Rapid resolution of migraine symptoms after initiating the preventive treatment eptinezumab during a migraine attack: results from the randomized RELIEF trial.

BACKGROUND: Eptinezumab is an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. In the phase 3 RELIEF study, eptinezumab resulted in shorter time to headache pain freedom and time to absence of most bothersome symptom (MBS; including nausea, photophobia, or phonophobia) compared with placebo when administered during a migraine attack. The objective of this exploratory analysis was to examine the earliest time points that eptinezumab separated from placebo (P < .05) on headache- and migraine-associated symptoms when administered during a migraine attack. METHODS: RELIEF, a multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind trial, occurred from November 7, 2019, through July 8, 2020. Adults considered candidates for preventive treatment were randomized to eptinezumab 100 mg (N = 238) or placebo (N = 242) administered intravenously over 30 min within 1-6 h of migraine onset. Outcome measures included headache pain freedom/relief and absence of MBS, patient's choice of photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at regular intervals from 0.5 to 48 h after infusion start. Censoring was applied at time of acute rescue medication use. RESULTS: At hour 1, more eptinezumab-treated patients achieved headache pain freedom (9.7%), headache pain relief (38.7%), and absence of MBS (33.2%) versus placebo (4.1%, 26.9%, and 22.1%, respectively; P < .05 all), with separation from placebo (P < .05) through hour 48. Eptinezumab separated from placebo (P < .05) at hour 1 in absence-of-photophobia (29.4% vs 17.0%) and absence-of-phonophobia (41.2% vs 27.2%) and through hour 48. Initial separation from placebo (P < .05) in absence-of-nausea occurred at end-of-infusion (0.5 h; 36.7% vs 25.4%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Preventive treatment with eptinezumab initiated during a migraine attack resulted in more patients achieving headache pain freedom/relief and absence of MBS, with separation from placebo (P < .05) as early as 0.5-1 h following the start of infusion. Rapid resolution of headache- and migraine-associated symptoms by a peripherally acting, intravenously administered antibody suggest a peripheral site of pharmacological action for CGRP blockade. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04152083 .

Erenumab dosage for migraine prevention: An evidence-based narrative review with recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor or its ligand have changed the landscape of treatment options for migraine. Erenumab is the first and only fully human monoclonal antibody designed to target and block the CGRP receptor. It is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The recommended dose of erenumab is 70 mg monthly, with guidance that some patients may benefit from the 140 mg monthly dose. There is a need for information to guide clinical practice on the comparative efficacy and safety of these two dosing options. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate therapeutic and tolerability differences between erenumab 70 and 140 mg based on evidence from published literature. METHODS: This narrative review evaluates therapeutic and tolerability differences between erenumab 70 and 140 mg based on a literature search using PubMed interface, Embase and Ovid MEDLINE(R) databases. The key search terms included migraine, AMG 334, AMG334, erenumab, erenumab-aooe, and Aimovig. The search was limited to English language articles or conference abstracts published up to May 2021. RESULTS: From the literature search, we retrieved 23 relevant articles/conference abstracts (19 articles [5 randomized, double-blind studies] and 4 conference abstracts) for inclusion in this narrative review. Although the recommended starting dosage of erenumab is 70 mg, this narrative review of the literature indicates that some patients may benefit from a dosage of 140 mg erenumab once monthly-especially those with difficult-to-treat disease and prior treatment failures. The evidence indicates that erenumab at 140 mg has a numerically better efficacy than 70 mg across a broad spectrum of migraine outcomes, including preventing progression to chronic migraine. CONCLUSION: Cumulative data from the literature support a therapeutic gain with an increase from erenumab 70 to 140 mg and a rationale for initiating 140 mg in selected patients.

Eptinezumab treatment initiated during a migraine attack is associated with meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcome measures: secondary results from the randomized controlled RELIEF study.

BACKGROUND: Demonstrating therapeutic value from the patient perspective is important in patient-centered migraine management. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of eptinezumab, a preventive migraine treatment, on patient-reported headache impact, acute medication optimization, and perception of disease change when initiated during a migraine attack. METHODS: RELIEF was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between 2019 and 2020 in adults with ≥1-year history of migraine and 4-15 migraine days per month in the 3 months prior to screening. Patients were randomized (1:1) to a 30-min infusion of eptinezumab 100 mg or placebo within 1-6 h of a qualifying migraine attack onset. The 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and 6-item Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire (mTOQ-6) were administered at baseline and week 4, and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at week 4. A post hoc analysis of these measures was conducted in patients who reported headache pain freedom at 2 h after infusion start. RESULTS: Of 480 patients enrolled and treated, 476 completed the study and are included in this analysis. Mean baseline HIT-6 total scores indicated severe headache impact (eptinezumab, 65.1; placebo, 64.8). At week 4, the eptinezumab-treated group demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in HIT-6 total score compared with placebo (mean change from baseline: eptinezumab, - 8.7; placebo, - 4.5; mean [95% CI] difference from placebo: - 4.2 [- 5.75, - 2.63], P < .0001), with greater reductions in each item score vs placebo (P < .001 all comparisons). Change in HIT-6 total score in the subgroup with 2-h headache pain freedom was - 13.8 for the eptinezumab group compared with - 4.9 for the placebo group. mTOQ-6 total score mean change from baseline favored eptinezumab (change, 2.1) compared with placebo (1.2; mean [95% CI] difference: 0.9 [0.3, 1.5], P < .01). More eptinezumab-treated patients rated PGIC as much or very much improved than placebo patients (59.3% vs 25.9%). CONCLUSIONS: When administered during a migraine attack, eptinezumab significantly improved patient-reported outcomes after 4 weeks compared with placebo, with particularly pronounced effects in patients reporting headache pain freedom at 2 h after infusion start. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04152083 . November 5, 2019.

