified by HF (low: 0-3 days/month; moderate-to-high: 4-14 days/month) and prior preventive TF (preventive naive; 0-1 TF; ≥2 TFs). Comparisons were conducted between preventive TF groups using multivariable regression models controlling for patient demographic and health characteristics. RESULTS: Among individuals with moderate-to-high frequency EM, the NHWS identified 397 with ≥2 TFs, 334 with 0-1 TF, and 356 as preventive naive. The 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (version 2) Physical Component Summary scores were significantly lower among those with ≥2 TFs, at a mean (standard error [SE]) of 41.4 [0.8] versus the preventive-naive 46.8 [0.9] and 0-1 TF 44.5 [0.9] groups; p < 0.001 for both). Migraine Disability Assessment Scale scores were significantly higher in the ≥2 TFs, at a mean (SE) of 37.7 (3.9) versus preventive-naive 26.8 (2.9) (p < 0.001) and 0-1 TF 30.1 (3.3) (p = 0.011) groups. The percentages of time that respondents experienced absenteeism (mean [SE] 21.6% [5.5%] vs. 13.4% [3.6%]; p = 0.022), presenteeism (mean [SE] 55.0% [8.3%] vs. 40.8% [6.5%]; p = 0.015), overall work impairment (mean [SE] 59.4% [5.6%] vs. 45.0% [4.4%]; p < 0.001), and activity impairment (mean [SE] 56.8% [1.0%] vs. 44.4% [0.9%]; p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the ≥2 TFs versus preventive-naive group. Emergency department visits (preventive-naive, p = 0.006; 0-1 TF, p = 0.008) and hospitalizations (p < 0.001 both) in the past 6 months were significantly higher in the ≥2 TFs group. Direct and indirect costs were significantly higher in the ≥2 TFs (mean [SE] $24,026 [3460]; $22,074 [20]) versus 0-1 TF ($10,897 [1636]; $17,965 [17]) and preventive-naive ($11,497 [1715]; $17,167 [17]) groups (p < 0.001 for all). Results were similar in the low-frequency EM group. CONCLUSIONS: In this NHWS analysis, individuals with more prior preventive TFs experienced significantly higher humanistic and economic burden regardless of HF.

Migraine-Related Stigma and Its Relationship to Disability, Interictal Burden, and Quality of Life: Results of the OVERCOME (US) Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This population-based analysis characterizes the relative frequency of migraine-related stigma and its cross-sectional relationship to migraine outcomes. We hypothesized that migraine-related stigma would be inversely associated with favorable migraine outcomes across headache day categories. METHODS: OVERCOME (US) is a web-based observational study that annually recruited a demographically representative US sample and then identified people with active migraine using a validated migraine diagnostic questionnaire. It also assessed how frequently respondents experienced migraine-related stigma using a novel 12-item questionnaire (Migraine-Related Stigma, MiRS) that contained 2 factors; feeling that others viewed migraine as being used for Secondary Gain (8 items, α = 0.92) and feeling that others were Minimizing disease Burden (4 items, α = 0.86). We defined 5 groups: (1) MiRS-Both (Secondary Gain and Minimizing Burden often/very often; (2) MiRS-SG (Secondary Gain often/very often); (3) MiRS-MB (Minimizing Burden often/very often); (4) MiRS-Rarely/Sometimes; (5) MiRS-Never. Using MiRS group as the independent variable, we modeled its cross-sectional relationship to disability (Migraine Disability Assessment, MIDAS), interictal burden (Migraine Interictal Burden Scale-4), and migraine-specific quality of life (Migraine Specific Quality of Life v2.1 Role Function-Restrictive) while controlling for sociodemographics, clinical features, and monthly headache day categories. RESULTS: Among this population-based sample with active migraine (n = 59,001), mean age was 41.3 years and respondents predominantly identified as female (74.9%) and as White (70.1%). Among respondents, 41.1% reported experiencing, on average, ≥4 monthly headache days and 31.7% experienced migraine-related stigma often/very often; the proportion experiencing migraine-related stigma often/very often increased from 25.5% among those with <4 monthly headache days to 47.5% among those with ≥15 monthly headache days. The risk for increased disability (MIDAS score) was significant for each MiRS group compared with the MiRS-Never group; the risk more than doubled for the MiRS-Both group (rate ratio 2.68, 95% CI 2.56-2.80). For disability, interictal burden, and migraine-specific quality of life, increased migraine-related stigma was associated with increased disease burden across all monthly headache day categories. DISCUSSION: OVERCOME (US) found that 31.7% of people with migraine experienced migraine-related stigma often/very often and was associated with more disability, greater interictal burden, and reduced quality of life.

