Effect of Galcanezumab on Total Pain Burden in Patients Who Had Previously Not Benefited from Migraine Preventive Medication (CONQUER Trial): A Post Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In evaluating therapies for migraine prevention, emphasis is placed on frequency and less attention is paid to duration or severity. Total pain burden (TPB) combines frequency, duration, and severity of migraine headache, and has the potential to further characterize the benefit of preventive treatment using a single composite measure. TPB was previously used to characterize response to galcanezumab (GMB) in patients with migraine. In this post hoc analysis we assessed the impact of GMB in lowering TPB in patients who had previously not benefited from two to four categories of migraine preventive medication. METHODS: CONQUER trial patients (N = 462), 18-75 years old who had previously not benefited from two to four categories of migraine preventive medication, were randomized (1:1) to monthly placebo or GMB 120 mg with 240 mg loading dose. For each patient, monthly TPB in severity-weighted hours was calculated by multiplying migraine headache duration (hours) by maximum severity for each migraine headache day, then summing these daily scores over the month for the monthly score. Changes from baseline in monthly TPB across months 1-3 were analyzed. Spearman correlations between TPB and scores on the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MSQ) total and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) were assessed at baseline. RESULTS: Mean (SD) baseline monthly TPB was 192.1 (158.3) and 188.2 (197.4) severity-weighted hours for GMB-treated and placebo-treated patients, respectively. Across the 3-month double-blind period, GMB-treated patients experienced significantly greater mean reductions from baseline in monthly TPB compared with placebo-treated patients, both for mean change (GMB - 82.7, placebo - 15.8, p < 0.001) and percentage change (GMB - 38.6%, placebo 9.4%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, baseline TPB correlated with MSQ score (r = - 0.39) and MIDAS score (r = 0.40), suggesting good association of TPB with functional and disability outcomes. CONCLUSION: GMB reduced mean TPB in patients who had previously not benefited from two to four categories of migraine preventive medication. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03559257.

Changes in acute headache medication use and health care resource utilization: Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating galcanezumab in adults with treatment-resistant migraine (CONQUER).

BACKGROUND: Patients with migraine, particularly with multiple prior preventive treatment failures, often have high rates of acute headache medication use and are at risk for overuse (acute or symptomatic headache medication use between 10 and 15 days per month [depending on the medication] for > 3 months). Furthermore, these patients have greater health care resource utilization (HCRU). OBJECTIVE: To examine acute headache medication use and HCRU with galcanezumab compared with placebo in a population with multiple prior migraine preventive treatment failures. METHODS: In the 3-month double-blind phase, patients with episodic or chronic migraine and treatment failures to 2 to 4 standard-of-care migraine preventive categories (lack of effectiveness or safety/tolerability) received galcanezumab 120 mg/month (following a 240-mg loading dose) or placebo; an optional 3 month open-label phase followed. Acute headache medication use (monthly days with acute headache medication utilization) was self-reported daily. The change from baseline in monthly days with acute headache medication used a mixed-model repeated measures analysis. HCRU was reported at baseline (for the previous 6 months) and at monthly visits. Migraine-related HCRU rates were evaluated in the total population per 100 patient-years. RESULTS: Of the 462 patients (galcanezumab n=232, placebo n=230), baseline mean days/month of acute headache medication was 12.3; 44.8% had acute headache medication overuse. Across months 1-3, least squares (LS) mean reductions in acute headache medication use were greater for the galcanezumab group (4.2) compared with placebo (0.9); the LS mean difference was 3.4 (95% CI = 2.7-4.1; P < 0.0001). Greater reductions in the galcanezumab group were observed as early as month 1; statistical separation continued at months 2 and 3 (all P < 0.0001). During the open-label phase, reductions from baseline ranged from 4.7 to 5.3 days and were similar in patients who transitioned from placebo to patients continuing galcanezumab. Reductions from baseline of migraine-specific health care visits (double-blind phase) were numerically greater with galcanezumab than placebo (215.5 vs 155.3). Patients switching to galcanezumab had reductions (212.9 days) similar to patients continuing galcanezumab (222.6 days). Migraine-specific emergency department visits decreased by two-thirds at month 3 in the galcanezumab group compared with nearly no reduction in the placebo group that experienced a similar reduction during the open-label phase. For both groups, migraine-specific hospitalizations were less than 2 per 100 patient-years. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that galcanezumab has the potential to reduce acute headache medication use and overuse and HCRU in patients with prior migraine preventive treatment failures. DISCLOSURES: Data were presented in part as a poster presentation at the 14th European Headache Congress (European Headache Federation), Virtual Meeting, July 3-5, 2020. Dr Ambrosini is on the advisory board for Eli Lilly and Company and received honorarium from Teva, Novartis, and Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Estemalik is on the advisory boards for Eli Lilly and Company, Lundbeck, and Allergan and the speakers' bureau for Teva, Lundbeck, Eli Lilly and Company, Allergan, and Biohaven. He received consulting fees from Eli Lilly and Company, Teva, Lundbeck, and Allergan and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Eli Lilly and Company, Allergan, Biohaven, Teva, and Lundbeck. Dr Pascual received research support from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Ministry of Economy, Spain. He was also on advisory boards for Allergan, Amgen-Novartis, Eli Lilly and Company, and Stendhal and received consulting fees or honoraria from Allegan, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis-Amgen, and Teva. Dr Rettiganti is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company and/or one of its subsidiaries, Indianapolis, IN. She is also a minor stock and restricted stockholder of Eli Lilly and Company. Mr. Stroud and Ms. Day are employees of Eli Lilly and Company and/or one of its subsidiaries, Indianapolis, IN. Dr Ford is an employee of and holds stock of Eli Lilly and Company and/or one of its subsidiaries, Indianapolis, IN. She also received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Eli Lilly and Company.