Early response to eptinezumab indicates high likelihood of continued response in patients with chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND: A clinical ability to describe the response trajectory of patients receiving preventive migraine treatment could expedite and improve therapeutic management decisions. This post hoc analysis of the PROMISE-2 study evaluated the consistency and predictive power of Month 1 treatment response on later response in patients with chronic migraine. METHODS: PROMISE-2 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized adults with chronic migraine to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo administered IV every 12 weeks for up to 24 weeks (2 infusions over 6 study months). Migraine responder rates (MRRs) were calculated from monthly migraine days over 4-week intervals compared with baseline. Patients were grouped by MRR during Month 1 (< 25%, 25-< 50%, 50-< 75%, and ≥ 75%), with the number of subsequent study months (Months 2-6) with ≥50% and ≥ 75% MRR calculated in each subgroup. A similar analysis was conducted using Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) rating to define Month 1 subgroups (very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, and no change/worse) and rates of very much improved or much improved PGIC during Months 2-6. RESULTS: In the eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, and placebo groups, respectively, 194/356 (54.5%), 212/350 (60.6%), and 132/366 (36.1%) patients were ≥ 50% migraine responders during Month 1. More eptinezumab-treated patients were ≥ 75% migraine responders (100 mg, 110/356 [30.9%]; 300 mg, 129/350 [36.9%]; placebo, 57/366 [15.6%]) and more placebo-treated patients were < 25% migraine responders (eptinezumab 100 mg, 103/356 [28.9%]; 300 mg, 80/350 [22.9%]; placebo, 153/366 [41.8%]). Among patients who achieved ≥75% migraine response in Month 1, more than one-third attained ≥75% migraine response for all 5 subsequent study months and more than two-thirds achieved ≥75% migraine response for ≥3 months. More than two-thirds of those in the very much improved (PGIC) subgroup at Month 1 were much or very much improved for all 5 subsequent months. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of data from PROMISE-2, more eptinezumab-treated than placebo-treated patients were early (Month 1) responders, and most early responders went on to achieve a high level of response for at least half of the 24-week treatment period. Potential for later response in early non-responders was also observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02974153 ; registered November 23, 2016.

Effects of Intravenous Eptinezumab vs Placebo on Headache Pain and Most Bothersome Symptom When Initiated During a Migraine Attack: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Intravenous eptinezumab, an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide antibody, is approved for migraine prevention in adults. It has established onset of preventive efficacy on day 1 after infusion. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of and adverse events related to eptinezumab when initiated during a migraine attack. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 3, multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted from November 4, 2019, to July 8, 2020, at 47 sites in the United States and the country of Georgia. Participants (aged 18-75 years) with a greater than 1-year history of migraine and migraine on 4 to 15 days per month in the 3 months prior to screening were treated during a moderate to severe migraine attack. Interventions: Eptinezumab, 100 mg (n = 238), or placebo (n = 242), administered intravenously within 1 to 6 hours of onset of a qualifying moderate to severe migraine. Main Outcomes and Measures: Co-primary efficacy end points were time to headache pain freedom and time to absence of most bothersome symptom (nausea, photophobia, or phonophobia). Key secondary end points were headache pain freedom and absence of most bothersome symptom at 2 hours after start of infusion. Additional secondary end points were headache pain freedom and absence of most bothersome symptom at 4 hours and use of rescue medication within 24 hours. Results: Of 480 randomized and treated patients (mean age, 44 years; 84% female), 476 completed the study. Patients treated with eptinezumab vs placebo, respectively, achieved statistically significantly faster headache pain freedom (median, 4 hours vs 9 hours; hazard ratio, 1.54 [P < .001]) and absence of most bothersome symptom (median, 2 hours vs 3 hours; hazard ratio, 1.75 [P < .001]). At 2 hours after infusion, in the respective eptinezumab and placebo groups, headache pain freedom was achieved by 23.5% and 12.0% (between-group difference, 11.6% [95% CI, 4.78%-18.31%]; odds ratio, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.39-3.72]; P < .001) and absence of most bothersome symptom by 55.5% and 35.8% (between-group difference, 19.6% [95% CI, 10.87%-28.39%]; odds ratio, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.55-3.25]; P < .001). Results remained statistically significant at 4 hours after infusion. Statistically significantly fewer eptinezumab-treated patients used rescue medication within 24 hours than did placebo patients (31.5% vs 59.9%, respectively; between-group difference, -28.4% [95% CI, -36.95% to -19.86%]; odds ratio, 0.31 [95% CI, 0.21-0.45]; P < .001). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 10.9% of the eptinezumab group and 10.3% of the placebo group; the most common was hypersensitivity (eptinezumab, 2.1%; placebo, 0%). No treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients eligible for preventive migraine therapy experiencing a moderate to severe migraine attack, treatment with intravenous eptinezumab vs placebo shortened time to headache and symptom resolution. Feasibility of administering eptinezumab treatment during a migraine attack and comparison with alternative treatments remain to be established. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04152083.

