Clinical factors associated with day-to-day peak pain severity in individuals with chronic migraine: A cohort study using daily prospective diary data.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the association between day-to-day peak pain severity and clinical factors in individuals with chronic migraine (CM). BACKGROUND: Little is known about how clinical factors relate to day-to-day pain severity in individuals with CM. METHODS: Adults with CM were enrolled into this observational prospective cohort study that collected daily data about headache, associated symptoms, and lifestyle factors using a digital health platform (N1-Headache™) for 90 days. "Migraine days" were defined as days in which a headache occurred that had features described by the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria. On these days, peak pain severity was recorded on a 4-point scale; on non-headache days peak pain severity was imputed as "0/none". The associations between peak pain severity and 12 clinical factors were modeled and adjusted for sex, age, daily headache, presence of menstrual bleeding, day of the week, and disability. All numerical and Likert scale variables were standardized prior to analysis. RESULTS: Data were available for 392 participants (35,280 tracked days). The sample was predominantly female (90.6%), with a mean (standard deviation) age of 39.9 (12.8) years. In the final multivariable model with random intercept and slopes, higher than typical self-reported levels of standardized stress (odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.11), standardized irritability (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08), standardized sadness (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.07), fatigue (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15-1.36), eyestrain (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.26-1.52), neck pain (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.76-2.13), skin sensitivity (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.44-1.80), and dehydration (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18-1.42) were associated with higher reported peak pain severity levels, while standardized sleep quality (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99) and standardized waking feeling refreshed (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.81-0.88) were associated with lower reported peak pain severity levels. The inclusion of a random intercept and random slopes improved upon more parsimonious models and illustrated large differences in individuals' reporting of peak severity according to the levels of the associated clinical factors. CONCLUSION: Our data showed that the experience of CM, from a pain severity perspective, is complex, related to multiple clinical variables, and highly individualized. These results suggest that future work should aim to study a personalized approach to both medical and behavioral interventions for CM based on which clinical factors relate to the individual's experience of pain severity.

Sustained benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA treatment in chronic migraine: An analysis of the pooled Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the long-term (56-week) benefits of continuous onabotulinumtoxinA treatment response in individuals with chronic migraine (CM) who achieved reduction to <15 headache days/month with treatment. BACKGROUND: There are limited data exploring reductions in monthly headache days to levels consistent with episodic migraine among those experiencing CM. Understanding the impact of sustained preventive treatment response in CM can provide important information about the impact of successful therapy. METHODS: The two Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy trials of onabotulinumtoxinA in adults included a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase and a 32-week open-label phase. Data were pooled to determine proportions of individuals with <15 headache days/month while on treatment during several time periods in the double-blind phase (Weeks 21-24; any 12 consecutive weeks; Weeks 13-24) and the entire study (Weeks 53-56; any 12 consecutive weeks; any 4-week period). We assessed the long-term impact on mean monthly headache days and changes from baseline on the six-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2.1). RESULTS: We analyzed 1384 participants with chronic migraine (double-blind: onabotulinumtoxinA, n = 688; placebo, n = 696; open-label: n = 688 [onabotulinumtoxinA]). The discontinuation rates prior to the completion of the full 56-week treatment period for onabotulinumtoxinA and placebo were 25.4% (n = 175) and 29.3% (n = 204), respectively. During Weeks 13-24 of the double-blind phase, significantly more onabotulinumtoxinA-treated (386/688 [56.1%]) than placebo-treated (342/696 [49.1%]) individuals had <15 headache days/month (p = 0.010), with fewer monthly headache days for onabotulinumtoxinA versus placebo responders. The proportions of participants achieving <15 monthly headache days with onabotulinumtoxinA were 60.9% (419/688) at Weeks 25-56, 81.1% (558/688) at Weeks 53-56, and 79.4% (546/688) during any consecutive 12-week period. Mean changes from baseline on the HIT-6 and MSQv2.1 questionnaire surpassed within-group minimal important difference thresholds in all periods. At Week 24, onabotulinumtoxinA-treated participants who achieved <15 monthly headache days during Weeks 21-24 had a greater mean HIT-6 score reduction (-6.5 vs. -1.4) and greater mean MSQv2.1 Role-Function Restrictive score improvements (21.3 vs. 6.4) than those who did not achieve <15 monthly headache days during the same period. CONCLUSIONS: Participants who achieved <15 monthly headache days with onabotulinumtoxinA treatment achieved meaningful benefits in headache-related disability and migraine-specific quality of life compared with those who remained at or above the 15-monthly headache days threshold. Sustained benefits observed over 56 weeks support long-term onabotulinumtoxinA use for the prevention of CM.