Does "wearing off" of efficacy occur in galcanezumab-treated patients at the end of the monthly treatment cycle? Post hoc analyses of four phase III randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to propose a definition of "wearing off" at the individual patient-level and determine the percentage of patients with migraine who experience "wearing off" of efficacy of galcanezumab at the end of a treatment cycle using this predefined threshold. BACKGROUND: Anecdotal reports suggest that some patients may experience "wearing off" of efficacy during the last week of their calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody treatment cycle. A previous post hoc analysis of galcanezumab demonstrated consistent efficacy at each week throughout all monthly dosing intervals at the population-level, but "wearing off" has not been assessed at the individual patient-level. METHODS: Post hoc analyses of clinical trial data from four galcanezumab phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled studies in a total of 2680 patients with high-frequency episodic migraine (EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, and CONQUER studies) or chronic migraine (CM; REGAIN and CONQUER studies) were conducted. "Wearing off" was defined as an increase of greater than or equal to 2 weekly migraine headache days in the last week of the treatment cycle compared to the second week for at least 2 months. The analyses were conducted (1) in all patients and (2) in patients with a clinically meaningful response to treatment. RESULTS: The percentage of patients meeting the threshold of "wearing off" was not statistically significantly different among the placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg, and galcanezumab 240 mg treatment groups, both in the total population and in patients with a clinically meaningful response (all ≤9.0%). Although the frequency of "wearing off" in patients with CM and prior preventive failures was numerically greater in the galcanezumab groups (8/89 or 9.0%) compared to placebo (3/95 or 3.2%), these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous analyses at the population-level that showed no evidence of decreased efficacy at the end of a treatment cycle, rates of individual patients meeting the threshold of "wearing off" in this analysis were low and similar among placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg, and galcanezumab 240 mg treatment groups.

Impact of Galcanezumab on Total Pain Burden: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study in Patients with Episodic Cluster Headache.

PURPOSE: In a phase 3 study, galcanezumab significantly reduced the frequency of episodic cluster headache attacks across weeks 1-3 (primary endpoint) compared with placebo. However, multiple pain dimensions may contribute to the total burden of episodic cluster headache pain. This post hoc analysis assessed the impact of galcanezumab on the total pain burden of episodic cluster headache using a composite measure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with episodic cluster headache were randomized 1:1 to galcanezumab 300 mg or placebo once monthly for 8 weeks. Mean weekly total pain burden was calculated (daily cluster headache attack frequency × average duration × average pain severity summed over 7 days) using data collected in an electronic patient-reported outcomes diary. Change from baseline in weekly total pain burden across weeks 1-3 was compared between galcanezumab and placebo. To explore construct validity, mean weekly total pain burden scores were stratified by Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) responses at the week 4 clinic visit. RESULTS: The reduction from baseline in mean weekly total pain burden was significantly greater with galcanezumab (N=49) than with placebo (N=57): the least squares mean difference was -11.18 severity-weighted hours (p=0.035). Median weekly total pain burden decreased as PGI-I ratings improved, from 33.6 to 5.0 severity-weighted hours for patients who felt "very much worse" and "very much better," respectively. CONCLUSION: Galcanezumab significantly reduced mean weekly total pain burden compared with placebo in patients with episodic cluster headache. The composite pain measure demonstrated construct validity. Total pain burden may provide a holistic measure of the pain of episodic cluster headache. CLINICAL TRIALS: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02397473.

