Citations

Background The Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) trials demonstrated efficacy/tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA for headache prevention in adults with chronic migraine. This post hoc analysis assessed time of onset of onabotulinumtoxinA after the first treatment in total and responder populations and consistency weekly through five treatment cycles. Methods In the 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase of PREEMPT, individuals were randomized 1:1 to onabotulinumtoxinA (155-195 U) or placebo every 12 weeks for two cycles. The primary pooled efficacy variable was change in headache days per 28 days at week 24. We assessed change in headache and migraine/probable migraine (hereafter migraine) days/week compared with baseline week 4. Results Baseline mean (SD) headache days/week (week 4 of baseline) for onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 688) and placebo (n = 696) were similar (4.8 [1.6] vs. 4.8 [1.6] days/week, respectively), as were migraine days/week (4.6 [1.7] vs. 4.6 [1.7] days/week). The effect of onabotulinumtoxinA on change in headache and migraine days/week was significantly greater than placebo at week 1, persisting from week 3 after the first treatment (−1.6 [2.2] vs. −1.1 [2.2] headache days/week [ p < 0.001] and −1.6 [2.2] vs. −1.1 [2.2] migraine days/week [ p < 0.001]). Headache and migraine days decreased in onabotulinumtoxinA responders beginning 1 week after treatment 1. Conclusions Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA is associated with significant reductions in headache and migraine days/week at week 1, persisting after week 3, compared with placebo. Combined with earlier reports showing onabotulinumtoxinA treatment results in a persistent and progressive reduction in headache days over 56 weeks, it is suggested peak benefit may require multiple treatments. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00156910 and NCT00168428.

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of a remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) device for the acute treatment of migraine. Background There is a significant unmet need for novel effective well‐tolerated acute migraine treatments. REN is a novel acute migraine treatment that stimulates upper arm peripheral nerves to induce conditioned pain modulation – an endogenous analgesic mechanism in which conditioning stimulation inhibits pain in remote body regions. A recent pilot study showed that REN can significantly reduce headache. We have conducted a randomized, double‐blind, sham‐controlled study to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of REN for the acute treatment of migraine. Methods This was a randomized, double‐blind, sham‐controlled, multicenter study conducted at 7 sites in the United States and 5 sites in Israel. Two hundred and fifty‐two adults meeting the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for migraine with 2‐8 migraine headaches per month were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to active or sham stimulation. A smartphone‐controlled wireless device was applied for 30‐45 minutes on the upper arm within 1 hour of attack onset; electrical stimulation was at a perceptible but non‐painful intensity level. Migraine pain levels were recorded at baseline, 2, and 48 hours post‐treatment. Most bothersome symptoms (MBS) were also recorded. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving pain relief at 2 hours post‐treatment (improvement from severe or moderate pain to mild or none, or from mild pain to none). Relief of MBS and pain‐free at 2 hours were key secondary endpoints. Results Active stimulation was more effective than sham stimulation in achieving pain relief (66.7% [66/99] vs 38.8% [40/103]; therapeutic gain of 27.9% [CI 95% , 15.6‐40.2]; P < .0001), pain‐free (37.4% vs 18.4%, P = .003), and MBS relief (46.3% vs 22.2%, P = .0008) at 2 hours post‐treatment. The pain relief and pain‐free superiority of the active treatment was sustained 48 hours post‐treatment. The incidence of device‐related adverse events was low and similar between treatment groups (4.8% [6/126] vs 2.4% [3/126], P = .499). Conclusions REN provides superior clinically meaningful relief of migraine pain and MBS compared to placebo, offering a safe and effective non‐pharmacological alternative for acute migraine treatment.

The quality of clinical trials is an essential part of the evidence base for the treatment of headache disorders. In 1991, the International Headache Society Clinical Trials Standing Committee developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine. Scientific and clinical developments in headache medicine led to second and third editions in 2000 and 2012, respectively. The current, fourth edition of the Guidelines retains the structure and much content from previous editions. However, it also incorporates evidence from clinical trials published after the third edition as well as feedback from meetings with regulators, pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, and patient associations. Its final form reflects the collective expertise and judgement of the Committee. These updated recommendations and commentary are intended to meet the Society's continuing objective of providing a contemporary, standardized, and evidence-based approach to the conduct and reporting of randomised controlled trials for the acute treatment of migraine attacks.