Long-term efficacy and safety of erenumab in patients with chronic migraine and acute medication overuse: A subgroup analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the long-term efficacy and safety of erenumab in patients with chronic migraine with acute medication overuse. BACKGROUND: Overuse of acute medication in patients with chronic migraine has been linked to greater pain intensity and disability and may diminish the effectiveness of preventive therapies. METHODS: This 52-week open-label extension study followed a 12-week double-blind placebo-controlled study in which patients with chronic migraine were randomized 3:2:2 to placebo or once-monthly erenumab 70 mg or 140 mg. Patients were stratified by region and medication overuse status. Patients received erenumab 70 mg or 140 mg throughout or switched from erenumab 70 to 140 mg (based on protocol amendment to augment safety data at higher dose). Efficacy was assessed in patients with and without medication overuse at parent study baseline. RESULTS: Of 609 patients enrolled in the extension study, 252/609 (41.4%) met the criteria for medication overuse at parent study baseline. At Week 52, the mean change in monthly migraine days from parent study baseline was -9.3 (95% confidence interval: -10.4, -8.1 days) in the medication overuse subgroup versus -9.3 (-10.1, -8.5 days) in the non-medication overuse subgroup (combined erenumab doses); proportion of patients achieving ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days at Week 52 was 55.9% (90/161; 48.2%, 63.3%) versus 61.3% (136/222; 54.7%, 67.4%), respectively. Among baseline users of acute migraine-specific medication, the mean change in monthly migraine-specific medication days at Week 52 was -7.4 (-8.3, -6.4 days) in the medication overuse subgroup versus -5.4 (-6.1, -4.7 days) in the non-medication overuse subgroup. Most patients (197/298; 66.1%) in the medication overuse subgroup transitioned to non-overuse status by Week 52. Erenumab 140 mg was associated with numerically greater efficacy than erenumab 70 mg across all endpoints. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: Long-term erenumab treatment demonstrated sustained efficacy and safety in patients with chronic migraine with and without acute medication overuse.

Safety and tolerability of fremanezumab in patients with episodic and chronic migraine: a pooled analysis of phase 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated efficacy for preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine. Since calcitonin gene-related peptide is expressed within the cardio- and cerebrovascular system and may have cardioprotective effects, it is critical to understand the cardio- and cerebrovascular safety of fremanezumab. METHODS: This was a pooled analysis of three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3, 12-week trials in which patients with episodic migraine or chronic migraine received quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, or placebo. Incidences of overall and serious adverse events were analyzed. Cardio- and cerebrovascular adverse events (CVAEs) were analyzed in subgroups stratified by cardio- and cerebrovascular medical history, cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs), and use of cardio- and cerebrovascular medications or triptans. RESULTS: Two thousand, eight hundred and forty-two patients were included in the study. Overall (58-65%) and serious adverse events (<1-2%) occurred in similar proportions across fremanezumab and placebo groups. CVAEs were infrequent, regardless of cardio- and cerebrovascular medical history (2-6%). CVAEs occurred in low, similar proportions of patients with CVRFs and those using cardio- and cerebrovascular medications or triptans. No cardio- and cerebrovascular signals were identified. CONCLUSION: Fremanezumab demonstrated a favorable overall and cardio- and cerebrovascular safety profile in more than 2800 patients with episodic migraine or chronic migraine, regardless of cardio- and cerebrovascular medical history, CVRFs, or medication use.Trial Registrations: NCT02629861 (HALO EM, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02629861), NCT02621931 (HALO CM, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02621931), NCT03308968 (FOCUS, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ show/NCT03308968).

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for Clinic-Based Headache Registries, 1st edition.