Pre- and post-headache phases of migraine: multi-country results from the CaMEO - International Study.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with migraine frequently experience pre- and post-headache symptoms. This analysis aimed to characterize the relative frequency and burden of pre- and post-headache symptoms in people with migraine using data collected through the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes - International Study. METHODS: This cross-sectional, observational, web-based survey was conducted in 2021-2022 in Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Respondents who met modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, criteria were offered the opportunity to participate. Information collected included migraine-related disability, depression/anxiety symptoms, cutaneous allodynia, activity limitations, and acute treatment optimization. Respondents indicated how often they had pre- or post-headache symptoms using a 5-point scale, ranging from 0 to 4, with a rating of 2 or higher classified as a pre- or post-headache symptom case. Modeling was used to examine relationships with monthly headache days (MHDs) and activity limitations during pre-headache and post-headache phases. RESULTS: Among a total of 14,492 respondents, pre-headache symptoms were reported by 66.9%, while post-headache symptoms were reported by 60.2%. Both pre-headache and post-headache symptoms were reported by 49.5% of respondents, only pre-headache by 17.4%, only post-headache by 10.7%, and neither pre- nor post-headache symptoms by 22.4%. Compared with respondents who experienced only pre- or post-headache symptoms, respondents who experienced both pre- and post-headache symptoms had the highest rates of 4-7, 8-14, and ≥ 15 monthly headache days (23.1%, 14.1%, and 10.9%, respectively). Of respondents with both pre- and post-headache symptoms, 58.5% reported moderate-to-severe disability, 47.7% reported clinically significant symptoms of depression, 49.0% reported clinically significant symptoms of anxiety, and 63.8% reported cutaneous allodynia with headache (ASC-12). Moderate-to-severe activity limitations were reported during the pre-headache (29.5%) and post-headache phases (27.2%). For all outcomes modeled, after controlling for covariates, having pre-headache symptoms, post-headache symptoms, or both were associated with worse outcomes than having neither. CONCLUSIONS: Pre- and post-headache phases of migraine are common, carry unrecognized burden, and may be a target for treatment.

Impact of monthly headache days on migraine-related quality of life: Results from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the direct impact of monthly headache days (MHDs) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with migraine and the potential mediating effects of anxiety, depression, and allodynia. BACKGROUND: Although the general relationship between increased migraine frequency (i.e., MHDs) and reduced HRQoL is well established, the degree to which reduced HRQoL is due to a direct effect of increased MHDs or attributable to mediating factors remains uncertain. METHODS: Cross-sectional baseline data from participants with migraine who completed the Core and Comorbidities/Endophenotypes modules in the 2012-2013 US Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) study, a longitudinal web-based survey study, were analyzed. The potential contribution of depression, anxiety, and/or allodynia to the observed effects of MHDs on HRQoL as measured by the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ) was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 12,715 respondents were included in the analyses. The MSQ domain scores demonstrated progressive declines with increasing MHD categories (B = -1.23 to -0.60; p < 0.001). The observed HRQoL decrements associated with increasing MHDs were partially mediated by the presence of depression, anxiety, and allodynia. The MHD values predicted 24.0%-32.4% of the observed variation in the MSQ domains. Depression mediated 15.2%-24.3%, allodynia mediated 9.6%-16.1%, and anxiety mediated 2.3%-6.0% of the observed MHD effects on the MSQ. CONCLUSIONS: Increased MHD values were associated with lower MSQ scores; the impact of MHDs on the MSQ domain scores was partially mediated by the presence of depression, anxiety, and allodynia. MHDs remain the predominant driver of the MSQ variation; moreover, most of the variation in the MSQ remains unexplained by the variables we analyzed. Future longitudinal analyses and studies may help clarify the contribution of MHDs, comorbidities, and other factors to changes in HRQoL.

Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes - International (CaMEO-I) Study: Methods and multi-country baseline findings for diagnosis rates and care.

