Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review.

INTRODUCTION: Combination use of onabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has the potential to be more effective than either therapy alone for migraine prevention. METHODS: This retrospective, longitudinal chart review included adults with chronic migraine treated at one clinical site with ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA and ≥ 1 month of subsequent combination treatment with CGRP mAbs. Charts at time of mAb prescription (baseline) and up to four visits ~ 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-baseline were reviewed for safety, tolerability, and outcome measures (monthly headache days [MHDs], headache intensity, and migraine-related disability [MIDAS]). RESULTS: Of 300 charts reviewed, 257 patients met eligibility criteria (mean age: 50 years; 82% women). Average headache frequency was 21.5 MHDs before initiation of onabotulinumtoxinA and 12.1 MHDs before adding CGRP mAb therapy. Prescribed mAbs were erenumab (78%), fremanezumab (6%), and galcanezumab (16%). Over the entire study, patients discontinued CGRP mAb more frequently than onabotulinumtoxinA (23 vs. 3%). Adverse events occurred in 28% of patients, most commonly constipation (9%). Compared with onabotulinumtoxinA alone (baseline), MHDs decreased significantly at all visits (mean decrease: 3.5-4.0 MHDs over ~ 6-12 months of combination treatment); 45.1% of patients had clinically meaningful improvement in migraine-related disability (≥ 5-point reduction in MIDAS score) after ~ 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study, combination treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAbs was well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified, and was associated with additional clinically meaningful benefits. More real-world and controlled trials should be considered to further assess safety and potential benefits of combination treatment. Video abstract: Real-world data suggests that CGRP inhibitors improve onabotulinumtoxinA efficacy for chronic migraine (MP4 20,067 kb).

Cell Therapy for Chronic TBI: Interim Analysis of the Randomized Controlled STEMTRA Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if chronic motor deficits secondary to traumatic brain injury (TBI) can be improved by implantation of allogeneic modified bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (SB623). METHODS: This 6-month interim analysis of the 1-year double-blind, randomized, surgical sham-controlled, phase 2 STEMTRA trial (NCT02416492) evaluated safety and efficacy of the stereotactic intracranial implantation of SB623 in patients with stable chronic motor deficits secondary to TBI. Patients in this multi-center trial (N = 63) underwent randomization in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to 2.5 × 106, 5.0 × 106, 10 × 106 SB623 cells or control. Safety was assessed in patients who underwent surgery (N = 61), and efficacy in the modified intent-to-treat population of randomized patients who underwent surgery (N = 61; SB623 = 46, control = 15). RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint of significant improvement from baseline of Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale score at 6 months for SB623-treated patients was achieved. SB623-treated patients improved by (LS mean [SE]) +8.3 (1.4) vs +2.3 (2.5) for control at 6 months, the LS mean difference was 6.0 (95% CI: 0.3-11.8); p = 0.040. Secondary efficacy endpoints improved from baseline, but were not statistically significant vs control at 6 months. There were no dose-limiting toxicities or deaths, and 100% of SB623-treated patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events vs 93.3% of control patients (p = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: SB623 cell implantation appeared to be safe and well tolerated, and patients implanted with SB623 experienced significant improvement from baseline motor status at 6 months compared to controls. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that implantation of SB623 was well tolerated and associated with improvement in motor status.

Posterior Cortical Atrophy: Characteristics From a Clinical Data Registry.