Clinic-based headache registries collect data for a wide variety of purposes including delineating disease characteristics, longitudinal natural disease courses, headache management approaches, quality of care, treatment safety and effectiveness, factors that predict treatment response, health care resource utilization, clinician adherence to guidelines, and cost-effectiveness. Registry data are valuable for numerous stakeholders, including individuals with headache disorders and their caregivers, healthcare providers, scientists, healthcare systems, regulatory authorities, pharmaceutical companies, employers, and policymakers. This International Headache Society document may serve as guidance for developing clinic-based headache registries. Use of registry data requires a formal research protocol that includes: 1) research aims; 2) methods for data collection, harmonization, analysis, privacy, and protection; 3) methods for human subject protection; and 4) publication and dissemination plans. Depending upon their objectives, headache registries should include validated headache-specific questionnaires, patient reported outcome measures, data elements that are used consistently across studies (i.e., "common data elements"), and medical record data. Amongst other data types, registries may be linked to healthcare and pharmacy claims data, biospecimens, and neuroimaging data. Headache diagnoses should be made according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders diagnostic criteria. The data from well-designed headache registries can provide wide-ranging and novel insights into the characteristics, burden, and treatment of headache disorders and ultimately lead to improvements in the management of patients with headache.

Time course of efficacy of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine: Results from the randomized, double-blind ADVANCE trial.

BACKGROUND: Atogepant is an oral, small-molecule, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for the preventive treatment of migraine. METHODS: In the double-blind, phase 3 ADVANCE trial, participants with 4-14 migraine days/month were randomized to atogepant 10 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. We evaluated the time course of efficacy of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine. Analyses included change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days during each of the three 4-week treatment periods, change in weekly migraine days during weeks 1-4, and proportion of participants with a migraine on each day during the first week. RESULTS: We analyzed 873 participants (n = 214 atogepant 10 mg, n = 223 atogepant 30 mg, n = 222 atogepant 60 mg, n = 214 placebo). For weeks 1-4, mean change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days ranged from -3.1 to -3.9 across atogepant doses vs -1.6 for placebo (p < 0.0001). For weeks 5-8 and 9-12, reductions in mean monthly migraine days ranged from -3.7 to -4.2 for atogepant vs -2.9 for placebo (p ≤ 0.012) and -4.2 to -4.4 for atogepant vs -3.0 for placebo (p < 0.0002), respectively. Mean change from baseline in weekly migraine days in week 1 ranged from -0.77 to -1.03 for atogepant vs -0.29 with placebo (p < 0.0001). Percentages of participants reporting a migraine on post-dose day 1 ranged from 10.8% to 14.1% for atogepant vs 25.2% with placebo (p ≤ 0.0071). CONCLUSION: Atogepant demonstrated treatment benefits as early as the first full day after treatment initiation, and sustained efficacy across each 4-week interval during the 12-week treatment period.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03777059.

Efficacy and quality-of-life improvements with fremanezumab treatment in patients with difficult-to-treat migraine with associated neurological dysfunction.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin-gene-related peptide, has demonstrated efficacy as a preventive treatment for adults with episodic migraine or chronic migraine and inadequate response to two to four prior preventive treatment classes in the phase 3b FOCUS study. In this post hoc analysis, efficacy and effects on quality-of-life outcomes for fremanezumab were evaluated in subgroups of patients with and without aura or similar neurological symptoms, here referred to as migraine with or without associated neurological dysfunction. METHODS: In the FOCUS study, 838 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab or matched placebo for 12 weeks of double-blind treatment. For this post hoc analysis, subgroups of patients with migraine with and without associated neurological dysfunction at baseline were identified based on patient response to questions about symptoms. RESULTS: In patients with migraine with associated neurological dysfunction at baseline, fremanezumab significantly reduced monthly average days with neurological symptoms (quarterly, -1.7 days; monthly, -1.8 days) compared to placebo (-0.5 days; both p ≤ 0.01). In comparison with placebo, both dosing regimens of fremanezumab yielded greater reductions in monthly migraine days over 12 weeks (p < 0.0001) and improvements in Headache Impact Test 6 and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life scores over the last 4 weeks (p < 0.05), regardless of neurological dysfunction at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab reduced days with neurological symptoms, effectively prevented migraine, and improved quality of life in patients with migraine with associated neurological dysfunction, including those with previous inadequate response to two to four migraine preventive medication classes.