BACKGROUND: The Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes-International study provides insight into people with migraine in multiple countries. METHODS: This cross-sectional, observational, web-based cohort study was conducted in Canada, France, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States. An initial Screening Module survey solicited general healthcare information from a representative sample and identified participants with migraine based on modified International Classification of Headache Disorders-3 criteria; those with migraine completed a detailed survey based on validated migraine-specific assessments. RESULTS: Among 90,613 people who correctly completed the screening surveys, 76,121 respondents did not meet the criteria for migraine, while 14,492 did. Among respondents with migraine, mean age ranged from 40 to 42 years. The median number of monthly headache days ranged from 2.33 to 3.33 across countries, while the proportion of respondents with moderate-to-severe disability (measured by Migraine Disability Assessment) ranged from 30% (Japan) to 52% (Germany). The proportion of respondents with ≥15 monthly headache days ranged from 5.4% (France) to 9.5% (Japan). Fewer than half of respondents with migraine in each country reported having received a migraine diagnosis. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrated high rates of migraine-related disability and underdiagnosis of migraine across six countries. This study will characterize country-level burden, treatment patterns, and geographical differences in care.

Predictors of treatment-response to caffeine combination products, acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in acute treatment of episodic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of acute treatment optimization for migraine with "over-the-counter" (OTC) or prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as well as other widely used OTCs including acetaminophen, caffeine combination products (CCP), and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) among people with episodic migraine and to develop models that predict treatment response to each class of OTCs. BACKGROUND: Efficacy of acute OTC medications for migraine varies greatly. Identifying predictors of treatment response to particular classes of medication is a step toward evidence-based personalized therapy. METHODS: For this prediction model development study, we used data from 2224 participants from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study who were aged ≥18 years, met criteria for migraine, had <15 monthly headache days, and reported being on monotherapy for acute migraine attacks with one of the following classes medications: CCP (N = 711), acetaminophen (N = 643), ASA (N = 110), and prescription or OTC NSAIDs (N = 760). The primary outcome measures of treatment optimization were adequate 2-h pain freedom (2hPF) and adequate 24-h pain relief (24hPR), which were defined by responses of half the time or more to the relevant items on the Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire-6. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of the participants was 46.2 (13.1) years, 79.4% (1765/2224) were female, 43.7% (972/2224) reported adequate 2hPF, and 46.1% (1025/2224) reported adequate 24hPR. Those taking CCP had better 2hPF and 24PR outcomes. For those taking NSAIDs, better outcomes were associated with lower average pain intensity (2hPF: odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.99; 24PR: OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.96), cutaneous allodynia (2hPF: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.96; 24PR: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95), depressive symptoms (2hPF: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98; 24PR: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.99), and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) grade (2hPF: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.90; 24PR: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.95). Adequate 2hPF for those taking CCP was associated with male gender (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.21-2.77), lower average pain intensity (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91), lower cutaneous allodynia (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.97), and lower Migraine Symptom Severity Scale Score (MSSS; OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.97). Adequate 24hPR for those taking CCP was associated with lower average pain intensity (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.96), lower cutaneous allodynia (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.96), and lower MIDAS grade (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.96). Participants who were married (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.05-2.19), had lower average pain intensity (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.89), lower MSSS (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.99), less depression (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), and lower MIDAS grade (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) had adequate 2hPF after taking acetaminophen. Participants who were married (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.02-2.21), had lower pain intensity (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.88), less depression (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.98) and lower MIDAS grade (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67) had higher 24hPR following use of acetaminophen. A lower MSSS was the only factor associated with higher 2hPF and 24PR after using ASA (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.92 and OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67-0.93). Predictive models had modest performance in identifying responders to each class of OTC. CONCLUSION: A large subgroup of people with migraine had an inadequate response to their usual acute OTC migraine treatment 2- and 24-h after dosing. These findings suggest a need to improve OTC treatment for some and to offer prescription acute medications for others. Predictive models identified several factors associated with better treatment-response in each OTC class. Selecting OTC treatment based on factors predictive of treatment optimization might improve patient outcomes.

