Safety and tolerability results of atogepant for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine from a 40-week, open-label multicenter extension of the phase 3 ADVANCE trial.

BACKGROUND: Atogepant is a United States Food and Drug Administration-approved oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. The study objective was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of atogepant in participants who completed the phase 3 ADVANCE trial (NCT03777059). METHODS: This 40-week, open-label extension trial (NCT03939312) monitored safety in participants receiving oral atogepant 60 mg once daily, followed by a four-week safety follow-up period. RESULTS: Of the 685 participants taking at least one dose of atogepant, the treatment period was completed by 74.6% of participants with a mean (standard deviation) treatment duration of 233.6 (89.3) days. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 62.5% of participants, with upper respiratory tract infection (5.5%), urinary tract infection (5.3%), nasopharyngitis (4.8%), sinusitis (3.6%), constipation (3.4%), and nausea (3.4%) occurring at ≥3%. Serious adverse events were observed in 3.4% of participants (none were treatment-related), and there were no deaths. Adverse events leading to discontinuation occurring at >0.1% were nausea (0.4%) and abdominal pain, vomiting, weight decrease, dizziness, and migraine (0.3% each). CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with atogepant's known safety profile and support long-term use of atogepant 60 mg once daily dosing as safe and well tolerated.ClinicalTrials.gov Registration Number: NCT03939312.

Preventive migraine treatment with eptinezumab reduced acute headache medication and headache frequency to below diagnostic thresholds in patients with chronic migraine and medication-overuse headache.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis in patients medically diagnosed with chronic migraine (CM) and medication-overuse headache (MOH) evaluated reductions in the use of acute headache medication (AHM) and sustained changes in the diagnostic status of CM and MOH following eptinezumab treatment in the PROMISE-2 study. BACKGROUND: Eptinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits calcitonin gene-related peptide, is approved in the United States for the preventive treatment of migraine. A previous analysis showed that eptinezumab reduced monthly migraine days and was well tolerated in the subgroup of PROMISE-2 patients diagnosed with both CM and MOH. METHODS: The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled PROMISE-2 study (NCT02974153) randomized adults with CM to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo (administered intravenously every 12 weeks for up to two doses). MOH was prospectively diagnosed at screening by trained physicians based on 3 months of medication history and International Classification of Headache Disorders-3ß criteria. This post hoc analysis evaluated changes in total and class-specific days of AHM usage, the percentage of patients using AHM at or above MOH diagnostic thresholds, and the percentage of patients experiencing monthly headache and migraine day frequency below diagnostic thresholds for MOH and/or CM. RESULTS: In PROMISE-2, 431/1072 (40.2%) patients with CM were diagnosed with MOH (eptinezumab 100 mg, n = 139; 300 mg, n = 147; placebo, n = 145) and were included in this analysis. Total monthly AHM use decreased from 20.6 days/month at baseline to 10.6 days/month over 24 weeks of treatment (49% decrease) with eptinezumab 100 mg, from 20.7 to 10.5 days/month (49% decrease) with eptinezumab 300 mg, and from 19.8 to 14.0 days/month (29% decrease) with placebo. Numerically greater decreases from baseline with eptinezumab were also observed for individual drug classes. In each study month, the percentages of patients who were below MOH thresholds were numerically higher for both eptinezumab doses compared with placebo, as were the percentages of patients experiencing headache and migraine frequency below CM thresholds. Of patients with available data across the entire treatment period, 29.0% (58/200) of patients treated with eptinezumab stopped meeting and remained below diagnostic thresholds for both CM and MOH during Weeks 1-24, as well as 6.3% (6/96) of patients who received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Across 24 weeks of treatment, eptinezumab reduced AHM use in patients diagnosed with CM and MOH. More than one-fourth (29%) of patients treated with eptinezumab did not meet the diagnostic thresholds for either CM or MOH for the entire treatment period.

Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of eptinezumab in patients with a dual diagnosis of chronic migraine and medication-overuse headache: Subgroup analysis of PROMISE-2.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg compared with placebo in patients with the dual diagnosis of chronic migraine (CM) and medication-overuse headache (MOH). BACKGROUND: Eptinezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide, may be effective for treating patients with a dual diagnosis of CM and MOH. METHODS: PROMISE-2 (NCT02974153) was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study that comprised a screening visit, a 28-day pretreatment period, and a 32-week study duration. Patients in this exploratory analysis of a prespecified subgroup had confirmed diagnoses of both CM and MOH at screening. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous eptinezumab 100, 300 mg, or placebo every 12 weeks. Efficacy outcomes included mean changes from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMDs) during weeks 1-12, migraine responder rates at week 12, and percentages of patients below International Classification of Headache Disorders thresholds for CM and MOH over weeks 1-24. RESULTS: There were 431 patients who were diagnosed with CM and MOH as specified in the protocol and received eptinezumab 100 mg (n = 139), 300 mg (n = 147), or placebo (n = 145). During the baseline period, these patients experienced an average of 16.7 migraine days across treatment arms. Over weeks 1-12, eptinezumab-treated patients experienced greater reductions from baseline in MMDs than placebo patients (100 mg, change from baseline = -8.4, difference from placebo [95% confidence interval (CI)] = -3.0 [-4.56, -1.52], p < 0.0001 vs. placebo; 300 mg, change from baseline = -8.6, difference from placebo [95% CI] = -3.2 [-4.66, -1.78], p < 0.0001 vs. placebo; placebo, -5.4). Compared with placebo, more eptinezumab-treated patients were ≥50% migraine responders (100 mg, 84/139 [60.4%]; 300 mg, 91/147 [61.9%]; placebo, 50/145 [34.5%]) or ≥75% responders (100 mg, 38/139 [27.3%]; 300 mg, 44/147 [29.9%]; placebo, 21/145 [14.5%]) over weeks 1-12. Therapeutic benefits with eptinezumab were observed from day 1 after dosing, and improvements were sustained with an additional dose. For the full 24-week treatment period, 71/139 (51.1%), 80/147 (54.4%), and 47/145 (32.4%) of 100, 300 mg, and placebo-treated patients, respectively, were below CM thresholds, and of the patients who provided sufficient acute medication data, 47/93 (50.5%), 53/107 (49.5%), and 26/96 (27.1%), respectively, were below medication-overuse thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: In patients diagnosed with both CM and MOH, eptinezumab treatment resulted in greater reductions in MMDs, higher responder rates, and fewer patients meeting CM and MOH criteria, thus demonstrating the efficacy and clinical utility of eptinezumab in this patient population.

Eptinezumab for the prevention of chronic migraine: efficacy and safety through 24 weeks of treatment in the phase 3 PROMISE-2 (Prevention of migraine via intravenous ALD403 safety and efficacy-2) study.

BACKGROUND: PROMISE-2 was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of repeat intravenous (IV) doses of the calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted monoclonal antibody eptinezumab (ALD403) for migraine prevention in adults with chronic migraine. This report describes the results of PROMISE-2 through 24 weeks of treatment. METHODS: Patients received up to two 30-min IV administrations of eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo separated by 12 weeks. Patients recorded migraine and headache endpoints in a daily eDiary. Additional assessments, including patient-reported outcomes, were performed at regularly scheduled clinic visits throughout the 32-week study period (screening, day 0, and weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, and 32). RESULTS: A total of 1072 adults received treatment: eptinezumab 100 mg, n = 356; eptinezumab 300 mg, n = 350; placebo, n = 366. The reduction in mean monthly migraine days observed during the first dosing interval (100 mg, - 7.7 days; 300 mg, - 8.2 days; placebo, - 5.6 days) was further decreased after an additional dose (100 mg, - 8.2 days; 300 mg, - 8.8 days; placebo, - 6.2 days), with both doses of eptinezumab demonstrating consistently greater reductions from baseline compared to placebo. The ≥50% and ≥ 75% migraine responder rates (MRRs) increased after a second dose, with more eptinezumab-treated patients experiencing migraine response than placebo patients (≥50% MRRs weeks 13-24: 100 mg, 61.0%; 300 mg, 64.0%; placebo, 44.0%; and ≥ 75% MRRs weeks 13-24: 100 mg, 39.3%; 300 mg, 43.1%; placebo, 23.8%). The percentages of patients who improved on patient-reported outcomes, including the Headache Impact Test and Patient Global Impression of Change, increased following the second dose administration at week 12, and were greater with eptinezumab than with placebo at all time points. No new safety concerns were identified with the second dose regarding the incidence, nature, and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSION: Eptinezumab 100 mg or 300 mg administered IV at day 0 and repeated at week 12 provided sustained migraine preventive benefit over a full 24 weeks and demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in patients with chronic migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02974153 ). Registered November 23, 2016.