Headache and rhinosinusitis: A review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To explain our current understanding of headache attributed to rhinosinusitis, an often inappropriately diagnosed secondary headache. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have shown that headache attributed to rhinosinusitis is often over-diagnosed in patients who actually have primary headache disorders, most commonly migraine. Failure to recognize and treat rhinosinusitis, however, can have devastating consequences. Abnormalities of the sinuses may also be treatable by surgical means, which may provide headache relief in appropriately selected patients. SUMMARY: It is important for the practicing physician to understand how rhinosinusitis fits into the differential diagnosis of headache, both to avoid overdiagnosis in patients with primary headache, and to avoid underdiagnosis in patients with serious sinus disease.

Safety and efficacy of ubrogepant in participants with major cardiovascular risk factors in two single-attack phase 3 randomized trials: ACHIEVE I and II.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for acute treatment of migraine across cardiovascular (CV) disease risk categories. METHODS: ACHIEVE I and II were multicenter, double-blind, single-attack, phase 3 trials in adults with migraine, with or without aura. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant (50 or 100 mg in ACHIEVE I; 25 or 50 mg in ACHIEVE II), to treat one migraine attack of moderate or severe headache pain intensity. This post-hoc analysis pooled data from ubrogepant 50 mg and placebo groups from the ACHIEVE trials to examine the safety and efficacy of ubrogepant by baseline cardiovascular disease risk factors. Using a cardiovascular risk assessment algorithm, participants were categorized as having no cardiovascular risk, low cardiovascular risk or moderate-high cardiovascular risk at baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events were documented 48 h and 30 days after taking the trial medication. Co-primary efficacy outcomes were 2-h pain freedom and 2-h absence of most bothersome migraine-associated symptom. RESULTS: Overall, 3358 participants were randomized in the ACHIEVE trials (n = 2901 safety population; n = 2682 modified intent-to-treat population). In the safety population, 11% of participants were categorized as moderate-high (n = 311), 32% low (n = 920), and 58% no cardiovascular risk factors (n = 1670). The proportion of ubrogepant participants reporting a treatment-emergent adverse event was comparable across risk categories and similar to placebo. The treatment effects of ubrogepant versus placebo were consistent across cardiovascular risk categories for all efficacy outcomes. CONCLUSION: The safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of a single migraine attack did not differ by the presence of major cardiovascular risk factors. No evidence of increased treatment-emergent adverse events or cardiac system organ class adverse events with ≥2 major cardiovascular risk factors and no safety concerns were identified.Trial Registration: ACHIEVE I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02828020; ACHIEVE II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02867709.

Reversion from chronic migraine to episodic migraine following treatment with erenumab: Results of a post-hoc analysis of a randomized, 12-week, double-blind study and a 52-week, open-label extension.

OBJECTIVE: To determine reversion rates from chronic migraine to episodic migraine during long-term erenumab treatment. METHODS: A daily headache diary was completed during the 12-week, double-blind treatment phase of a placebo-controlled trial comparing erenumab 70 mg, 140 mg, and placebo, and weeks 1-12, 21-24, 37-40, and 49-52 of the open-label treatment phase. Chronic migraine to episodic migraine reversion rates were assessed over the double-blind treatment phase; persistent reversion to episodic migraine over 24 weeks (double-blind treatment phase through the first 12 weeks in the open-label treatment phase), long-term persistent reversion to episodic migraine over 64 weeks (double-blind treatment phase plus open-label treatment phase); delayed reversion to episodic migraine through the first 12 weeks of the open-label treatment phase among patients remaining in chronic migraine during the double-blind treatment phase. RESULTS: In the double-blind treatment phase, 53.1% (95% confidence interval: 47.8-58.3) of 358 erenumab-treated completers had reversion to episodic migraine; monthly reversion rates to episodic migraine were typically higher among patients receiving 140 mg versus 70 mg. Among 181 completers (receiving erenumab for 64 weeks), 98 (54.1% [95% confidence interval: 46.6-61.6]) had reversion to episodic migraine during the double-blind treatment phase; of those, 96.9% (95% confidence interval: 91.3-99.4) had persistent reversion to episodic migraine, 96.8% (95% confidence interval: 91.1-99.3) of whom had long-term persistent reversion to episodic migraine. Delayed reversion to episodic migraine occurred in 36/83 (43.4% [95% confidence interval: 32.5-54.7]) patients; of these, 77.8% (95% confidence interval: 60.9-89.9) persisted in reversion through week 64. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with reversion to episodic migraine at week 12 will likely persist as episodic migraine with longer-term erenumab; others may achieve delayed reversion to episodic migraine.Clinical trial registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02066415.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for clinical trials with neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine.