Optimized Acute Treatment of Migraine Is Associated With Greater Productivity in People With Migraine: Results From the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to ascertain whether level of optimization of acute treatment of migraine is related to work productivity across the spectrum of migraine. METHODS: Data were from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study, an internet-based longitudinal survey. Respondents with migraine who reported full-time employment and use of ≥1 acute prescription medication for migraine were included. We determined relationships among lost productive time (LPT; measured with the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale), acute treatment optimization (Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire- ), and monthly headache days (MHDs). RESULTS: There was a direct relationship between LPT and MHD category. Greater acute treatment optimization was associated with lower total LPT, less absenteeism, and less presenteeism within each MHD category. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing acute treatment for migraine may reduce LPT in people with migraine and reduce indirect costs.

Psychiatric Characteristics of Students Who Make Threats Toward Others at School.

OBJECTIVE: While studies have focused on identifying potential school shooters, little is known about the mental health and other characteristics of students who make threats. This study aimed to describe these students and factors prompting psychiatric interventions and treatment recommendations. METHOD: Child and adolescent psychiatry threat assessment evaluations of 157 consecutive school-referred youths in grades K-12 between 1998 and 2019 were reviewed for demographics, reasons for referral, nature of threat, psychiatric diagnosis, and psychiatric and educational recommendations. Predictors of recommendations for psychiatric interventions were modeled using multivariable logistic regression as a function of above-mentioned covariates. RESULTS: Mean (SD) age of referred students was 13.37 (2.79) years; 88.5% were male; 79.7%, White; 11.6%, Hispanic; 10.1%, Black; 2.5%, Asian. Of students, 51.6% were receiving special education services. Verbal threat was made by 80%, and 29.3% brought a weapon to school. History included being bullied in 43.4%, traumatic family events in 52.2%, physical abuse in 5.1%, sexual abuse in 5.7%, and verbal abuse in 36.3%. Frequently encountered psychiatric diagnoses were attention-deficit/hyperactivity, learning, depressive, anxiety, and autism spectrum disorders, usually in combinations. History of medication treatment was reported in 79 (50.3%) and psychotherapeutic interventions in 57 (36.3%). Recommendations to return the student to their prior schools were made for 63.1%. Recommendations for psychotherapy were made for 79.9%, medication for 88.5%, and both for 70.1%. Therapeutic school setting or psychiatric hospitalization was more likely recommended (with statistical significance) with a prior threat history (odds ratio [OR] 5.47, 95% CI 1.91-15.70), paranoid symptoms (OR 5.72, 95% CI 1.55-21.14, p = .009), autism spectrum disorders (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.32-9.00), mood disorder (OR 5.71, 95% CI 1.36-23.96), personality disorder (OR 9.47, 95% CI 1.78-50.55), or with psychotherapy recommendation (OR 4.84, 95% CI 1.08-21.75). CONCLUSION: Students who make threats have diverse psychiatric profiles and warrant treatments. A trauma and/or abuse history is common. Evaluations of youths who make threats need to go beyond simply assessing the threat itself and should include identifying underlying psychiatric problems. Psychiatric evaluation of students who issue threats of any type can lead to revelations about psychiatric diagnoses and crucial treatment and educational recommendations. DIVERSITY & INCLUSION STATEMENT: The author list of this paper includes contributors from the location and/or community where the research was conducted who participated in the data collection, design, analysis, and/or interpretation of the work.

Predictors of treatment-response to acute prescription medications in migraine: Results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of acute treatment optimization with prescription drugs among people with episodic migraine. METHODS: A total of 2896 individuals from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study were included in this study. The primary outcome measures of treatment optimization were 2-h pain freedom (2hPF) and 24-h pain relief (24hPR), which were defined by responses to the Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire-6 (mTOQ-6). We identified predictors of 2hPF and 24hPR in response to triptans, butalbital combination medications (BCMs), and opioids. RESULTS: PARTICIPANTS: were on average 47.3 years old (SD=12.0), 85.6 % were female, and 88.4 % were white, 46.9 % of participants reported 2hPF and 49.5 % reported 24hPR with their "usual acute treatment". The odds of adequate 2hPF response were reduced in men and those with higher average headache pain intensity, higher migraine symptom severity scores, presence of cutaneous allodynia, and depression. Adequate 24hPR was associated with being married, but declined in those with higher-than-average average headache pain intensity and frequency, greater disability, presence of cutaneous allodynia, and depression. Among participants reporting acute monotherapy, individuals taking triptans were more likely to have adequate treatment response in comparison with those taking BCMs (2hPF: OR=1.86, 95 %CI 1.42-2.42; 24hPR: OR=2.26, 95 %CI 1.73-2.96) and opioids (2hPF: OR=2.39, 95 %CI 1.94-2.96; 24hPR: OR=2.78, 95 %CI 2.24-3.44). There was no significant difference in response to treatment between the subsample taking BCMs and opioid users. CONCLUSION: Almost half of study respondents were not optimized on their usual prescription acute migraine treatment(s). Predictive models identified several features associated with treatment optimization.