Diagnosing and understanding adult headache.

Primary headaches are the most common headache disorders. The most common forms are tension-type headaches, migraine, and cluster headache. Knowing the clinical presentation coupled with taking a thorough history taking and performing a thorough physical examination usually helps in arriving at a correct diagnosis. Special attention should be paid to unusual clinical presentations. Further diagnostic work-up should be performed in the presence of atypical and worrisome signs.

Sumatriptan-naproxen sodium for menstrual migraine and dysmenorrhea: satisfaction, productivity, and functional disability outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a sumatriptan/naproxen sodium combination tablet on patient satisfaction, productivity, and functional disability in menstrual migraine treated during the mild pain phase of a single menstrual migraine attack associated with dysmenorrhea. BACKGROUND: Menstrual migraineurs with dysmenorrhea represent a unique patient population not previously studied. When health outcomes end points are analyzed alongside traditional efficacy end points in migraine studies, a more comprehensive and robust understanding of the many factors that may influence patients' choice of and adherence to pharmacological treatments for migraine is observed. METHODS: In 2 replicate, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, participants with menstrual migraine and dysmenorrhea treated a single menstrual migraine attack with a single fixed-dose tablet of sumatriptan 85 mg formulated with RT Technology™ and naproxen sodium 500 mg (sumatriptan-naproxen sodium) or placebo. RESULTS: Participants randomized to sumatriptan-naproxen sodium were significantly more satisfied than those randomized to placebo at 24 hours post dose, as demonstrated by higher satisfaction subscale scores for efficacy (P < .001 for both studies), functionality (P = .003 for study 1; P < .001 for study 2), and ease of use (P = .027 for study 1; P = .011 for study 2). There was little bothersomeness of side effects associated with either treatment. Use of sumatriptan-naproxen sodium was also associated with lower reported "lost-time equivalents" in work and leisure time (pooled analysis, P = .003) and lower rates of functional disability (P = .05, study 1; P < .001, study 2) compared with placebo. CONCLUSION: A fixed-dose combination tablet containing sumatriptan and naproxen sodium significantly improved patient satisfaction, productivity, and restoration of normal functioning in menstrual migraineurs with dysmenorrhea.