A Randomized Trial to Evaluate OnabotulinumtoxinA for Prevention of Headaches in Adolescents With Chronic Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: As a post-approval commitment, this dose-ranging study was undertaken to evaluate efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA in adolescents. BACKGROUND: In adolescents, migraine is often undiagnosed or misdiagnosed and can present unique management challenges. OnabotulinumtoxinA was approved for prevention of chronic migraine (CM) in adults in 2010. METHODS: This multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, randomized trial assessed a single treatment of onabotulinumtoxinA (155 U or 74 U) vs placebo (intramuscular saline) administered via the recommended fixed-dose fixed site paradigm in adolescents with CM aged 12 to <18 years. The primary efficacy measure was change in frequency of headache days from baseline at week 12; other measures included change in frequency of headache days at weeks 4 and 8 and change in frequency of severe headache days. Safety and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Of 125 randomized patients (onabotulinumtoxinA 155 U, n = 45; onabotulinumtoxinA 74 U, n = 43; placebo, n = 37), all were included in the primary efficacy analysis, and 115 (92.0%) completed the study. Lack of efficacy was the primary reason for discontinuing (n = 4; 3.2%); no patients discontinued because of adverse events. All treatments reduced frequency of headache days at week 12, with no significant differences between treatments. The mean (95% confidence interval) changes from baseline in the frequency of headache days during the 28-day period ending at week 12 (primary endpoint) were -6.3 (-8.5, -4.2), -6.4 (-8.8, -4.0), and -6.8 (-9.6, -4.1) days in the onabotulinumtoxinA 155 U, onabotulinumtoxinA 74 U, and placebo groups, respectively (P ≥ .474). All treatments reduced frequency of severe headache days and were well-tolerated; serious adverse events (n = 3) were considered unrelated to treatment and resolved without sequelae. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events were neck pain (n = 8), upper respiratory tract infection (n = 7), migraine, and nasopharyngitis (n = 5 each). CONCLUSION: Although this study did not meet its efficacy endpoints, onabotulinumtoxinA was well tolerated in this adolescent population. Given previous data demonstrating the benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA in adults with CM, additional studies with design modifications, including adequate statistical power, to assess the efficacy of multiple treatment cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA for CM prevention in adolescents may be informative.

Vascular safety of erenumab for migraine prevention.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular safety of erenumab across migraine prevention studies. METHODS: Vascular adverse events (AEs) and blood pressure data were integrated across 4 double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of erenumab and their open-label extensions in patients with chronic or episodic migraine. Subgroup analyses were conducted by acute migraine-specific medication use and number of vascular risk factors at baseline. Standardized search terms were used to identify vascular AEs (cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, or peripheral). An independent committee adjudicated whether targeted events were vascular in origin. RESULTS: In placebo-controlled studies, 2,443 patients received placebo (n = 1,043), erenumab 70 mg (n = 893), or erenumab 140 mg (n = 507) subcutaneously once monthly. Regardless of acute migraine-specific medication use or vascular risk factors at baseline, AE incidence was similar across the placebo and erenumab treatment groups. Hypertension AEs were reported for 0.9% (placebo), 0.8% (erenumab 70 mg), and 0.2% (erenumab 140 mg) of patients. Vascular AEs, which were similar across double-blind and open-label treatment, generally were confounded, with plausible alternative etiologies. In 18 patients with events reviewed by the independent committee, 4 events were positively adjudicated as cardiovascular in origin: 2 deaths and 2 vascular events. All 4 positively adjudicated cardiovascular events occurred during open-label erenumab treatment. CONCLUSION: Selective blockade of the canonical calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor with erenumab for migraine prevention had a vascular safety profile comparable to that of placebo over 12 weeks, with no increased emergence of events over time. Further study of long-term safety of erenumab in patients with migraine is needed. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIERS: NCT02066415, NCT02456740, NCT01952574, NCT02483585, NCT02174861, and NCT01723514. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This analysis provides Class II evidence that for patients with migraine, erenumab does not increase the risk of vascular AEs.