Shift from high-frequency to low-frequency episodic migraine in patients treated with Galcanezumab: results from two global randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients with episodic migraine (EM) with a higher-frequency of migraine headache days (HFEM: 8-14 migraine headache days/month) have a greater disease burden and a higher risk of progressing to chronic migraine (CM) with associated acute treatment overuse versus those with low-frequency EM (LFEM: 4-7 migraine headache days/month). In this post hoc analysis, we assessed the proportions of patients who shifted from HFEM to LFEM and to very low-frequency EM (VLFEM: 0-3 migraine headache days/month) status following treatment with galcanezumab versus placebo. METHODS: EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2 were double-blind, Phase 3 studies in patients with EM. Patients (18-65 years) were randomized (2:1:1) to subcutaneous monthly injections of placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg (240 mg loading dose) or 240 mg, for up to 6 months. Data were pooled and endpoints were change from baseline in number of migraine headache days/month and patients who shifted from HFEM to LFEM or VLFEM status. Impact of change in HFEM status on migraine headache days/month, quality of life and disability was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 66% (1176/1773) patients from EVOLVE studies had HFEM status at baseline and were included in this analysis; placebo: 592, galcanezumab 120 mg: 294 and galcanezumab 240 mg: 290. At each month, both doses of galcanezumab resulted in a higher proportion of patients who shifted to 0-7 monthly headache days/month (VLFEM or LFEM status). Patients who shifted from HFEM at baseline to VLFEM status at Month 3, a relatively larger proportion of patients on galcanezumab 120 mg versus placebo remained at VLFEM status at Months 4-6; Months 4-5 for galcanezumab 240 mg versus placebo. Among the galcanezumab-treated patients who did-not-shift or shifted to LFEM or VLFEM status for ≥3 consecutive months until the end of the study, patients who shifted from HFEM to VLFEM status experienced the largest reduction in migraine headache days/month and the largest clinically meaningful improvements in daily functioning (MSQ-RFR) and disability (MIDAS). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFEM, treatment with galcanezumab (120 mg and 240 mg) significantly reduced migraine headache days/month, maintained remission status at subsequent months until the end of the study, and improved patients' quality of life versus placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: EVOLVE-1, NCT02614183 ; EVOLVE-2, NCT02614196 .

Galcanezumab Provides Consistent Efficacy Throughout the Dosing Interval Among Patients with Episodic and Chronic Migraine: A Post Hoc Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The consistency of the treatment effect of galcanezumab throughout the dosing interval is examined in patients with episodic and chronic migraine. METHODS: This study was a post hoc analysis of clinical trial data from episodic (EVOLVE-1; EVOLVE-2; both 6-month duration) and chronic (REGAIN; 3-month duration) migraine double-blind trials evaluating the efficacy of a once-monthly injection of galcanezumab 120 mg relative to placebo. Adults with episodic (placebo, n = 894; galcanezumab, n = 444) or chronic migraine (placebo, n = 558; galcanezumab, n = 278) were included. Mean change from baseline in weekly migraine headache days, averaged across all months for each week of the dosing interval, was compared between groups and within the galcanezumab group during weeks 1 and 4. Additional analyses examined the mean difference from placebo in weekly migraine headache days and a day-by-day analysis. RESULTS: Weekly migraine headache day reduction was significantly greater with galcanezumab relative to placebo every week (P < 0.001) and did not differ during weeks 1 and 4 for those with episodic (P = 0.740) or chronic migraine (P = 0.231) taking galcanezumab. Estimated probabilities of migraine on day 2 and day 30 did not differ for those with episodic (P = 0.61) or chronic migraine (P = 0.616) taking galcanezumab. CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates once monthly galcanezumab exhibits consistent efficacy throughout the dosing interval among the population of patients with migraine in three clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of galcanezumab. There is no evidence from these trials that the effect of galcanezumab "wears off" at the end of the dosing interval. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: EVOLVE-1 (NCT02614183); EVOLVE-2 (NCT02614196); REGAIN (NCT02614261).