Predictive models for determining treatment response to nonprescription acute medications in migraine: Results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of acute treatment response for nonprescription (over-the-counter [OTC]) medications among people with migraine and develop improved models for predicting treatment response. BACKGROUND: Pain freedom and sustained pain relief are important priorities in the acute treatment of migraine. OTC medications are widely used for migraine; however, it is not clear which treatment works best for each patient without going through the trial and error process. METHODS: A prediction model development study was completed using the 2006 American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study survey, from participants who were aged ≥18, met criteria and headache day frequency for episodic migraine, did not take prescription medication for migraine, and used ≥1 of the following acute migraine medication classes: acetaminophen, aspirin, NSAIDs, or caffeine containing combination products (CCP). Two items from the Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire were used to evaluate treatment response, adequate 2-h pain freedom (2hPF) and 24-h pain relief (24hPR), which were defined by a response to treatment ≥half the time at 2 h and 24 h post treatment, respectively. We identified predictors of adequate treatment response and developed models to predict probability of treatment response to each medication class. RESULTS: The sample included 3852 participants (3038 [79.0%] females) with an average age of 45.0 years (SD = 12.8). Only 1602/3852 (41.6%) and 1718/3852 (44.6%) of the participants reported adequate 2hPF and 24hPR, respectively. Adequate treatment-response was significantly predicted by lower average headache pain intensity, less cutaneous allodynia, and lower depressive symptom scores. Lower migraine symptom severity was predictive of adequate 2hPF and fewer monthly headache days was predictive of adequate 24hPR. Among participants reporting OTC monotherapy (n = 2168, 56.3%) individuals taking CCP were more likely to have adequate 2hPF (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.23-1.95) and 24hPR (OR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.18-1.88) in comparison with those taking acetaminophen. Predictive models were modestly predictive of responders to OTC medications (c-statistics = 0.65; 95% CI 0.62-0.68). CONCLUSION: These results show that response to acute migraine treatments is not optimized in the majority of people with migraine treating with OTC medications. Predictive models can improve our ability to choose the best therapeutic option for individuals with episodic migraine and increase the proportion of patients with optimized response to treatments.

Diagnosis, consultation, treatment, and impact of migraine in the US: Results of the OVERCOME (US) study.

OBJECTIVE: The ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care of MigrainE (OVERCOME; United States) study is a multicohort, longitudinal web survey that assesses symptomatology, consulting, diagnosis, treatment, and impact of migraine in the United States. BACKGROUND: Regularly updating population-based views of migraine in the United States provides a method for assessing the quality of ongoing migraine care and identifying unmet needs. METHODS: The OVERCOME (US) 2018 migraine cohort involved: (I) creating a demographically representative sample of US adults using quota sampling (n = 97,478), (II) identifying people with active migraine in the past year via a validated migraine diagnostic questionnaire and/or self-reported medical diagnosis of migraine (n = 24,272), and (III) assessing consultation, diagnosis, and treatment of migraine (n = 21,143). The current manuscript evaluated whether those with low frequency episodic migraine (LFEM; 0-3 monthly headache days) differed from other categories on outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Among the migraine cohort (n = 21,143), 19,888 (94.1%) met our International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition-based case definition of migraine and 12,905 (61.0%) self-reported a medical diagnosis of migraine. Respondents' mean (SD) age was 42.2 (15.0) years; 15,697 (74.2%) were women. Having at least moderate disability was common (n = 8965; 42.4%) and around half (n = 10,783; 51.0%) had consulted a medical professional for migraine care in the past year. Only 4792 (22.7%) of respondents were currently using a triptan. Overall, 8539 (40.4%) were eligible for migraine preventive medication and 3555 (16.8%) were currently using migraine preventive medication. Those with LFEM differed from moderate and high frequency episodic migraine and chronic migraine on nearly all measures of consulting, diagnosis, and treatment. CONCLUSION: The OVERCOME (US) 2018 cohort revealed slow but steady progress in diagnosis and preventive treatment of migraine. However, despite significant impact among the population, many with migraine have unmet needs related to consulting for migraine, migraine diagnosis, and getting potentially beneficial migraine treatment. Moreover, it demonstrated the heterogeneity and varying unmet needs within episodic migraine.