Early Onset of Efficacy With Fremanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the onset of efficacy for fremanezumab in chronic migraine by evaluating pain-related clinical measures at different time points. BACKGROUND: Faster onset of efficacy of preventive treatments could benefit patients with migraine. Fremanezumab is a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, a neuropeptide involved in the pathophysiology of migraine. In 12-week clinical trials, subcutaneous fremanezumab significantly reduced the frequency of migraine headaches, headache hours, and headaches in general, without serious treatment-related adverse events. New drug classes of migraine preventive treatment demonstrate markedly different clinical profiles from standard-of-care treatments. METHODS: In this double-blind phase III study, eligible patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous injections of fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline, placebo at weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab monthly (675 mg at baseline, 225 mg at weeks 4 and 8), or placebo at each time point. This study included secondary, exploratory, and post hoc analyses of the primary trial, evaluating the change in headache days of at least moderate severity or migraine days during the first 4 weeks of the trial. RESULTS: A total of 1130 patients were randomized (fremanezumab quarterly, n = 376; fremanezumab monthly, n = 379; or placebo, n = 375). During the 4-week period after the first dose, the mean number of monthly headache days of at least moderate severity was reduced for the all-fremanezumab group (mean reduction [95% confidence interval]: -4.6 days [-5.1, -4.1]) compared with the placebo group (-2.3 days [-2.9, -1.6]; P < .0001). Treatment effects were observed at Week 1 for the all-fremanezumab group (-1.1 days [-1.3, -1.0]) vs placebo (-0.5 days [-0.7, -0.3]; P < .0001), with separation from placebo by Day 2 (P = .003). Similar effects were observed for the monthly average number of migraine days and mean number of monthly headache hours. CONCLUSIONS: The early onset of efficacy of fremanezumab may have the potential to improve patient compliance and clinical outcomes.

Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment in Patients with Chronic Migraine: Results of the COMPEL Study.

INTRODUCTION: OnabotulinumtoxinA is approved in the USA for the prevention of headache in adults with chronic migraine, a debilitating neurologic disease characterized by headaches occurring on ≥ 15 days per month for > 3 months and including migraine features on ≥ 8 days per month. OBJECTIVE: The COMPEL Study (NCT01516892), a 108-week, multi-center, open-label study, evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA in adults with chronic migraine. The objective of this subanalysis was to examine the safety and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA after each of nine treatment cycles. METHODS: OnabotulinumtoxinA 155 U was administered every 12 weeks. Safety and tolerability, overall and by treatment cycle, were assessed. Treatment-emergent adverse events reported between successive treatments were attributed to the preceding treatment. The safety population received one or more doses of onabotulinumtoxinA. The primary efficacy outcome was the reduction in headache days at week 108 compared with baseline. RESULTS: Of 716 patients enrolled, 373 patients (52.1%) completed the study and 343 (47.9%) withdrew; 481 patients (67.2%) received 60 weeks of treatment and 402 (56.1%) received 108 weeks of treatment. In total, 436 (60.9%) patients reported treatment-emergent adverse events; most were mild/moderate in severity. Thirty-two patients (4.5%) discontinued the study after experiencing treatment-emergent adverse events. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events typically decreased with repeated onabotulinumtoxinA treatment: first cycle, 24.2%; fourth cycle, 18.4%; ninth cycle, 12.2%. Neck pain (2.7%), eyelid ptosis (1.8%), musculoskeletal stiffness (1.4%), injection-site pain (1.3%), and headache (1.3%) were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events after the first cycle. Seventy-five patients (10.5%) reported serious treatment-emergent adverse events, 13 (1.8%) withdrew. Treatment-related adverse events were reported by 131 patients (18.3%), one was considered serious. OnabotulinumtoxinA significantly reduced headache day frequency by 10.7 (6.4) days per 28-day period (p < 0.0001) at week 108. CONCLUSIONS: OnabotulinumtoxinA treatment was well tolerated over 108 weeks; no new safety signals were identified. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and the most common individual events decreased with repeated onabotulinumtoxinA administration. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01516892.

Early Onset of Efficacy and Consistency of Response Across Multiple Migraine Attacks From the Randomized COMPASS Study: AVP-825 Breath Powered® Exhalation Delivery System (Sumatriptan Nasal Powder) vs Oral Sumatriptan.