Effect of galcanezumab on severity and symptoms of migraine in phase 3 trials in patients with episodic or chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated a significant reduction in monthly migraine headache days compared with placebo. Here, we analyze data from 3 randomized clinical trials (2 episodic trials [EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2] and 1 chronic trial [REGAIN]), to examine if galcanezumab also alleviates the severity and symptoms of migraine. METHODS: The episodic migraine trials were 6-month, double-blind studies in patients with episodic migraine (4-14 monthly migraine headache days). The chronic migraine trial was a 3-month, double-blind study in patients with chronic migraine (≥ 15 headache days per month, where ≥ 8 met criteria for migraine). Patients (18-65 years) were randomized to placebo or galcanezumab 120 mg with a 240-mg loading dose or 240 mg. Patients recorded headache characteristics, duration, severity, and presence of associated symptoms with each headache. The outcomes analyzed were changes from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days with nausea and/or vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia, aura, and prodromal symptoms other than aura. Additional outcomes analyzed included the number of moderate-to-severe monthly migraine headache days, number of severe migraine headache days, and mean severity of remaining migraine headache days. Change from baseline in the proportion of days with nausea and/or vomiting and the proportion of days with photophobia and phonophobia among the remaining monthly migraine headache days were also analyzed. RESULTS: Galcanezumab was superior to placebo in reducing the frequency of migraine headache days with associated symptoms of migraine such as nausea and/or vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia, and prodromal symptoms. Galcanezumab reduced the frequency of migraine headache days with aura in the episodic migraine studies. There was a significant reduction in the proportion of remaining migraine headache days with nausea and/or vomiting for the episodic and chronic migraine studies, and with photophobia and phonophobia for the episodic migraine studies. Galcanezumab was superior to placebo in reducing the number of monthly moderate-to-severe migraine headache days and the overall and monthly severe migraine headache days. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab reduces the frequency of migraine headache days and can alleviate potentially disabling non-pain symptoms on days when migraine is present in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT, NCT02614183 (EVOLVE-1), registered 25 November 2015; NCT, NCT02614196 , (EVOLVE-2), registered 25 November 2015; NCT, NCT02614261 (REGAIN), registered 25 November 2015.

Hypothermia as an Outcome Predictor Tool in Pediatric Trauma: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Hypothermia is an independent risk factor for mortality in adult trauma patients. Two small studies have shown similar results in pediatric trauma patients. Temperature is not included in any pediatric trauma assessment scores. This study sought to compare mortality and various descriptive outcomes between pediatric hypothermic and normothermic trauma patients. METHODS: Data were obtained from the National Trauma Database from 2009 to 2012. Patients meeting inclusion criteria were stratified by presence of isolated head injury, head injury with multiple trauma, and absence of head injury. These groups were then subdivided into hypothermic (temperature ≤36°C) and normothermic groups. We used propensity score matching to 1:1 match hypothermic and normothermic patients. Mortality, neurosurgical interventions, endotracheal intubation, blood transfusion, length of stay, laparotomy, thoracotomy, conversion of cardiac rhythm, and time receiving mechanical ventilation were evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 3,011,482 patients were obtained. There were 414,562 patients who met the inclusion criteria. In all patients meeting inclusion criteria, hypothermia was a significant risk factor in all outcomes measured. Following stratification and 1:1 matching, in all groups, hypothermia was associated with increased mortality (P < 0.0001), increased rate of endotracheal intubation (P < 0.0002), increased need for blood transfusion (P < 0.0025), and conversion of cardiac rhythm (P < 0.0027). CONCLUSION: Hypothermia has been shown to be a significant prognostic indicator in the pediatric trauma patient with further potential application. Future studies are indicated to evaluate the incorporation of hypothermia into the Pediatric Trauma Score not only to help predict injury severity and mortality but also to improve appropriate and expeditious patient transfer to pediatric trauma centers and potentially facilitate earlier intervention.