Background: Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA) is a neurodegenerative syndrome that presents with higher-order visual dysfunction with relative sparing of memory and other cognitive domains, and it is most commonly associated with Alzheimer's disease pathology. There is a lack of data regarding the presentation of PCA to non-cognitive specialists. Therefore, we collected clinical data from neuro-ophthalmologists regarding the presentation of PCA to their practices and compared data to published cohorts and a published survey of cognitive specialists. Methods: Members of the North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society Listserv (NANOSnet) were invited to complete an online, retrospective, chart-review data-entry survey regarding their patients with PCA, and REDCap was used for data collection. Results: Data for 38 patients were entered by 12 neuro-ophthalmologists. Patient mean age at presentation was 67.8 years, and 74% of patients were women. Difficulty reading was reported at presentation by 91% of patients, and poor performance on color vision, stereopsis, and visual field testing (performed reliably by 36/38 patients) were common findings. Most patients who were treated were treated with donepezil and/or memantine. Conclusions: Compared to published data from cognitive specialists, patients presenting to neuro-ophthalmology with PCA were more likely to be older and female and have a reading complaint. Reliable visual field testing was the norm with homonymous defects in the majority of patients. The neuro-ophthalmologist plays an important role in diagnosing PCA in older adults with unexplained visual signs and symptoms, and future studies of PCA should involve multiple specialists in order to advance our understanding of PCA and develop effective treatments.

Neuroimaging for Migraine: The American Headache Society Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations about when to obtain neuroimaging in patients with migraine. METHODS: Articles were included in the systematic review if they studied adults 18 and over who were seeking outpatient treatment for any type of migraine and who underwent neuroimaging (MRI or CT). Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane Clinical Trials were searched from 1973 to August 31, 2018. Reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the evidence in duplicate. We assessed study quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 2269 publications. Twenty three articles met inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. The majority of studies were retrospective cohort or cross-sectional studies. There were 4 prospective observational studies. Ten studies evaluated the utility of CT only, 9 MRI only, and 4 evaluated both. Common abnormalities included chronic ischemia or atrophy with CT and MRI scanning, and non-specific white matter lesions with MRI. Clinically meaningful abnormalities requiring intervention were relatively rare. Clinically significant neuroimaging abnormalities in patients with headaches consistent with migraine without atypical features or red flags appeared no more common than in the general population. RECOMMENDATIONS: There is no necessity to do neuroimaging in patients with headaches consistent with migraine who have a normal neurologic examination, and there are no atypical features or red flags present. Grade A Neuroimaging may be considered for presumed migraine for the following reasons: unusual, prolonged, or persistent aura; increasing frequency, severity, or change in clinical features, first or worst migraine, migraine with brainstem aura, migraine with confusion, migraine with motor manifestations (hemiplegic migraine), late-life migraine accompaniments, aura without headache, side-locked headache, and posttraumatic headache. Most of these are consensus based with little or no literature support. Grade C.

Twelve-month tolerability and safety of sumatriptan-naproxen sodium for the treatment of acute migraine.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of sumatriptan-naproxen sodium for the treatment of moderate to severe acute migraines and to assess the safety of administration of an optional second dose. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 12-month, multicenter, open-label safety study was conducted in adults treated for migraine attacks of moderate to severe intensity from April 14, 2004, to August 18, 2005. Safety evaluations included adverse events and laboratory tests. RESULTS: Of 600 patients enrolled, 565 (94%) were treated for at least 1 migraine. Of treated patients, 414 (73%) and 362 (64%) completed 6 and 12 months of treatment, respectively. Of the 24,485 attacks treated, 17,144 (70%) were treated with only 1 dose. On average, patients treated 5 migraine attacks per month, with a median of 6 days between attacks. The most common treatment-related adverse events were nausea, muscle tightness, and dizziness. Fourteen patients reported 1 or more serious adverse event with only 1 judged probably related to treatment. No deaths occurred. Eight percent of patients discontinued participation in the study because of adverse events or pregnancy. The rates of adverse events reported were no higher after treatment with 2 tablets (at least 2 hours apart) compared with 1 tablet. CONCLUSIONS: In this 12-month data set of more than 24,000 migraine attacks in 565 patients, sumatriptan-naproxen sodium formulated in a single tablet was well tolerated when used episodically for the treatment of acute migraine. The adverse events did not differ from those expected for the individual components alone, and no new or unexpected findings occurred.