OBJECTIVE: To further characterize the clinical utility of AVP-825 based on additional prespecified outcomes and post hoc analyses of COMPASS, a Phase 3 comparative efficacy trial of AVP-825 vs 100 mg oral sumatriptan (NCT01667679). AVP-825 was approved in January 2016 by the US Food and Drug Administration under the name ONZETRA® Xsail® (sumatriptan nasal powder) for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults. BACKGROUND: AVP-825 is a delivery system that uses a patient's own breath to deliver low-dose sumatriptan powder to the upper posterior regions of the nasal cavity beyond the narrow nasal valve, areas lined with vascular mucosa conducive to rapid drug absorption into the systemic circulation. The recommended dose of AVP-825 is 22 mg sumatriptan powder administered as one 11 mg nosepiece in each nostril, which delivers approximately 15-16 mg of sumatriptan intranasally. The COMPASS trial compared AVP-825 22-100 mg oral sumatriptan across multiple migraine attacks for efficacy, safety, and tolerability endpoints. DESIGN/METHODS: COMPASS was a randomized, multicenter, double-dummy, crossover, multiattack, comparative efficacy study with two 12-week double-blind periods. Patients with 2-8 migraine attacks/month were randomized 1:1 to AVP-825 (22 mg) plus oral placebo or an identical placebo delivery system plus 100 mg oral sumatriptan for the first period, and then patients switched treatments for the second period. Patients treated up to 5 qualifying migraines per period within 1 h of onset, even if the intensity of the attack was mild. Results from the primary endpoint (SPID-30, defined as the sum of pain intensity differences from dosing to 30 minutes), key secondary efficacy endpoints and safety assessments have been reported in the primary publication (Tepper et al., 2015). This article reports additional prespecified outcomes, including the SPID-30 for attacks treated when baseline severity was mild vs moderate/severe, measures of sustained response and consistency of effect in patients who experienced multiple migraine attacks, and the results of post hoc analyses performed to assess total migraine freedom (defined as no pain and no migraine-associated symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia), time to pain freedom, time to meaningful pain relief, and local (occurring at the site of administration in the nose) vs systemic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: A total of 185 patients completed both treatment periods, yielding 1,531 migraine attacks which were treated and assessed (765 AVP-825, 766 oral sumatriptan). Treatment with AVP-825 provided greater reduction in migraine pain intensity which was statistically significant vs oral sumatriptan in the first 30 minutes postdose regardless of whether attacks were treated when pain was mild (least squares mean SPID-30 = 3.90 vs 0.24, P = .0013) or moderate/severe (least squares mean SPID-30 = 13.83 vs 10.07, P = .0002). At every time point from 15 to 90 minutes postdose, the proportion of attacks achieving total migraine freedom was greater and statistically significant after treatment with AVP-825 vs 100 mg oral sumatriptan. AVP-825 treatment resulted in greater odds of achieving pain freedom (odds ratio, OR = 1.29, P < .01) and meaningful pain relief (OR = 1.32, P < .0001), which were also statistically significant compared with oral sumatriptan. In addition, a greater proportion of attacks treated with AVP-825 vs oral sumatriptan was associated with sustained pain freedom, achieving statistical significance when assessed from 1 h postdose through 24 hours postdose (33.3% vs 27.9%; P < .05) and through 48 hours postdose (32.7% vs 27.4%; P < .05). For patients who treated multiple migraine attacks in both treatment periods, a greater proportion had consistent pain relief and pain freedom following treatment with AVP-825 compared to oral sumatriptan across multiple attacks, a difference that achieved statistical significance at 30 minutes postdose. Local TEAEs of abnormal taste and nasal discomfort were more common following AVP-825 treatment. Of the patients experiencing either of these TEAEs, about 90% described the intensity as mild, and only one discontinued treatment because of either of these two TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: These results from the COMPASS study further demonstrate that treatment with AVP-825 provides earlier onset and more consistent across-episode improvement of pain and migraine-associated symptoms compared with oral sumatriptan, highlighting the clinical advantages of this newly approved intranasal delivery system for low-dose sumatriptan powder.

A Phase I, Open-Label, Single-Dose Safety, Pharmacokinetic, and Tolerability Study of the Sumatriptan Iontophoretic Transdermal System in Adolescent Migraine Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan delivered by the iontophoretic transdermal system (TDS) in adolescent patients. BACKGROUND: Since nausea can be a prominent and early symptom of migraine, nonoral treatment options are often required. Sumatriptan iontophoretic TDS is approved for the acute treatment of migraine in adults. The present study evaluates the pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan administered via the iontophoretic TDS in adolescents, contrasting the findings with historical data from adults. DESIGN: Patients aged 12-17 years (inclusive) with acute migraine were treated with sumatriptan iontophoretic TDS for 4 hours. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic profiling of sumatriptan were obtained prior to dosing and at predetermined time points covering the 12 hours postonset of treatment. Key pharmacokinetic endpoints included Cmax (peak plasma drug concentration), tmax (time to Cmax ), AUC0-∞ (area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity), and t½ (terminal elimination half-life). Safety was evaluated by monitoring of adverse events in addition to laboratory and clinical assessments. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 37 patients, and 36 were included in the PK evaluable population. Cmax , tmax , AUC0-∞ , and t½ values were all similar between male and female patients and between younger (12-14 years) and older (15-17 years) adolescents. When compared with historical adult data, adolescent patients demonstrated similar systemic exposures to those observed in adults (mean Cmax 20.20 (±6.43) ng/mL in adolescents vs 21.89 (±6.15) ng/mL in adults; mean AUC0-∞ 98.1 (±28.1) ng·h/mL in adolescents vs 109.7 (±26.1) ng·h/mL in adults). All adverse events were mild or moderate, with application-site paresthesia being the most common (32%). No clinically relevant changes in laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiogram findings were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The iontophoretic TDS produced mean systemic exposures to sumatriptan in younger and older adolescents, in line with what was seen in adult subjects. It was generally well tolerated.