BACKGROUND: Although the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration have cleared several devices that use neuromodulation to provide clinical benefits in the acute or preventive treatment of migraine, the Clinical Trials Committee of the International Headache Society has not developed guidelines specifically for clinical trials of neuromodulation devices. In recognition of the distinct needs and challenges associated with their assessment in controlled trials, the Committee provides these recommendations for optimizing the design and conduct of controlled trials of neuromodulation devices for the acute and/or preventive treatment of migraine. METHODS: An international group of headache scientists and clinicians with expertise in neuromodulation evaluated clinical trials involving neuromodulation devices that have been published since 2000. The Clinical Trials Committee incorporated findings from this expert analysis into a new guideline for clinical trials of neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine. RESULTS: Key terms were defined and recommendations provided relative to the assessment of neuromodulation devices for acute treatment in adults, preventive treatment in adults, and acute and preventive treatment in children and adolescents. Ethical and administrative responsibilities were outlined, and a bibliography of previous research involving neuromodulation devices was created. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of these recommendations will improve the quality of evidence regarding this important area in migraine treatment.

A new hypothesis linking oxytocin to menstrual migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To highlight the emerging understanding of oxytocin (OT) and oxytocin receptors (OTRs) in modulating menstrual-related migraine (MRM). BACKGROUND: MRM is highly debilitating and less responsive to therapy, and attacks are of longer duration than nonmenstrually related migraine. A clear understanding of the mechanisms underlying MRM is lacking. METHODS: We present a narrative literature review on the developing understanding of the role of OT and the OTR in MRM. Literature on MRM on PubMed/MEDLINE database including clinical trials and basic science publications was reviewed using specific keywords. RESULTS: OT is a cyclically released hypothalamic hormone/neurotransmitter that binds to the OTR resulting in inhibition of trigeminal neuronal excitability that can promote migraine pain including that of MRM. Estrogen regulates OT release as well as expression of the OTR. Coincident with menstruation, levels of both estrogen and OT decrease. Additionally, other serum biochemical factors, including magnesium and cholesterol, which positively modulate the affinity of OT for OTRs, both decrease during menstruation. Thus, during menstruation, multiple menstrually associated factors may lead to decreased circulating OT levels, decreased OT affinity for OTR, and decreased expression of the trigeminal OTR. Consistent with the view of migraine as a threshold disorder, these events may collectively result in decreased inhibition promoting lower thresholds for activation of meningeal trigeminal nociceptors and increasing the likelihood of an MRM attack. CONCLUSION: Trigeminal OTR may thus be a novel target for the development of MRM therapeutics.