Botulinum toxin type A (BOTOX) for the prophylactic treatment of chronic daily headache: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A; BOTOX, Allergan, Inc.) for the prophylactic treatment of chronic daily headache (CDH). BACKGROUND: Several open-label and small controlled trials suggest that BoNT-A may be effective in the prophylactic treatment of headache. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an 11-month, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study of BoNT-A for the treatment of patients aged 18 to 65 years old with 16 or more headache days per 30 days conducted at 13 North American study centers. Following a 30-day screening period and a 30-day, single-blind, placebo-response period to identify placebo responders, eligible patients from both the placebo responder and placebo nonresponder groups were injected with BoNT-A or placebo every 90 days and assessed every 30 days for 9 months, a period encompassing three treatment cycles. The primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline in the frequency of headache-free days in a 30-day period for the placebo nonresponder group at day 180, the chosen efficacy time point. The secondary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients with a decrease from baseline of 50% or more in the frequency of headache days per 30-day period for the placebo nonresponder group at day 180. The change from baseline in the frequency of headaches (per 30-day period), the proportion of patients with a decrease from baseline of 50% or greater in the frequency of headaches per 30-day period, acute medication use, and adverse events were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 571 patients assessed over the baseline period, 355 (mean age, 43.5 years; 300/355 [84.5%] female) were enrolled and randomized. At the end of the placebo run-in period, 279 patients (79%) were classified as placebo nonresponders and 76 patients (21%) as placebo responders. Subsequently, patients were randomized within each group to receive either BoNT-A or placebo. In the placebo nonresponder stratum, the mean number of headache-free days at baseline was 5.8 (+/-4.7) for BoNT-A- versus 5.5 (+/-4.7) for placebo-treated patients. At day 180, placebo nonresponders treated with BoNT-A had an improved mean change from baseline of 6.7 headache-free days per 30-day period compared to a mean change from baseline of 5.2 headache-free days for placebo-treated patients. The between-group difference of 1.5 headache-free days favored BoNT-A treatment, although the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. However, a statistically significant difference was observed at day 180 endpoint for the secondary efficacy measure. A significantly higher percentage of BoNT-A patients had a decrease from baseline of 50% or greater in the frequency of headache days per 30-day period at day 180 (32.7% vs. 15.0%, P=.027). Also, the mean change from baseline in the frequency of headaches per 30-day period at day 180 was -6.1 for BoNT-A patients vs. -3.1 for the placebo patients (P=.013). Only 4 of 173 BoNT-A patients (2.3%) discontinued the study due to adverse events. The majority of treatment-related adverse events were transient and mild to moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: BoNT-A treatment resulted in patients having, on average, approximately seven more (1 week) headache-free days compared to baseline. Although at the primary time point (day 180) the BoNT-A treatment resulted in a 1.5 between-group difference compared to placebo, this difference was not statistically significant. The treatment met secondary efficacy outcome measures, including the percentage of patients experiencing a 50% or more decrease in the frequency of headache days, in addition to statistically significant reductions in headache frequency. BoNT-A was also well tolerated in patients with CDH.

Association of internal carotid artery dissection and chiropractic manipulation.

BACKGROUND: To determine the relationship between chiropractic manipulative therapy and internal carotid artery dissection, a MEDLINE literature search was performed for the years 1966 through 2000 using the terms internal carotid dissection. Literature that included information concerning causation of ICAD, as well as all case studies and series, was selected for review. REVIEW SUMMARY: In reviewing the cases of internal carotid dissection potentially related to CMT, there were many confounding factors, such as connective tissue aberrations, underlying arteriopathy, or coexistent infection, that obscured any obvious cause-and-effect relationship. To date there are only 13 reported cases of ICAD temporally related to CMT. Most ICADs seem to occur spontaneously and progress from local symptoms of headache and neck pain to cortical ischemic signs. Approximately one third of the reported cases were manipulated by practitioners other than chiropractic physicians, and because of the differential risk related to major differences in training and practice between practitioners who manipulate the spine, it would be inappropriate to compare adverse outcomes between practitioner groups. CONCLUSIONS: The medical literature does not support a clear causal relationship between CMT and ICAD. Reported cases are exceedingly scarce, and none support clear cause and effect.