Concurrent onabotulinumtoxinA treatment of cervical dystonia and concomitant migraine.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the clinical benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX®) treatment on the symptoms of cervical dystonia and the frequency, severity, and associated symptoms of migraine in patients with cervical dystonia and concurrent migraine. BACKGROUND: Botulinum toxin is established as first-line treatment of cervical dystonia. Recent clinical trials have shown onabotulinumtoxinA to be an effective prophylactic therapy for patients with chronic migraine, and onabotulinumtoxinA has been approved for use in this patient population by the Food and Drug Administration. Patients with headache associated with cervical dystonia have been identified as a specific subpopulation of patients in whom botulinum toxin treatment may be effective for controlling the symptoms of both conditions. METHODS: An open-label pilot study was conducted for 7.5 months in patients at least 18 years old with primary cervical dystonia of moderate severity (baseline rating of at least 20 on the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale) complicated by migraine headache meeting the International Classification of Headache Disorders-II criteria for migraines with or without aura. Each patient received 2 cycles of treatment at Visit 3 (baseline) and Visit 6 (Day 90). For cervical dystonia, each patient was injected with a maximum of 175 units. At the same visit, a maximum of 125 units was also injected for migraine using a fixed-site, fixed-dose injection paradigm, with additional cervical dystonia injection-site treatment to a maximum dose of 300 units. Patients were assessed following onabotulinumtoxinA injection and at follow-up on Visit 4 (Day 30), Visit 5 (Day 60), Visit 6 (Day 90), and at Visits 7, 8, and 9 (Days 120, 150, and 180). The primary outcome measures for this study were change in Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale total score for cervical dystonia and frequency of headache episodes per 28-day period. Migraine episodes were defined as at least 4 hours of sustained pain with no upper limit. An episode was considered new if the patient was pain free for at least 24 hours. Secondary study end points included number of headache days per month, headache intensity, headache disability (assessed using Headache Impact Test-6 and the Migraine Disability Assessment score scales), acute headache medication use, resource utilization, and allodynia pain. Adverse events were reported. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients (24 women, mean age 50.5 years; mean age of disease onset 21.9 years) were enrolled in the study. Patients experienced improvement in cervical dystonia symptoms with significant reductions from baseline in Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale scores at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, and 180 days (-9.84 ± 8.49, -12.67 ± 8.22, -13.63 ± 7.27, -14.92 ± 7.05, -14.76 ± 6.97, -14.49 ± 6.14, respectively, P < .0001 at all time points from a baseline of 31.03 ± 3.61). Changes from baseline were assessed using the t-test. Reductions in the number of headache episodes from baseline on concurrent onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for coexistent chronic migraine did not attain significance. However, patients experienced significant reductions from baseline in the number of headache days at 90, 120, and 180 days (-3.39 ± 6.78, P = .0289; -4.29 ± 7.94, P = .0194; -4.38 ± 7.99, P = .0178, respectively, from a baseline of 15.33 ± 6.76). Changes from baseline were assessed using the t-test. The change from baseline in Headache Impact Test-6 total scores was significant at 30, 60, 90, 150, and 180 days (3.21 ± 4.14, P = .0009; -3.04 ± 4.04, P = .0012; -2.41 ± 2.79, P = .0006; -2.59 ± 3.87, P = .0050; -3.09 ± 3.80, respectively, from a baseline of 22.68 ± 3.20). Changes from baseline were assessed using the t-test. The change from baseline in Migraine Disability Assessment was significant at 120, 150, and 180 days (-38.09 ± 47.87, P < .0001, Wilcoxon signed rank test; -16.91 ± 62.69, P = .0358, Wilcoxon signed rank test; -23.73 ± 40.57, P = .0122, t-test, respectively, from a baseline of 56.68 ± 50.41). There were no serious adverse events or treatment-related discontinuations. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA is effective and well tolerated in controlling the symptoms of cervical dystonia complicated by concurrent migraine.

Randomized trial of sumatriptan and naproxen sodium combination in adolescent migraine.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of adolescent migraine remains a significant unmet medical need. We compared the efficacy and safety of 3 doses of sumatriptan and naproxen sodium (suma/nap) combination tablets to placebo in the acute treatment of adolescent migraine. METHODS: This randomized, parallel group study in 12 to 17 year olds required 2 to 8 migraines per month (typically lasting >3 hours untreated) for ≥ 6 months. Subjects entered a 12-week run-in phase, treating 1 moderate-to-severe migraine (attack 1) with single-blind placebo. Subjects reporting headache pain 2 hours after dosing were randomly assigned into a 12-week double-blind phase, treating 1 moderate-to-severe migraine (attack 2) with placebo (n = 145), suma/nap 10/60 mg (n = 96), 30/180 mg (n = 97), or 85/500 mg (n = 152). The primary end point was the percentage of subjects pain-free at 2 hours. RESULTS: The attack 2 adjusted (age; baseline pain severity) 2-hour pain-free rates were higher with suma/nap 10/60 mg (29%; adjusted P = .003), 30/180 mg (27%; adjusted P = .003), and 85/500 mg (24%; adjusted P = .003) versus placebo (10%). Posthoc primary end-point analyses did not demonstrate differences among the 3 doses or an age-by-treatment interaction. Statistically significant differences were found for 85/500 mg versus placebo for sustained pain-free 2 to 24 hours (23% vs 9%; adjusted P = .008), 2-hour photophobia-free (59% vs 41%; adjusted P = .008), and 2-hour phonophobia-free (60% vs 42%; adjusted P = .008). Analyses of other pain, associated symptoms, rescue medication use, and health outcome end points supported higher efficacy for active doses versus placebo. All active doses were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: All doses of suma/nap were well tolerated, providing similarly effective acute treatment of adolescent migraine pain and associated symptoms, as compared with placebo.