Medication Overuse and Headache Burden: Results From the CaMEO Study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the relative frequency of acute medication overuse (AMO) among people with episodic migraine and chronic migraine, to characterize the types of acute medications overused for migraine, and to identify factors associated with AMO. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01648530), a cross-sectional and longitudinal internet study that included a systematic sampling of the US population. From September 2012 to November 2013, the CaMEO Study respondents participated in different modules to collect data on the clinical course of migraine, family burden, barriers to care, endophenotypes, and comorbidities. Among people who met the criteria for migraine consistent with the International Classification of Headache Disorders, third edition (ICHD-3), we evaluated types and frequency of medications used for headache/migraine, selected comorbidities, and emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) use. AMO was defined by days per month of medication use as specified by ICHD-3 criteria for medication overuse headache (MOH) without the requirement for ≥15 monthly headache days (MHDs). Nested, multivariable binary logistic regression modeling was used to identify factors associated with an increased risk of AMO. RESULTS: Of 16,789 CaMEO respondents with migraine, 2,975 (17.7%) met the AMO criteria. Approximately 67.9% (2,021/2,975) of AMO respondents reported <15 MHDs. Simple analgesics, combination analgesics, and opioids were the medication classes most commonly overused. Factors associated with AMO in the final multivariable logistic regression model included ≥15 MHDs, moderate to severe disability, severe migraine interictal burden, use of preventive medication, and an ED/UC visit for headache within 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately two-thirds of respondents with AMO reported <15 MHDs and therefore did not meet the criteria for MOH. Those with AMO had greater disease burden and increased ED/UC utilization relative to people with migraine but not AMO.

Barriers to care in episodic and chronic migraine: Results from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess rates of and factors associated with traversing fundamental barriers to good medical outcomes and pharmacologic care in individuals with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), including socioeconomic status and race. BACKGROUND: Barriers to good outcomes in migraine include the lack of appropriate medical consultation, failure to receive an accurate diagnosis, not being offered a regimen with acute and preventive pharmacologic treatments (if indicated), and not avoiding medication overuse. METHODS: The Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study was a longitudinal Internet-based survey. Respondents who met criteria for migraine consistent with the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, had a Migraine Disability Assessment score ≥ 6, and provided health insurance coverage status were included in this analysis. Successfully traversing each barrier to care and the effects of sociodemographic characteristics were examined. RESULTS: Among 16,789 respondents with migraine, 9184 (54.7%; EM: 7930; CM: 1254) were eligible. Current headache consultation was reported by 27.6% (2187/7930) of EM and 40.8% (512/1254) of CM respondents. Among consulters, 75.7% (1655/2187) with EM and 32.8% (168/512) with CM were accurately diagnosed. Among diagnosed consulters, 59.9% (992/1655) with EM and 54.2% (91/168) with CM reported minimally appropriate acute and preventive pharmacologic treatment. Among diagnosed and treated consulters, in the EM group 31.8% (315/992) and in the CM group 74.7% (68/91) met medication overuse criteria. Only 8.5% (677/7930) of EM and 1.8% (23/1254) of CM respondents traversed all four barriers. Higher income was positively associated with likelihood of traversing each barrier. Blacks and/or African Americans had higher rates of consultation than other racial groups. Blacks and/or African Americans and multiracial people had higher rates of acute medication overuse. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to improve care should focus on increasing consultation and diagnosis rates, improving the delivery of all appropriate guideline-based treatment, and avoidance of medication overuse.