Treatment Outcomes in Patients Treated With Galcanezumab vs Placebo: Post Hoc Analyses From a Phase 3 Randomized Study in Patients With Episodic Cluster Headache.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache (CH) is a highly disabling primary headache disorder. To date, characterization of outcomes in the preventive treatment of episodic CH, including precise definitions of clinically meaningful attack frequency reduction and impact on acute treatment management, is lacking. METHODS: This was a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients (men or women aged 18-65 years) diagnosed with episodic CH as defined by the International Classification of Headache Disorders-3 beta criteria. In this post hoc analysis, we evaluated the median time-to-first occurrence of ≥50, ≥75, or 100% reduction from baseline in CH attack frequency, and impact on acute medication use. An anchor-based assessment of clinically relevant attack frequency reduction using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scores at Week 4 was also assessed. RESULTS: The median time-to-first occurrence of ≥50, ≥75, or 100% reduction from baseline in CH attacks was consistently shorter (9-10 days sooner) with galcanezumab vs placebo (median [95% confidence interval, 95% CI]: ≥50%, 5 days [4.0 to 7.0] vs 14 days [6.0 to 19.0]; ≥75%, 11 days [7.0 to 16.0] vs 21 days [13.0 to 26.0]; 100%, 22 days [16.0 to 37.0] vs 32 days [23.0 to 34.0]). Mean reduction from baseline in the overall frequency of weekly pooled acute medication use across Weeks 1-3 was significantly greater with galcanezumab vs placebo (11.0 vs 5.5; odds ratio, OR [95% CI]: 5.52 [1.02, 10.01]; P value = .017). Patients reporting "much better" on the PGI-I experienced a median weekly CH attack reduction of approximately 43% from baseline across Weeks 1-3. The overall odds of achieving an attack reduction threshold of 43% across Weeks 1-3 was significantly higher with galcanezumab vs placebo (Weeks 1-3: OR [95% CI], 2.60 [1.3 to 5.3]). CONCLUSIONS: Faster median time-to-first occurrence of response rates, lower frequency of pooled acute medications use, and a greater proportion of patients achieving a response anchored by patient-reported improvement were observed for galcanezumab vs placebo.

Migraine Headache Day Response Rates and the Implications to Patient Functioning: An Evaluation of 3 Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trials of Galcanezumab in Patients With Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc study investigated the relationship between patient response in terms of migraine headache day reduction and patient-reported outcomes of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and disability categories. BACKGROUND: Migraine causes considerable disease-related disability and negatively impacts HRQoL of patients. Calcitonin gene-related peptide inhibitors improve these outcomes and may eliminate disability due to migraine in some patients. METHODS: Analyses used data from 3 double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase 3 studies in adults with episodic migraine (EM) (EVOLVE-1: N = 858 and EVOLVE-2: N = 915) or chronic migraine (CM) (REGAIN: N = 1113). Patients were randomized 2:1:1 to subcutaneous injection of PBO, galcanezumab (GMB) 120 mg, or GMB 240 mg once monthly for 6 months in EVOLVE-1 and -2 and for 3 months in REGAIN. Primary endpoint was overall mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days. Patients were divided into 4 response-level groups based on percent change from baseline (<30%, ≥30% to <50%, ≥50% to <75%, ≥75%). Patient-reported outcomes included the 14-item Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ) and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. RESULTS: Among patients with migraine, mean improvements from baseline in MSQ domain scores increased with each successive level of migraine headache day response. On a 100-pt scale, increases in Role Function-Restrictive score in EM were 16.8 and 36.0 at the <30% and ≥75% response levels, respectively, and for CM were 10.7 and 46.5. Similar patterns in scores were observed for the Role Function-Preventive and Emotional Function domains. Examination of improvement in MSQ item score by treatment group showed that, in patients with EM, approximately 10 to 20% more GMB-treated patients (N = 796 for GMB 120 mg and GMB 240 mg) had improvements in all 14 MSQ items compared with PBO-treated patients (N = 773) (all P < .001). In patients with CM, 3 to 16% more GMB-treated patients (N = 507) had improvements in the 14 MSQ items compared with PBO (N = 494), though differences were statistically significant in only 19 of 28 comparisons. At baseline, mean MIDAS scores (EM, 33.1; CM, 67.2) indicated severe mean disability for patients with EM and very severe disability for patients with CM. Among patients with EM, 215 of 425 (50.6%) of those treated with GMB 120 mg and 212 of 413 (51.3%) treated with 240 mg had little/no disability due to migraine after 6 months (PBO: 277 of 832 (33.3%), P < .001 for both). Among patients with CM, 50 of 254 (19.7%) of those treated with GMB 120 mg and 54 of 258 (20.9%) treated with 240 mg reached the level of little/no disability after 3 months of treatment (PBO: 70 of 504 (13.9%), P = .045 for 120 mg, P = .017 for 240 mg). CONCLUSIONS: Because migraine greatly impairs an individual's ability to participate in activities of daily living, measurements of HRQoL are essential in clinical research. This study showed that function in daily life, as measured by MSQ score, improved as migraine headache days were reduced and that GMB-treated patients were more likely to see improvement in MSQ item scores compared with PBO-treated patients. Elimination of migraine-related disability was also more frequent in GMB-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients.