Intravenous ibuprofen for acute treatment of migraine: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) Ibuprofen for acute treatment of migraine. BACKGROUND: IV nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are an alternative to oral NSAIDs, especially in patients with severe migraine who have emesis or gastroparesis. To date, only three IV NSAIDs (ketorolac, ibuprofen, and meloxicam) are available in the United States for use in moderate and severe pain, but no placebo-controlled trial is available for migraine. We performed a single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled pilot study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IV ibuprofen as an acute treatment of migraine (NCT01230411). METHODS: Individuals with episodic migraine were screened at the Jefferson Headache Center. Qualified subjects were treated for migraine attacks within 2-72 h following the headache onset with either 800 mg of IV ibuprofen or placebo in 250 ml saline bolus. Migraine pain intensity (4-point Likert scale) and associated symptoms were assessed at predetermined time points (0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 24 h). The primary endpoint was pain relief at 2 h after infusion. Important secondary endpoints included pain freedom at 2 h, sustained relief over 24 h, use of rescue therapy, and absence of associated symptoms. Adverse events (AEs) were also collected. RESULTS: Seventy-four participants were enrolled between 2011 and 2017. Forty-four subjects (female 33/44; 75.0%) with mean (SD) age 41.0 (11.2)   11.2 years came for the treatment. All treated subjects (n = 44) were included in the analysis. Among them, 23 were randomized to receive IV ibuprofen. Both groups were demographically similar except for longer migraine duration (i.e., years lived with disease) in the active treatment than in the placebo group. At 2 h posttreatment, pain relief was found in 74% (17/23) and 48% (10/21) after IV ibuprofen and placebo, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 3.12, 95% CI: 0.88-11.0; p = 0.078). Other secondary endpoints at 2 and 24 h were not significant. The longitudinal repeated-measures analysis within 2 h on ibuprofen treatment showed significant pain relief (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.08-5.7; p = 0.033) and absence of associated symptoms: photophobia (OR 4.0, 95% CI 1.57-10.3; p = 0.004), phonophobia (OR 3.12, 95% CI 1.16-8.4; p = 0.025), and osmophobia (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.01-11.8; p = 0.048). AEs were observed in seven subjects in both groups, with arm pain being the most common. No serious AE was reported. CONCLUSION: This study did not meet the primary endpoint but showed pain relief and elimination of several associated symptoms within 2 h on repeated-measures analysis. Although limited by small sample size and high placebo response, our results indicate that IV ibuprofen may be a safe and effective option for acute treatment of migraine, but more extensive studies are necessary.

Chronic versus episodic migraine: The 15-day threshold does not adequately reflect substantial differences in disability across the full spectrum of headache frequency.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the 15-day threshold of headache days per month adequately reflects substantial differences in disability across the full spectrum of migraine. BACKGROUND: The monthly frequency of headache days defines migraine subtypes and has crucial implications for epidemiological and clinical research as well as access to care. METHODS: The patients with migraine (N = 836) who participated in the American Registry for Migraine Research, which is a multicenter, longitudinal patient registry, between February 2016 and March 2020, were divided into four groups based on monthly headache frequency: Group 1 (0-7 headache days/month, n = 286), Group 2 (8-14 headache days/month, n = 180), Group 3 (15-23 headache days/month, n = 153), Group 4 (≥24 headache days/month, n = 217). Disability (MIDAS), Pain intensity (NRS), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI), Pain Interference (PROMIS-PI), Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4), and General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) scores were compared. RESULTS: Mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 46 (13) years (87.9% [735/836] female). The proportion of patients in each group was as follows: Group 1 (34.2% [286/836]), Group 2 (21.5% [180/836]), Group 3 (18.3% [153/836]), and Group 4 (26.0% [217/836]). There were significant relationships with increasing disability, lost productive time, and pain interference in higher headache frequency categories. There were no significant differences between Group 2 and Group 3 for most measures (NRS, all WPAI scores, PROMIS-PI, GAD-7, and PHQ-4), although MIDAS scores differed (median [interquartile range (IQR)]; 38 [20-58] vs. 55 [30-90], p < 0.001). Patients in Group 1 had significantly lower MIDAS (median [IQR];16 [7-30], p < 0.001), WPAI-% total active impairment (mean (SD): Group 1 [30.9 (26.8)] vs. Group 2 [39.2 (24.5), p = 0.017], vs. Group 3 [45.9 (24.1), p < 0.001], vs. Group 4 [55.3 (23.0), p < 0.001], and PROMIS-PI-T score (Group 1 [60.3 (7.3)] vs. Group 2 [62.6 (6.4), p = 0.008], vs. Group 3 [64.6 (5.6), p < 0.001], vs. Group 4 [66.8 (5.9), p < 0.001]) compared to all other groups. Patients in Group 4 had significantly higher MIDAS (median (IQR): Group 4 [90 (52-138)] vs. Group 1 [16 (7-30), p < 0.001], vs. Group 2 [38 (20-58), p < 0.001], vs. Group 3 [55 (30-90), p < 0.001], WPAI-%Presenteeism (Group 4 [50.4 (24.4)] vs. Group 1 [28.8 (24.9), p < 0.001], vs. Group 2 [34.9 (22.3), p < 0.001], vs. Group 3 [40.9 (22.3), p = 0.048], WPAI-% total work productivity impairment (Group 4 [55.9 (26.1)] vs. Group 1 [32.1 (37.6), p < 0.001], vs. Group 2 [38.3 (24.0), p < 0.001], vs. Group 3 [44.6 (24.4), p = 0.019]), and WPAI-%Total activity impairment (Group 4 [55.3 (23.0)] vs. Group 1 [30.9 (26.8), p < 0.001], vs. Group 2 [39.2 (24.5), p < 0.001], vs. Group 3 [45.9 (24.1), p = 0.025]) scores compared with all other groups. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the use of a 15 headache day/month threshold to distinguish episodic and chronic migraine does not capture the burden of illness nor reflect the treatment needs of patients. These results have important implications for future refinements in the classification of migraine.