Combination treatment for menstrual migraine and dysmenorrhea using sumatriptan-naproxen: two randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan-naproxen during the mild pain phase of a single menstrual migraine attack associated with dysmenorrhea. METHODS: Two replicate randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, trials of adults with menstrual migraine and dysmenorrhea were conducted. Participants treated their menstrual migraine attack during the mild pain phase (within 1 hour of onset) with sumatriptan 85 mg and naproxen sodium 500 mg in a single fixed-dose formulation (sumatriptan-naproxen) or placebo. The primary endpoint was 2-hour pain-free response. RESULTS: Sumatriptan-naproxen was statistically superior to placebo in both studies (n=311, Study 1; n=310, Study 2) for 2-hour and, 2- to 24-hour sustained pain-free response, use of headache and menstrual rescue medications, and several nonpain menstrual symptom categories. Two-hour pain-free rates were Study 1, 42% compared with 23%, and Study 2, 52% compared with 22%, P<.001. Two- to 24-hour sustained pain-free rates were Study 1, 29% compared with 18%, P=.022; Study 2, 38% compared with 10%, P<.001. Headache and menstrual medication rates were Study 1, 37% compared with 53%, P=.005; Study 2, 31% compared with 69%, P<.001. Women treated with sumatriptan-naproxen continued to be pain free through 48 hours compared with placebo: Study 1, 26% compared with 17%, P=.040; Study 2, 28% compared with 8%, P<.001. No serious adverse events were reported in either study; nausea and dizziness were the most frequently reported adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sumatriptan-naproxen provided an effective pain-free response at 2 hours, which was maintained up to 48 hours in menstrual migraineurs with dysmenorrhea. Sumatriptan-naproxen was well-tolerated and resulted in decreased rescue medication use and relief of nonpainful menstrual symptoms. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00329459 and NCT00329355 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Use of the emergency department for severe headache. A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Although headache is a common emergency department (ED) chief complaint, the role of the ED in the management of primary headache disorders has rarely been assessed from a population perspective. We determined frequency of ED use and risk factors for use among patients suffering severe headache. METHODS: As part of the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study, a validated self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 24,000 severe headache sufferers, who were randomly drawn from a larger sample constructed to be sociodemographically representative of the US population. Participants were asked a series of questions on headache management, healthcare system use, sociodemographic features, and number of ED visits for management of headache in the previous 12 months. In keeping with the work of others, "frequent" ED use was defined as a participant's report of 4 or more visits to the ED for treatment of a headache in the previous 12 months. Headaches were categorized into specific diagnoses using a validated methodology. RESULTS: Of 24,000 surveys, 18,514 were returned, and 13,451 (56%) provided complete data on ED use. Sociodemographic characteristics did not differ substantially between responders and nonresponders. Among the 13,451 responders, over the course of the previous year, 12,592 (94%) did not visit the ED at all, 415 (3%) visited the ED once, and 444 (3%) visited the ED more than once. Patients with severe episodic tension-type headache were less likely to use the ED than patients with severe episodic migraine (OR 0.4 [95% CI: 0.3, 0.6]). Frequent ED use was reported by 1% of the total sample or 19% (95% CI: 17%, 22%) of subjects who used the ED in the previous year, although frequent users accounted for 51% (95% CI: 49%, 53%) of all ED visits. Predictors of ED use included markers of disease severity, elevated depression scores, low socioeconomic status, and a predilection for ED use for conditions other than headache. CONCLUSIONS: Most individuals suffering severe headaches do not use the ED over the course of a single year. The majority of ED visits for severe headache are accounted for by a small subset of all ED users. Increasing disease severity and depression are the most readily addressable factors associated with ED use.

Efficacy and tolerability of coadministration of rizatriptan and acetaminophen vs rizatriptan or acetaminophen alone for acute migraine treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of coadministration of rizatriptan and acetaminophen in the acute treatment of migraine. BACKGROUND: Rizatriptan is a selective 5-HT1B/1D agonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine. Acetaminophen has been studied for acute migraine treatment. In consideration of the prominent central and peripheral mechanisms in migraine, the use of "multi-mechanism therapy" is gaining momentum in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. STUDY DESIGN: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 10 centers. Eligible patients with migraine according to International Headache Society criteria treated a single migraine attack of moderate or severe intensity within 4 h from pain onset. Patients were randomized into 1 of 4 groups (rizatriptan 10 mg + acetaminophen 1000 mg [RA], rizatriptan alone [R], acetaminophen alone [A], and placebo [P]). There were 3 co-primary hypotheses tested sequentially for 2-h pain relief: (1) RA would be superior to P; (2) if the first was fulfilled, RA would be superior to A; and (3) if the first 2 were fulfilled, RA would be superior to R. RESULTS: Of 173 patients who treated a migraine, 123 patients (71.5%) achieved pain relief within 2 h. RA (90%) was significantly better than P (46%) and A (70%), but only numerically better than R (77%) for 2-h pain relief. No significant differences were seen between the active treatment groups in adverse events. CONCLUSION: Rizatriptan coadministered with acetaminophen achieved 2 of the 3 primary hypotheses, proving superior to both acetaminophen and placebo for 2-h pain relief, but failing to achieve superiority to rizatriptan alone. RA was as well tolerated as each of the individual agents.