Impact of galcanezumab on total pain burden: findings from phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with episodic or chronic migraine (EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, and REGAIN trials).

BACKGROUND: Focus on the frequency of migraine pain may undervalue the total burden of migraine as pain duration and severity may present unique, additive burden. A composite measure of total pain burden (TPB; frequency, severity, and duration) may provide a more comprehensive characterization of pain burden and treatment response in patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM). The impact of galcanezumab versus placebo on TPB among patients with EM or CM was analyzed. METHODS: Patients from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled episodic (two 6-month studies pooled) and chronic migraine (3-month) studies received once-monthly subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab 120 mg or placebo. A post hoc analysis of TPB for a given month was calculated as severity-weighted duration by multiplying duration (hours) and maximum pain severity (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) of migraine for each day and summing these over the days in a month. Least square mean change from baseline in monthly TPB across Months 1-6 (EM, N = 444 galcanezumab, N = 894 placebo) and Months 1-3 (CM, N = 278 galcanezumab, N = 558 placebo) were compared using a mixed-model repeated measures model. Correlation of the Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) to TPB at baseline was assessed. RESULTS: At baseline, the duration of migraine on a given migraine headache day accounted for the greatest unique proportion of variability (EM, 57.4% and CM, 61.1%) to TPB after adjusting for frequency of migraine headache days and maximum pain severity. The decrease from baseline in monthly TPB was greater with galcanezumab than placebo for patients with EM (68.6 versus 36.2) and CM (102.6 versus 44.4). The average percent reduction of TPB from baseline was significantly greater with galcanezumab compared with placebo in patients with EM (50.8% versus 17.2%) and CM (29.7% versus 11.0%). In patients with EM and CM, TPB correlated with MSQ total score (r = - 0.35 and r = - 0.37) and MIDAS (r = 0.34 and r = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Greater reduction in TPB was seen in patients with EM and CM treated with galcanezumab 120 mg once-monthly injection relative to placebo. Discussing TPB supports patient-centric conversations regarding treatment expectations when clinicians are evaluating options for migraine prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : # NCT02614183 (I5Q-MC-CGAG; EVOLVE-1), # NCT02614196 (I5Q-MC-CGAH; EVOLVE-2), and # NCT02614261 (I5Q-MC-CGAI; REGAIN) - all 3 trials were registered on 23 November 2015.

An International Survey Comparing Different Physician Models for Health Care Delivery to Critically Ill Children With Heart Disease.

OBJECTIVES: To explore relationships between the training background of cardiac critical care attending physicians and self-reported perceived strengths and weaknesses in their ability to provide clinical care. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational survey sent worldwide to ~550 practicing cardiac ICU attending physicians. SETTING: Hospitals providing cardiac critical care. SUBJECTS: Practicing cardiac critical care physicians. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We received responses from 243 ICU attending physicians from 82 centers (14 countries). The primary training background of the respondents included critical care (62%), dual training in critical care and cardiology (16%), cardiology (14%), and other (8%). We received 49 responses from medical directors in nine countries, who reported that the predominant training background for attending physicians who provide cardiac intensive care at their institutions were critical care (58%), dual trained (18%), cardiology (12%), and other (11%). A greater proportion of physicians trained in either critical care or dual-training reported feeling confident managing multiple organ failure, neurologic conditions, brain death, cardiac arrest, and performing procedures like advanced airway placement and inserting chest- and abdominal-drains. In contrast, physicians with cardiology and dual-training reported feeling more confident managing intractable arrhythmias, understanding cardiopulmonary interactions, and interpreting echocardiogram, electrocardiogram, and cardiac catheterization. Overall, only 57% of the respondents felt comfortable based on their current training background to manage patients with complex cardiac issues without collaboration with other specialists. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey demonstrates that intensivists trained in critical care are more comfortable with critical care skills, cardiology-trained intensivists are more comfortable with cardiology skills, and dual-trained physicians are comfortable with both critical care skills and cardiology skills. These findings may help inform future efforts to optimize the educational curriculum and training pathways for future cardiac intensivists. These data may also be used to shape continuing medical education activities for cardiac intensivists who have already completed their training.