MAP0004, orally inhaled dihydroergotamine for acute treatment of migraine: efficacy of early and late treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of MAP0004, an orally inhaled dihydroergotamine, for acute treatment of migraine when administered at various time points from within 1 hour to more than 8 hours after migraine onset. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This post hoc subanalysis was conducted using data from 902 patients enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm, phase 3, multicenter study conducted from July 14, 2008, through March 23, 2009. End points were 2-hour pain relief and pain-free rates in patients who treated a migraine in ≤1 hour, from >1 hour to ≤4 hours, from >4 to ≤8 hours, or in >8 hours after onset of migraine, given that patients may be unwilling or unable to initiate treatment at headache inception. RESULTS: Treatment with MAP0004 was significantly more effective than placebo in relieving pain at all treatment points (≤1 hour after start of migraine: 66% [74/112] for MAP0004 vs 41% [48/118] for placebo, P<.001; >1 to ≤4 hours: 60% [91/153] vs 35% [58/168], P<.001; >4 to ≤8 hours: 53% [36/68] vs 30% [16/54], P=.008; and >8 hours: 48% [25/52] vs 24% [11/46], P=.007). Pain-free rates were also significantly higher with MAP0004 than placebo for treatment within 8 hours after migraine onset (≤1 hour: 38% [43/112] for MAP0004 vs 13% [15/118] for placebo, P<.001; >1 to ≤4 hours: 28% [43/153] vs 10% [17/168], P<.001; >4 to ≤8 hours: 22% [15/68] vs 7% [4/54], P<.025) but not at >8 hours (19% [10/52] vs 9% [4/46], P=.106). CONCLUSION: This post hoc subanalysis shows that MAP0004 was effective in treating migraine irrespective of the time of treatment, even more than 8 hours after onset of migraine pain.

Long-term evaluation of sumatriptan and naproxen sodium for the acute treatment of migraine in adolescents.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term safety, tolerability, effectiveness, impact on quality of life, and medication satisfaction of sumatriptan/naproxen sodium in the acute treatment of migraine headache in adolescents. METHODS: This 12-month, multicenter, open-label, safety study was conducted in adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with an average of 2-8 migraines/month typically lasting >2 hours untreated for >6 months prior to initiation. Subjects were instructed to treat migraines as early as possible and were allowed to rescue 2 hours post dose with a single dose of a naproxen-containing product, over-the-counter pain reliever, or anti-emetics. Subjects were advised not to take a second tablet of sumatriptan/naproxen sodium without at least a 24-hour headache-free period. Safety evaluations included adverse events, laboratory tests, and vital signs and electrocardiogram evaluation. Other evaluations included freedom from pain, quality of life, and medication satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the 656 subjects enrolled, 622 (95%) treated at least 1 migraine with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium, of which 435 (70%) and 363 (58%) completed 6 and 12 months of the study, respectively. Overall, there were 12,927 exposures to sumatriptan/naproxen sodium: on average 2.5 tablets were taken per month per subject. The most common treatment-related adverse events were nausea (7%), dizziness (3%), muscle tightness (3%), and chest discomfort (3%). There were no deaths; 4 subjects had 5 serious adverse events (suicide attempt, hemolytic anemia and syncope, suicidal ideation, spontaneous abortion) unrelated to sumatriptan/naproxen sodium and resolved without sequelae. Seven percent of subjects discontinued participation in the study because of an adverse event; 5% of subjects discontinued due to lack of efficacy. Overall, 42% of the migraine attacks were pain-free within 2 hours of treatment with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium, subjects reported improvements from baseline in 2 of 3 quality of life domains over time, and were generally satisfied with the efficacy and overall treatment at the end of the study. CONCLUSION: In adolescent migraineurs, after up to 12 months and over 12,000 exposures to sumatriptan/naproxen sodium, there were no new or clinically significant findings in the safety parameters, including the frequency and nature of adverse events, as compared to the individual components or to the adverse event profile in adults. In addition, sumatriptan/naproxen sodium provided freedom from pain over time, improvements in quality of life and medication satisfaction.

Efficacy and tolerability of MK-0974 (telcagepant), a new oral antagonist of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, compared with zolmitriptan for acute migraine: a randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-treatment trial.