Evaluation of the 6-item Identify Chronic Migraine screener in a large medical group.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the 6-item Identify Chronic Migraine screener (ID-CM[6]), designed to improve the detection of chronic migraine (CM). BACKGROUND: CM is often undertreated and underdiagnosed. Survey-based studies have found that approximately 75-80% of people meeting criteria for CM do not report having received an accurate diagnosis. METHODS: This study used claims data of patients enrolled in a large medical group who had at least one medical claim with an International Classification of Diseases 9th/10th revision diagnostic code for migraine in the 12-month prescreening period. The Identify Chronic Migraine survey was administered by e-mail, in-person, or over the telephone to all enrolled patients. A Semi-Structured Diagnostic Interview (SSDI) was administered by telephone by a trained physician. The ID-CM(6) and SSDI classifications of CM status were compared to evaluate sensitivity and specificity of the ID-CM(6) screening tool. RESULTS: The analysis of the ID-CM(6) screening tool included 109 patients, with 65/109 (59.6%) positive for CM based on the SSDI. The mean (standard deviation) age of the patient sample was 49 (15) years and 100/109 (91.7%) were female. Using the SSDI as the diagnostic gold standard, the ID-CM(6) had a sensitivity of 70.8% (46/65) and a specificity of 93.2% (41/44). CONCLUSION: The ID-CM(6) demonstrated acceptable sensitivity and good specificity in determining CM status. The results of this analysis support the real-world utility of the ID-CM(6) as a simple and useful tool to identify patients with CM.

Burden of increasing opioid use in the treatment of migraine: Results from the Migraine in America Symptoms and Treatment Study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess factors associated with the frequency of self-reported prescription opioid use in persons with migraine, including demographic variables, comorbidities, headache characteristics, and patterns of consultation. BACKGROUND: Despite the dose-dependent effect of opioids on migraine progression and the association with negative outcomes, migraine treatment often includes opioids. The Migraine in America Symptoms and Treatment Study focuses on individuals with migraine who receive prescription acute medications, including those receiving and those not receiving opioids. METHODS: This web-based panel survey identified people in the United States with migraine using a validated screener. This analysis stratified people with migraine into 4 groups based on days of monthly opioid use: non-opioid users, ≤3 days, 4-9 days, and ≥10 days per month. RESULTS: Of 15,133 respondents with migraine, 4701 (31%) reported acute prescription medication use for headache/migraine in the previous 3 months (mean age 45 years, 71.6% [3367/4701] female), of whom 32.5% (1528/4701) reported opioid use. About one-third of respondents with primary care or neurology consults in the prior 6 months reported receiving an opioid, and more than half of respondents (209/391, 53.5%) with a pain clinic consultation did so. Models compared those using opioids ≤3 days/month (879/4701, 18.7%), 4-9 days/month (304/4701, 6.5%), ≥10 days/month (345/4701, 7.3%) to non-opioid users (3173/4701, 67.5%). Compared to non-opioid users, infrequent users (≤3 days/month) were more likely to be male and less likely to have chronic migraine or to screen positive for anxiety and depression; and frequent opioid users (the 4-9 days/month and the ≥10 days/month groups) were more likely to be male, to smoke, to be obese, to report greater pain interference, to have moderate to severe disability, to have symptoms of anxiety and depression, to use fewer triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and to have poor acute treatment optimization. CONCLUSION: Among prescription medication users, this cross-sectional analysis shows that increasing use of prescription opioids is associated with male gender, chronic migraine, more severe disability, anxiety and depression, poor acute treatment optimization, and treatment in a pain clinic.