Factors associated with motor vehicle-related eye injuries presenting to the US emergency departments.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate risk factors associated with eye injuries related to motor vehicle accidents (MVA) using a multicentre national database from the US emergency departments. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A post hoc analysis from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample database (2006-2013) was performed. Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with MVA-related trauma were included. We then evaluated patient- and centre-level risk factors associated with the presence of ocular trauma using a multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: A total of 2,745,152 patients from 2080 ED were identified for inclusion. Of these, 31,493 patients (1.14%) were associated with ocular trauma. The most common ocular injuries reported in our study were injury to ocular adnexa, orbital fractures, subconjunctival haemorrhage, foreign body on eye, and open wound of the eyeball. In univariate analysis, the other patient factors associated with ocular trauma included male gender, >1 chronic condition, admission during weekend, >1 bodily injury, higher injury severity score (ISS), presence of skull fractures and other bodily fractures, seizures, and initiation of mechanical ventilation after MVA. The hospital characteristics associated with highest incidence of ocular trauma included ED visit to a level I trauma centre and metropolitan teaching hospital. The independent factors associated with ocular trauma included younger age groups, male gender, weekend injury, presence of chronic conditions, >1 bodily injury, higher ISS, presence of skull fractures, ED admission to level-1 trauma centre, and ED admission to a teaching hospital. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre study establishes that both patient- and centre-level factors are associated with MVA-related eye injuries.

Epidemiologic Trends of Adoption of Do-Not-Resuscitate Status After Pediatric In-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence of do-not-resuscitate status, assess the epidemiologic trends of do-not-resuscitate status, and assess the factors associated with do-not-resuscitate status in children after in-hospital cardiac arrest using large, multi-institutional data. DESIGN: Generalized estimating equations logistic regression model was used to evaluate the trends of do-not-resuscitate status and evaluate the factors associated with do-not-resuscitate status after cardiac arrest. SETTING: American Heart Association's Get With the Guidelines-Resuscitation Registry. PATIENTS: Children (< 18 yr old) with an index in-hospital cardiac arrest and greater than or equal to 1 minute of documented chest compressions were included (2006-2015). Patients with no return of spontaneous circulation after cardiac arrest were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In total, 8,062 patients qualified for inclusion. Of these, 1,160 patients (14.4%) adopted do-not-resuscitate status after cardiac arrest. We found low rates of survival to hospital discharge among children with do-not-resuscitate status (do-not-resuscitate vs no do-not-resuscitate: 6.0% vs 69.7%). Our study found that rates of do-not-resuscitate status after cardiac arrest are highest in children with Hispanic ethnicity (16.4%), white race (15.0%), and treatment at institutions with larger PICUs (> 50 PICU beds: 17.8%) and at institutions located in North Central (17.6%) and South Atlantic/Puerto Rico (17.1%) regions of the United States. Do-not-resuscitate status was more common among patients with more preexisting conditions, longer duration of cardiac arrest, greater than 1 cardiac arrest, and among patients requiring extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We also found that trends of do-not-resuscitate status after cardiac arrest in children are decreasing in recent years (2013-2015: 13.8%), compared with previous years (2006-2009: 16.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Patient-, hospital-, and regional-level factors are associated with do-not-resuscitate status after pediatric cardiac arrest. As cardiac arrest might be a signal of terminal chronic illness, a timely discussion of do-not-resuscitate status after cardiac arrest might help families prioritize quality of end-of-life care.

Impact of Regional Cerebral Perfusion on Outcomes Among Neonates Undergoing Norwood Operation.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of regional cerebral perfusion (RCP) during heart operation on outcomes in neonates undergoing Norwood operation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the Single Ventricle Reconstruction trial data set. The adjusted effect of RCP use on each outcome was studied using a penalized logistic regression model with bootstrap validation. RESULTS: Of 549 patients included in the study, 252 patients (45.9%) received RCP during their heart operation. In univariate comparisons, the majority of the baseline characteristics and preoperative risk factors were similar in the RCP and No RCP group. The total cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time and the total cross-clamp (CC) time were longer in the RCP group (RCP vs No RCP, median CPB time: 161 minutes vs 109 minutes; median CC time: 63 minutes vs 43 minutes). In adjusted models, the use of RCP was not associated with decreased mortality and/or need for heart transplant at hospital discharge (odds ratio [OR]: 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-1.25) or prolonged mechanical ventilation (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.62-2.28) or prolonged hospital length of stay (OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.73-2.30). We demonstrated that use of RCP was associated with longer CPB times, increased use of ultrafiltration, and higher probability of open chest after Norwood operation. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not demonstrate any impact of RCP on in-hospital mortality and/or heart transplantation, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and prolonged hospital length of stay among neonates undergoing Norwood operation.