Migraine frequency and health utilities: findings from a multisite survey.

OBJECTIVES: Assess the relationship between migraine frequency and health utility. METHODS: Patients aged >/=18 years diagnosed with episodic migraine were enrolled at three US sites representing varied models of health-care delivery. All subjects completed a questionnaire that included demographic and clinical information, a migraine-specific disability questionnaire, and the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3). The HUI3 is a generic health status and health-related quality-of-life measure. HUI3 health status data are translated into utility scores anchored by 0 (dead) and 1 (perfect health). RESULTS: The study enrolled 150 patients. The mean age was 44 years and 87% were female. Mean (+/-SD) monthly migraine frequency was 4.4 +/- 3.6, with 34% reporting 6 migraines per month. The mean (+/-SD) HUI3 score was 0.62 +/- 0.26. After controlling for study center, demographics, comorbidities, migraine characteristics, and level of migraine disruptiveness, migraine frequency was found to be significantly (P < 0.05) and negatively associated with HUI3 scores. Subjects with >6 migraines per month had an adjusted mean HUI3 score of 0.41; the corresponding mean for those reporting

Characteristics of migraine attacks and responses to almotriptan treatment: a comparison of menstrually related and nonmenstrually related migraines.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical characteristics of menstrually related migraines (MRMs) and nonmenstrually related migraines (nonMRMs) and to investigate the efficacy of almotriptan in the treatment of these migraine subtypes. DESIGN/METHODS: These are post hoc analyses of data from the AXERT Early miGraine Intervention Study (AEGIS), a multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group trial that evaluated adults with IHS-defined migraine with and without aura. Patients were randomized 1:1 to treat 3 consecutive headaches with almotriptan 12.5 mg or matching placebo at the first sign of headache typical of their usual migraine, at any level of pain intensity but within 1 hour of onset. MRMs were defined as those occurring +/-2 days of the first day of menstrual flow. Post hoc analyses to describe headache characteristics pooled all migraine attacks experienced by patients who reported > or = 1 menses during the study regardless of assigned treatment group. The post hoc efficacy analyses included outcomes of almotriptan treatment compared with placebo treatment for all migraines in patients with a menstrual record. RESULTS: Of the 275 women in the AEGIS intent-to-treat population, 190 (69.1%; 97 almotriptan, 93 placebo; aged 18-54 years) reported > or = 1 menses during the trial. Of the 506 migraines reported by these patients, 95 (18.8%) occurred +/-2 days of the first day of menstrual flow and were defined as MRM. Aura was associated with 11.7% of MRM and 15.0% of nonMRM. Allodynia-associated symptoms were present with 62.8% of MRM and 57.0% of nonMRM. Prior to treatment, 19.1% of MRM were associated with normal functional ability, 68.1% with disturbed functional ability, and 12.8% required bed rest compared with 18.9%, 68.8%, and 12.3%, respectively, of nonMRM. Pretreatment pain intensity was mild in 40.0%, moderate in 47.4%, and severe in 12.6% of MRM compared with 43.6%, 47.2%, and 9.2%, respectively, of nonMRM. Almotriptan treatment efficacy outcomes for MRM vs nonMRM, respectively, were: 2-hour pain relief, 77.4% vs 68.3%; 2-hour pain free, 35.4% vs 35.9%; and sustained pain free, 22.9% vs 23.8%. Almotriptan was similarly effective in relieving migraine-associated symptoms and improving functional disability associated with both MRM and nonMRM. CONCLUSIONS: Prior to treatment, the presence of migraine-associated characteristics including aura, allodynia-associated symptoms, photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea were similar for both MRM and nonMRM attacks. The pretreatment levels of pain intensity and functional disability were likewise similar across the migraine subtypes. Almotriptan was equally effective in the treatment of both MRM and nonMRM attacks and was associated with an adverse event profile that was similar to placebo treatment.