Demographics, Headache Features, and Comorbidity Profiles in Relation to Headache Frequency in People With Migraine: Results of the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is typically divided into 2 headache frequency denominated categories, episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM). Characterizing more narrow headache day frequency groups may be of value for better understanding the broad range of migraine experience and making treatment decisions. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the impact and burden of migraine in 4 monthly headache day (MHD) categories. METHODS: Respondents to the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study 2005 survey who met criteria for migraine were categorized into low frequency episodic migraine (LFEM) 0-3, moderate frequency episodic migraine (MFEM) 4-7, high frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) 8-14, and CM with ≥15 headache days per month. Data including sociodemographics, headache features and symptomology, comorbidities, cutaneous allodynia, and severe migraine-related disability were compared among groups. We combined the low- and medium-frequency EM groups (L/MFEM) and compared them with the HFEM group in 1 set of models and compared the HFEM and CM groups in a second set of models. Binary logistic regression, linear regression, and ordered logistic regression were used depending upon the variable type and adjusted for sociodemographics. RESULTS: Among 11,603 eligible respondents with migraine, 67.7% (7860/11,603) were categorized with LFEM, 17.7% (2051/11,603) with MFEM, 7.8% (898/11,603) with HFEM, and 6.8% (794/11,603) with CM. The mean age was 46 (SD 13.7), 80.2% (9301/11,603) were female, and 90.0% (10,187/11,323) were White, 6.9% were Black (784/11,323), and 3.1% (352/11,323) were identified as Other race(s). Individuals with HFEM differed from L/MFEM on a wide range of sociodemographic variables in the categories of headache features, disability, and comorbidities while few differences were found when modeling HFEM vs CM. In comparison with L/MFEM and HFEM, the HFEM group was more likely to have severe disability (P < .001 OR = 1.74 [1.42, 2.15]), chronic pain (P ≤ .007 OR = 1.35 [1.09, 1.69]), arthritis (P = .001 OR = 1.44 [1.15, 1.80]), high cholesterol (P = .005, OR = 1.37 [1.10, 1.70]), ulcers (P = .016, OR = 1.44 [1.07, 1.93]), and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]) (P < .001 OR = 1.50 [1.22, 1.84]). CONCLUSION: While rates of migraine symptoms, headache impact and disability, and comorbidities generally increased with increases in MHD frequency, respondents with HFEM and CM were remarkably similar on a broad range of variables including sociodemographics, disability/impact, and comorbidities. There were many more significant differences between the HFEM and L/MFEM groups on the same variables. Future work should use empirical strategies to identify naturally occurring groups and possibly reconsider the boundary between CM and HFEM.

Patient-reported dermatomyositis and polymyositis flare symptoms are associated with disability, productivity loss, and health care resource use.

BACKGROUND: Flare activity or worsening symptoms are not well defined for myositis. OBJECTIVES: To (a) characterize dermatomyositis (DM) and polymyositis (PM) flares from the patient perspective and (b) report the corresponding disability and rate of unplanned medical encounters. METHODS: Online survey data were collected from volunteer patients from The Myositis Association and Johns Hopkins Myositis Center. Flare frequency; Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI), HAQ-Pain Index, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) scales; emergency department/urgent care (ED/UC) visits; and hospital admissions during the past year were examined. RESULTS: 564 individuals with selfreported diagnoses of DM/PM were surveyed between December 2017 and May 2018. Recall of symptom flares was reported by 524 respondents (78.1% were female, mean age of 55 years). Among the respondents, 378 (72.1%) reported ≥ 1 flare in the past year. The pattern of flare frequency was similar for DM and PM respondents. The most common symptoms were muscle weakness (83%), extreme fatigue (78%), and muscle pain/discomfort (64%). Increasing flare frequency was associated with significantly (P < 0.01) greater mean HAQ-DI and HAQ-Pain scores, myositis-related ED/UC visits, hospital admissions, WPAI work productivity loss (among those employed), and WPAI nonwork activity impairment. CONCLUSIONS: DM/PM-related flares are common with exacerbations of muscle weakness and fatigue being the most common flare symptoms. Flare frequency was associated with greater disability, pain, work productivity loss, nonwork activity impairment, and increased ED/UC utilization. Higher frequency of patient-reported flares may serve as a marker of worsening physical functioning and intensifying health care needs and, therefore, suggests their importance in the clinical assessment of patients with DM/PM. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals (Bedminster, NJ) via grants to Vedanta Research and The Myositis Association. Christopher-Stine has received compensation from previous Mallinckrodt Advisory Board meetings, unrelated to this subject matter. Wan is an employee of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals and is a stockholder of the company. Reed and Bostic received grant support from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals for data collection and analysis. McGowan is an employee of The Myositis Foundation, which received grant funding to support study data collection. Kelly has no conflicts to disclose. This study was presented, in part or full, at the 2019 Annual American College of Rheumatology and Association of Rheumatology Professional Meeting (November 8-13, 2018; Atlanta, GA) and at the Third Global Conference on Myositis (March 27, 2019; Berlin, Germany).