Characteristics and Fate of Abstracts Presented at American Academy of Ophthalmology Meetings.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the characteristics and publication outcomes of abstracts presented in American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) meetings. SUBJECT AND METHODS: Abstracts from AAO meetings for the years 2012 and 2013 were evaluated from the meeting archives. The study characteristics were recorded for each abstract. Each abstract was assessed for publication in a peer-reviewed scientific journal using three search engines (PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar). Time to publication was also calculated. RESULTS: A total of 929 abstracts presented to 2 AAO meetings were analyzed. Among subspecialty areas, retina represented the largest percentage of accepted meeting abstracts (33.3%) followed by cornea (21.9%), cataract (14.9%), and glaucoma (14.4%). A total of 304 abstracts (32.7%) were published in peer-reviewed journals as full-length articles. The median time to publication was 40 months, and the median impact factor of the journal for the published manuscript was 1.9. In multivariable models, topics related to glaucoma were most likely to be published followed by retina. The odds for publication were higher if the first author was affiliated with a residency program, and if the first author originated from South Korea and the United States. CONCLUSIONS: Our study presents the landscape of publication outcomes for abstracts presented in national AAO meetings with ~1/3 of presented abstracts culminated in publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Impact of food allergy on food insecurity and health literacy in a tertiary care pediatric allergy population.

BACKGROUND: Food insecurity (FI), limited availability of or access to nutritional foods, is linked to poor child/caregiver health. We examined FI in food-allergic and non-food-allergic children to determine whether dietary limitations associated with food allergy increases risk of FI. METHODS: Food-allergic and non-food-allergic children (1-17 years) were recruited from Arkansas Children's Hospital allergy/asthma clinics. The USDA Food Security Survey, the Newest Vital Sign Health Literacy (HL) questionnaire, and the Food Allergy Impact Scale QOL survey were administered. Logistic regression and analysis of covariance models were utilized for data analysis. RESULTS: Subjects (n = 650) included 325 food-allergic and 325 non-food-allergic children. Overall rate of FI was 21.5% (food allergic 22.2% and non-food allergic 20.9%) with no significant difference in the prevalence of FI between groups (OR = 1.30; 95% CI 0.86-1.96; P = 0.21). FI was increased in households of children with both milk and egg allergy when compared to those without food allergy and those with single food allergy (OR = 2.5; 95% CI 1.4-4.6; P = 0.003). Mean HL rates were higher in the food-secure vs food-insecure groups (mean diff = 0.31; 95% CI 0.03-0.59; P = 0.03). Among food-allergic children, QOL was better in the food-secure vs food-insecure group (mean diff = 0.61; 95% CI 0.002-1.23; P = 0.049). CONCLUSION: Food allergy to milk and egg was associated with increased risk of household FI. Food-insecure participants had lower HL than their food-secure counterparts. Further work is needed to define risks associated with FI among food-allergic children to improve screening and management strategies.

Creation of an empiric tool to predict ECMO deployment in pediatric respiratory or cardiac failure.

PURPOSE: To create a real-time prediction tool to predict probability of ECMO deployment in children with cardiac or pulmonary failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients ≤18 years old admitted to an ICU that participated in the Virtual Pediatric Systems database (2009-2015) were included. Logistic regression models using adaptive lasso methodology were used to identify independent factors associated with ECMO use. RESULTS: A total of 538,202 ICU patients from 140 ICUs qualified for inclusion. ECMO was deployed in 3484 patients (0.6%) with a mortality of 1450 patients (41.6%). The factors associated with increased probability of ECMO use included: younger age, pulmonary hypertension, congenital heart disease, high-complexity cardiac surgery, cardiomyopathy, acute lung injury, shock, renal failure, cardiac arrest, use of nitric oxide, use of either conventional mechanical ventilation or high frequency oscillatory ventilation, and higher annual ECMO center volume. The area under the receiver operating curve for this model was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). This tool can be accessed at https://soipredictiontool.shinyapps.io/ECMORisk/. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we present a tool to predict ECMO deployment among critically ill children; this tool will help create real-time risk stratification among critically ill children, and it will help with benchmarking, family counseling, and research.