Botulinum Toxin Type A in the treatment of chronic migraine without medication overuse.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic migraine is a recent diagnostic term that has undergone evolution from its original description. Clinically it has been believed that medication overuse contributed to its development and would block attempts at prevention. Previous studies with Botulinum Toxin Type A have demonstrated that it is effective even in patients with medication overuse. This study undertakes to examine the effects of Botulinum Toxin Type A in the absence of medication overuse in patients with chronic migraine. STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial of Botulinum Toxin Type A 100 units administered in a fixed dose and site paradigm. PATIENTS: In total, 86 patients were enrolled. A total of 60 patients were randomized and 41 patients were treated with the study medication or placebo. Five patients failed to complete the study, which lasted 4 months after the study medication was injected. RESULTS: Botulinum Toxin Type A was statistically superior to placebo for the primary endpoint of reduction in migraine headache episodes. Six patients on Botulinum Toxin Type A compared with 3 patients on Placebo had at least a 50% reduction in their migraine episodes. Active treatment was superior to placebo for the secondary endpoints of total headache days, headache index, and quality of life measures. It showed numerical superiority to placebo for acute medication use and Migraine Disability Assessment Scores. Adverse events were rare and similar in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Botulinum Toxin Type A may be an effective treatment for chronic migraine when the patient does not have concomitant medication overuse. It was well tolerated in this trial.

The impact of migraine on the health and well-being of women.

Migraine is a painful condition that predominantly affects women. Aside from the headache pain, migraine sufferers can experience symptoms of depression, anxiety, fatigue, and increased levels of stress, anger, and apprehension both during and between attacks (the cycle of migraine). Moreover, migraine is associated with the impairment of social, family, and work-related activities. Unfortunately, clinicians tend to focus treatment on the frequency and severity of migraine and often fail to address the overall functional impairment associated with this disorder. The goal of this review is to highlight the cycle of migraine and discuss its impact on the health and well-being of women. The frequency and severity of migraines, including interictal symptoms, should be considered when deciding on the most appropriate migraine therapy. Attention should also be given to the potential association between migraine and the physiological and hormonal changes that occur during menarche, pregnancy, or perimenopause. Healthcare providers should ask specific questions and be encouraged to expand dialogue with patients to reveal the full impact that migraine has on the daily activities of women both during and between attacks. This can help improve treatment strategies for the patient, with the goal of substantially improving symptoms, interictal distress, and the performance of their daily activities.

The impact of migraine prevention on daily activities: a longitudinal and responder analysis from three topiramate placebo-controlled clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Topiramate is approved for the prophylaxis (prevention) of migraine headache in adults. The most common adverse events in the three pivotal, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were paresthesia, fatigue, cognitive impairment, anorexia, nausea, and taste alteration. In these trials, topiramate 100 mg/d significantly improved Migraine-Specific Questionnaire (MSQ) scores versus placebo (p < 0.001). The MSQ measures how much migraine limits/interrupts daily performance. Pooled analyses of pivotal trial data were conducted to further assess how topiramate 100 mg/d affects daily activities and patient functioning. METHODS: Mean MSQ and Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) change scores (baseline to each double-blind assessment point) were calculated for pooled intent-to-treat (ITT) patients. Additionally, pooled ITT patients receiving topiramate 100 mg/d or placebo were combined and divided into two responder groups according to percent reduction in monthly migraine frequency: < 50% responders or >or= 50% responders. Between-group differences were assessed using analysis of covariance. RESULTS: Of 756 patients (mean age 39.8 years, 86% female), 384 received topiramate 100 mg/d and 372 placebo. Topiramate significantly improved all three MSQ domains throughout the double-blind phase versus placebo (p = 0.024 [week 8], p < 0.001 [weeks 16 and 26] for role prevention; p < 0.001 for role restriction and emotional function [all time points]). Topiramate 100 mg/d significantly improved SF-36 physical component scores (PCS) throughout the double-blind phase versus placebo (p < 0.001, all time points) and significantly improved mental component scores (MCS) at week 26 (p = 0.043). The greatest topiramate-associated improvements on SF-36 subscales were seen for bodily pain and general health perceptions (p < 0.05; weeks 8, 16, and 26), and physical functioning, vitality, role-physical, and social functioning (p < 0.05; weeks 16 and 26). Significantly greater improvements in all three MSQ domains, as well as the PCS and MCS of SF-36, were observed for >or= 50% responders versus < 50% responders (p < 0.001). Significantly greater percentages of topiramate-treated patients were >or= 50% responders versus placebo (46% versus 23%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Topiramate 100 mg/d significantly improved daily activities and patient functioning at all time points throughout the double-blind phase. Daily function and health status significantly improved for those achieving a >or= 50% migraine frequency reduction.