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.

The Use of Botulinum Toxin in the Management of Headache Disorders.

Tremendous progress has been made in the past decades for the treatment of headache disorders. Chronic migraine is the most disabling type of headache and requires the use of acute and preventive medications, many of which are associated with adverse events that limit patient adherence. Botulinum toxin (BoNT) serotype A, a neurotoxin derived from certain strains of Clostridium, disrupts neuropeptide secretion and receptor translocation related to trigeminal nociception, thereby preventing pain sensitization through peripheral and possibly central mechanisms. Ever since the first randomized controlled trial on onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) for migraine was published two decades ago, onabotA has been the only BoNT formulation approved for use in the prevention of chronic migraine. Superior tolerability and efficacy have been demonstrated on multiple migraine endpoints in many controlled trials and real-life studies. OnabotA is a safe and efficacious treatment for chronic migraine and possibly high-frequency episodic migraine. Further research is still needed to understand its mechanism of action to fully develop its therapeutic potential.

Treatment benefit among migraine patients taking fremanezumab: results from a post hoc responder analysis of two placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway, including the fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) fremanezumab, have demonstrated safety and efficacy for migraine prevention. Clinical trials include responders and nonresponders; efficacy outcomes describe mean values across both groups and thus provide little insight into the clinical benefit in responders. Clinicians and their patients want to understand the extent of clinical improvement in patients who respond. This post hoc analysis of fremanezumab treatment attempts to answer this question: what is the benefit in subjects who responded to treatment during the two, phase 3 HALO clinical trials? METHODS: We included subjects with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) who received fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg/placebo/placebo) or monthly (EM: 225 mg/225 mg/225 mg; CM: 675 mg/225 mg/225 mg) during the 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled HALO EM and HALO CM clinical trials. EM and CM responders were defined as participants with a reduction of ≥ 2 or ≥ 4 monthly migraine days, respectively. Treatment benefits evaluated included reductions in monthly migraine days, acute headache medication use, and headache-related disability, and changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS: Overall, 857 participants from the HALO trials were identified as responders (EM: 429 [73.8%]; CM: 428 [56.7%]). Reductions in the monthly average number of migraine days were greater among EM (quarterly: 5.4 days; monthly: 5.5 days) and CM (quarterly: 8.7 days; monthly: 9.1 days) responders compared with the overall population. The proportion of participants achieving ≥ 50% reduction in the average monthly number of migraine days was also greater in responders (EM: quarterly, 59.8%; monthly, 63.7%; CM: quarterly, 52.8%; monthly, 59.0%) than in the overall population. Greater reductions in the average number of days of acute headache medication use, greater reductions in headache-related disability scores, and larger improvements in HRQoL were observed among EM and CM responders compared with the overall populations. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab responders achieved clinically meaningful improvements in all outcomes. The magnitude of improvements with fremanezumab across efficacy outcomes was far greater in responders than in the overall trial population, providing insight into expected treatment benefits in participants who respond to fremanezumab in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02629861 (HALO EM) and NCT02621931 (HALO CM).

Fremanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine.

BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is being investigated as a preventive treatment for migraine. We compared two fremanezumab dose regimens with placebo for the prevention of chronic migraine. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with chronic migraine (defined as headache of any duration or severity on ≥15 days per month and migraine on ≥8 days per month) in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive fremanezumab quarterly (a single dose of 675 mg at baseline and placebo at weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab monthly (675 mg at baseline and 225 mg at weeks 4 and 8), or matching placebo. Both fremanezumab and placebo were administered by means of subcutaneous injection. The primary end point was the mean change from baseline in the average number of headache days (defined as days in which headache pain lasted ≥4 consecutive hours and had a peak severity of at least a moderate level or days in which acute migraine-specific medication [triptans or ergots] was used to treat a headache of any severity or duration) per month during the 12 weeks after the first dose. RESULTS: Of 1130 patients enrolled, 376 were randomly assigned to fremanezumab quarterly, 379 to fremanezumab monthly, and 375 to placebo. The mean number of baseline headache days (as defined above) per month was 13.2, 12.8, and 13.3, respectively. The least-squares mean (±SE) reduction in the average number of headache days per month was 4.3±0.3 with fremanezumab quarterly, 4.6±0.3 with fremanezumab monthly, and 2.5±0.3 with placebo (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). The percentage of patients with a reduction of at least 50% in the average number of headache days per month was 38% in the fremanezumab-quarterly group, 41% in the fremanezumab-monthly group, and 18% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). Abnormalities of hepatic function occurred in 5 patients in each fremanezumab group (1%) and 3 patients in the placebo group (<1%). CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab as a preventive treatment for chronic migraine resulted in a lower frequency of headache than placebo in this 12-week trial. Injection-site reactions to the drug were common. The long-term durability and safety of fremanezumab require further study. (Funded by Teva Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02621931 .).

Have the IHS Guidelines for controlled trials of acute treatment of migraine attacks been followed? Laying the ground for the 4th edition.

BACKGROUND: The International Headache Society (IHS) has published four editions of Guidelines for acute clinical trials in migraine in the past 28 years. This continuous update process has been driven by the increasing amount of scientific data in the field of migraine and by the need to continuously improve the quality of trials. OBJECTIVES: To illustrate: i) the results of the analysis on the adherence of published trials to the 3rd edition published in 2012, in order to identify the critical areas that needed to be addressed in the 4th edition and ii) the changes introduced in this latter edition for improving adherence and methodology robustness. METHODS: We searched and reviewed all controlled trials on acute treatment of migraine published in the period 2012-2018 and we assessed their adherence to the 3rd edition of the IHS Guidelines using a score system based on the most important recommendations. Afterwards, we compared the two editions of the Guidelines and assessed the changes between them. RESULTS: We included data from 24 controlled clinical trials. Most trials had a randomized double-blind controlled (RDB) design, while a minority (16.7%) were non-randomized double-blind trials. Less than half (44.6%) of the RDB trials used the recommended "pain-free at 2 hours" endpoint as the primary efficacy measure. Trial design and evaluation of results were the areas that diverged the most from the recommendations. CONCLUSION: Adherence to IHS guidelines for clinical trials has been suboptimal so far. The new edition has been adapted and optimized to facilitate uptake and strengthen the quality of evidence.

Comparison of healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with migraine with potentially adequate and insufficient triptan response.

BACKGROUND: Triptans are the most commonly prescribed acute treatments for migraine; however, not all triptan users experience adequate response. Information on real-world resource use and costs associated with triptan insufficient response are limited. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis using US commercial health plan data between 2012 and 2015 assessed healthcare resource use and costs in adults with a migraine diagnosis newly initiating triptans. Patients who either did not refill triptans but used other non-triptan medications or refilled triptans but also filled non-triptan medications over a 24-month follow-up period were designated as potential triptan insufficient responders. Patients who continued filling only triptans (i.e. triptan-only continuers) were designated as potential adequate responders. All-cause and migraine-related resource use and total (medical and pharmacy) costs over months 1-12 and months 13-24 were compared between triptan-only continuers and potential triptan insufficient responders. RESULTS: Among 10,509 new triptan users, 4371 (41%) were triptan-only continuers, 3102 (30%) were potential triptan insufficient responders, and 3036 (29%) did not refill their index triptan or fill non-triptan medications over 24 months' follow-up. Opioids were the most commonly used non-triptan treatment (68%) among potential triptan insufficient responders over 24 months of follow-up. Adjusted mean all-cause and migraine-related total costs were $5449 and $2905 higher, respectively, among potential triptan insufficient responders versus triptan-only continuers over the first 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: In a US commercial health plan, almost one-third of new triptan users were potential triptan insufficient responders and the majority filled opioid prescriptions. Potential triptan insufficient responder patients had significantly higher all-cause and migraine-related healthcare utilization and costs than triptan-only continuers.