BACKGROUND: Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) probably has a role in migraine pathophysiology, and antagonism of its receptors might provide treatment without the vasoconstrictor effects of triptans. We aimed to assess the clinical profile of MK-0974 (telcagepant), an orally bioavailable antagonist of CGRP receptor. METHODS: In a randomised, parallel-treatment, placebo-controlled, double-blind, trial at 81 sites in the Europe and the USA, adults with migraine diagnosed by International Headache Society criteria treated moderate or severe attacks with either oral telcagepant 150 mg or 300 mg, zolmitriptan 5 mg, or placebo. The five co-primary endpoints were pain freedom, pain relief, or absence of photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea at 2 h after treatment. Analysis was by the full analysis set and multiplicity was controlled for with a step-down closed-testing procedure. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00442936. FINDINGS: 1380 patients were randomly assigned to receive telcagepant 150 mg (n=333) or 300 mg (354), zolmitriptan (345), or placebo (348). Telcagepant 300 mg was more effective than placebo for pain freedom (95 [27%] of 353 patients vs 33 [10%] of 343 [p<0.0001]), pain relief (194 [55%] of 353 vs 95 [28%] of 343 [p<0.0001]), and absences of phonophobia (204 [58%] of 353 vs 126 [37%] of 342 [p<0.0001]), photophobia (180 [51%] of 353 vs 99 [29%] of 342 [p<0.0001]), and nausea (229 [65%] of 352 vs 189 [55%] of 342 [p=0.0061]). Efficacy of telcagepant 300 mg and zolmitriptan 5 mg were much the same, and both were more effective than telcagepant 150 mg. Adverse events were recorded for 31% taking telcagepant 150 mg, 37% taking telcagepant 300 mg, 51% taking zolmitriptan 5 mg, and 32% taking placebo. INTERPRETATION: Telcagepant 300 mg is effective as an acute treatment for migraine with efficacy comparable to that of zolmitriptan 5 mg, but with fewer associated adverse effects. FUNDING: Merck Research Laboratories.

Atomoxetine treatment of ADHD in children with comorbid Tourette syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines changes in severity of tics and ADHD during atomoxetine treatment in ADHD patients with Tourette syndrome (TS). METHOD: Subjects (7-17 years old) with ADHD (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-IV) and TS were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 56) or atomoxetine (0.5-1.5 mg/kg/day, n = 61) for approximately 18 weeks. RESULTS: Atomoxetine subjects showed significantly greater improvement on ADHD symptom measures. Treatment was also associated with significantly greater reduction of tic severity on two of three measures. Significant increases were seen in mean pulse rate and rates of treatment-emergent nausea, decreased appetite, and decreased body weight. No other clinically relevant treatment differences were observed in any other vital sign, adverse event, laboratory parameter, or electrocardiographic measure. CONCLUSION: Atomoxetine is efficacious for treatment of ADHD and its use appears well tolerated in ADHD patients with comorbid TS.

Pediatric migraine: recognition and treatment.

The diagnosis of migraine headache in childhood rests on criteria similar to those used in migraine in adults. It is important, however, to appreciate several fundamental differences. These differences include the duration of attack, which is often far shorter than in an adult, and the location of the attack, which may be bilateral in many children. The treatment of children and adolescents with migraines includes treatment modalities for acute attacks, preventive medications when the attacks are frequent, and biobehavioral modes of therapy to address long-term management of the disorder. The controlled clinical trials of medications in pediatric migraine have suffered from high placebo response rates that may be related to the sites conducting the study (ie, headache specialist vs clinical research organizations). The medications have proved to be safe in the pediatric age group. Treatment modalities for acute migraine include over-the-counter nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), as well as the oral triptans such as sumatriptan succinate, rizatriptan benzoate, and zolmitriptan and the nasal spray formulations of sumatriptan and zolmitriptan. Subcutaneous sumatriptan and parenteral dihydroergotamine have also been used limitedly. Preventive treatment for patients with frequent or disabling migraines (or both) includes the antidepressants amitriptyline hydrochloride and nortriptyline hydrochloride, the anticonvulsants divalproex sodium and topiramate, and the antihistaminic agent cyprohepatine hydrochloride. Biobehavioral approaches aimed at addressing the fundamental lifestyle issues and nonpharmacologic approaches to management are fundamental to long-term success.

Cefalea en los niños. Cuándo está indicado un procedimiento de diagnóstico completo?

Las migrañas, las variantes de las migrañas, y otros tipos de cefalea se presentan frecuentemente por primera vez durante la niñez; requieren seguimiento, y cuando sea apropiado, investigación posterior. El manejo de la migraña debe incluir la discusión de los propósitos, con los padres y los pacientes. Los medicamentos apropiados son limitados en los niños pequeños, pero los niños mayores y los adolescentes tienen más opciones, tales como los nuevos agentes agonistas de serotonina, los cuales se están estudiando para ser utilizados en este grupo de edad. La terapia preventiva, tanto no farmacológica como farmacológica, debe ser descrita a los pacientes y padres de modo que ellos comprendas las opciones disponibles si la cefalea reaparece.