Open-label, long-term tolerability of naratriptan for short-term prevention of menstrually related migraine.

BACKGROUND: Although naratriptan is not approved for prophylactic use in migraine, naratriptan has been shown to be significantly more effective than placebo for short-term prevention of menstrually related migraine (MRM). The tolerability of naratriptan administered intermittently for prophylaxis for MRM over the long term has not been assessed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the tolerability of naratriptan 1 mg given twice daily for 6 days per month, administered for up to 1 year for short-term prevention of MRM in an open-label study. METHODS: Patients were eligible for the study if they were between 18 and 65 years of age and had at least a 1-year history of migraine, with or without aura, as defined by 1988 International Headache Society criteria; reported a history of MRM; and had at least 1 MRM attack during their last menstrual cycle. MRM was defined as any migraine beginning during the perimenstrual period (PMP). By definition, the PMP consisted of Days -2, -1, 1, 2, 3, and 4, with Day 1 being the first day of menstrual flow. During each menstrual cycle occurring over a 1-year period, patients began short-term treatment with naratriptan 1 mg twice daily (BID) 3 days before the expected onset of MRM and treated for a total of 6 days. Naratriptan 2.5 mg could be taken for breakthrough MRM attacks. Tolerability and safety measures included adverse events, standard clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and vital signs. The secondary endpoints were the percentage of PMPs without MRM; headache disability as measured by the Headache Impact Test (HIT), and psychological health as measured by the Beck Depression Inventory version 2 (BDI-II). RESULTS: The number of patients who took at least 1 dose of study medication (safety population) was 457, and the numbers of patients completing 6 months and 12 months of treatment were 318 and 131, respectively. Note that 171 (37%) patients were asked to leave the study once target enrollment numbers were met. The only adverse event occurring at an incidence of more than 2% during the 6-day treatment periods when naratriptan 1 mg BID was taken with or without an additional 2.5-mg dose for breakthrough attacks was ear, nose, throat infection (3%). No specific adverse event considered at least possibly to be related to study medication occurred in more than 2% of patients. No serious drug-related adverse events were reported. Furthermore, no patient experienced clinically relevant drug-related changes in 12-lead ECGs, vital signs, or clinical laboratory tests. Patients in both the 6- and 12-month populations did not experience an MRM in approximately 50% of treated PMPs. Health outcomes results suggested that naratriptan reduced headache impact when used for up to 12 months for the short-term prevention of MRM. CONCLUSION: Naratriptan 1 mg BID, with the optional use of an additional 2.5-mg dose for breakthrough attacks, was well tolerated when used for 6 continuous days per month for up to 1 year for short-term prevention of MRM.

Sumatriptan/Naproxen sodium for migraine: efficacy, health related quality of life, and satisfaction outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pain relief, satisfaction, and health-related quality of life results of moderate or severe migraines treated with a sumatriptan/naproxen sodium combination tablet. METHODS: Sumatriptan and naproxen sodium as a single-dose formulation tablet was used to treat moderate to severe migraines over a 12-month period in a phase 3, open-label, multicenter study (n = 565) in patients with at least 6 months' history of migraine headaches. RESULTS: Seventy percent of all attacks were treated with 1 dose of sumatriptan/naproxen sodium. Overall subjects treated 24,485 attacks; of these, 81% attacks achieved pain relief and 60% pain-free by 2 hours. At 3 months, the percentage of patients satisfied or very satisfied increased from baseline on all 8 Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire (PPMQ) items and remained high throughout the study. Mean Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) domain scores also increased by 13-15 points from baseline during this time and remained high. CONCLUSIONS: Sumatriptan/naproxen sodium provides consistent relief of migraine attacks over 12 months, resulting in improved patient satisfaction and migraine specific quality of life.

Effect of pain intensity and time to administration on responsiveness to almotriptan: results from AXERT 12.5 mg Time Versus Intensity Migraine Study (AIMS).

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether time-based early treatment, independent of pain intensity, is superior to a pain intensity-based treatment, where patients are asked to treat at least moderate intensity headaches, resulting in a reduction of overall migraine headache duration. BACKGROUND: Retrospective and prospective trials have reported improved outcomes when triptans were used early or to treat mild migraine headache pain. However, tolerability as well as efficacy may be 2 of several key issues that have prevented this new treatment paradigm from becoming universally accepted. METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, cluster-randomized study, patients with IHS-defined migraine were instructed to treat 2 sequential migraine headaches with almotriptan 12.5 mg using either Early Treatment (ET, ie, treat at earliest onset of headache pain, within 1 hour) or Standard Treatment (ST, ie, treat when headache pain intensity is moderate or severe). The novel trial design uses total migraine headache pain duration as the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Results are presented for the first headache and include an ITT population of 757 ET and 693 ST patients. Median headache duration (time from onset of headache pain until no pain) was significantly shorter in ET patients compared to ST patients (3.18 vs 5.53 hours, P < .001). An analysis of the ET subgroup treating headache pain within 1 hour of onset revealed pain intensity, ie, treating mild or moderate versus severe pain, was significantly correlated with treatment outcomes defined by total headache duration, 2-hour pain free, sustained pain free, and use of rescue medication. Multivariate analyses comparing ST subgroups that treated within 1 hour versus greater than 1 hour after headache onset, demonstrate that both pain intensity, ie, treating moderate versus severe headache pain, and treating early versus late, were significantly correlated with total headache duration, 2-hour pain free, sustained pain free, and use of rescue medication. The overall incidence of adverse events was low; nausea and dizziness were the only adverse events with an incidence > or =1% in either treatment group (nausea: 2.5% and 1.7% and dizziness 1.1% and 0.7%, in the ET and ST groups, respectively). CONCLUSION: Total headache duration was significantly shorter in the early treatment group compared to the standard treatment group. Considering time to treatment within a relatively early range of 1 hour or less, efficacy results when treating mild versus moderate pain were similar and both were associated with better outcomes than treatment of severe pain. When considering the prognostic variables of time to treatment and headache pain intensity (limited to moderate vs severe), both were independent predictors, with time to treatment a better predictor of headache duration and rescue medication use, and pain intensity a better predictor of 2-hour pain free and sustained pain free.

Optimizing migraine therapy: evidence-based and patient-centered care.

Migraine is a chronic, intermittently debilitating neurovascular condition that affects the physical, mental and social aspects of health-related quality of life. Primary care provider interactions with migraine sufferers are common, highlighting the need for clinicians to provide optimal therapy. A comprehensive therapy plan should encompass the whole patient, via a patient-physician partnership where goals and strategies are mutually established. Key treatments include nondrug approaches, such as education and lifestyle modifications, to reduce the occurrence of attacks, as well as acute medications to address the immediate need for relief during an attack. Routine assessment and adjustment of therapy based on data recorded by patient diaries is paramount. Clinical trials support the use of triptans and dihydroergotamine for moderate-to-severe migraine and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (alone or in combination with antiemetics or caffeine) for mild-to-moderate migraine, as the treatments of choice to reduce pain and disability time in a cost-effective manner. Published evidence also endorses stratified care, where medication selection is geared towards disease severity, instead of step care, where nonspecific mediations are given to all patients. Thus, patients with significant migraine-induced debilitation, as assessed by tools, such as the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale or the Headache Impact Test, are prescribed migraine-specific agents from the onset of therapy, thereby avoiding the inherent failures of step care. For individuals experiencing a high frequency of attacks or routine debilitation, preventive medications are warranted.