Background: The sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) is a target for several headache syndromes. Most of the groups targeting the SPG do not localize it directly, and this might account for some therapeutic failures. As the SPG cannot be seen on computerized tomography (CT) scans, magnetic resonance image (MRI) must be used to visualize the ganglion. It would be advantageous to be able to predict the location of the SPG on CT scans for those using fluoroscopy or CT-guided injections and for those in whom MRI is not accessible or contraindicated. Methods: We localized the SPG in 21 Caucasian patients (21 right and 17 left ganglia; total 38) in 3 tesla MR images subsequently fused with CT scans. We measured the distance from the SPG to two bony landmarks identified on CT scans. We then applied the average distances to find an estimated position of the SPG. The first landmark was the center of the anterior opening of the vidian canal (VC). The second landmark was a point on the sphenoidal bone, defined in an axial plane at the level of the center of the VC (S-point). The predicted position of the SPG measured from the VC and the sphenoidal bone were referred to as, respectively, vcSPG and sSPG. Finally, the distances between the SPG, as seen on MRI, and predicted vcSPG/sSPG were calculated. Results: The average distance between SPG as seen on the MRI images and the estimated position based on CT images were 1.82 mm (SD 0.83, range 0.22–3.57 mm) for vcSPG and 2.09 mm (SD 0.99, range 0.71–4.79 mm) for sSPG. Conclusions: The localization of the SPG can be predicted on CT images using bony landmarks. Localization of the SPG may be important in achieving successful therapeutic outcomes for treatments that are directed toward the SPG.

Background Cutaneous allodynia is a common clinical feature of migraine that has been associated with reduced efficacy of acute migraine treatments and an increased risk of disease progression. Objective Identify factors associated with allodynia in a sample of adults with migraine. Methods An online survey panel was used to identify adults with migraine who averaged at least 1 monthly headache day over the previous 3 months. Data on sociodemographics, headache frequency, headache pain intensity, migraine symptom severity, medication use, depression and anxiety, and cutaneous allodynia (via the Allodynia Symptom Checklist) were obtained. Binary logistic modeling predicted the presence of allodynia. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results In total, 15,133 individuals with migraine met the eligibility criteria. Mean age was 43.1 years, 73.0% were female, and 81.0% were Caucasian. Allodynia was present in 39.9%. The fully adjusted model, controlling for sociodemographics and headache features, demonstrated that allodynia was significantly associated with a higher migraine symptom severity score (odds ratio 1.17, confidence interval 1.15, 1.19) and more severe pain intensity (odds ratio 1.11, confidence interval 1.08, 1.14); probable depression and/or anxiety (odds ratio 1.83, confidence interval 1.67, 2.00); and overuse of acute medication (odds ratio 1.23, confidence interval 1.09, 1.38). A higher number of monthly headache days increased the likelihood of allodynia, but the effect was attenuated in the fully adjusted model. Conclusion In a representative sample of US adults with migraine, there were significant associations between allodynia and headache frequency and intensity, anxiety and/or depression, symptom severity, and acute medication overuse.

Objective To understand the efficacy of zolmitriptan applied with Adhesive Dermally Applied Microarray (ADAM) in treating types of migraine (those with severe headache pain, the presence of nausea, treatment ≥2 hours after migraine onset, or migraine present upon awakening) that are historically considered to be less responsive to oral medications. Background ADAM is an investigational system for intracutaneous drug administration. In a pivotal Phase 2b/3 study (ZOTRIP, N = 321 in the modified intention‐to‐treat population), ADAM zolmitriptan 3.8 mg provided superior pain freedom and freedom from patients’ usual most bothersome associated symptom (MBS), compared with placebo at 2 hours post‐dose. We undertook a post hoc analysis of data from the ZOTRIP trial to examine these same outcomes in subsets of patients whose migraine characteristics have been associated with poorer outcomes when treated with oral medications. Methods The ZOTRIP trial was a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel group Phase 2b/3 study conducted at 36 sites in the United States. Presented here are post hoc subgroup analyses of patients with nausea (n = 110) or severe pain (n = 72) at baseline, those whose treatment was delayed 2 or more hours after onset (n = 75), and those who awoke with migraine (n = 80). The Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test was used to assess whether patients in the ADAM zolmitriptan 3.8 mg group had superior treatment outcomes compared with placebo. Results In patients with nausea, 2‐hour pain freedom was achieved in 44% (26/59) in the ADAM zolmitriptan 3.8 mg group and 14% (7/51) in the placebo group ( P = .005) (odds ratio = 5.11, 95% CI: 1.96–13.30), and 2‐hour MBS freedom was achieved in 68% (40/59) in the active treatment group and 45% (23/51) of those receiving placebo ( P = .009) (odds ratio = 2.86, 95% CI: 1.28–6.43). For those with severe pain, corresponding pain‐free values were 26% (10/39) and 15% (5/33) ( P = .249) (odds ratio = 2.14, 95% CI: 0.60–7.62), and MBS‐free values were 64% (25/39) and 42% (14/33) ( P = .038) (odds ratio = 2.86, 95% CI: 1.05–7.79). Among participants who awoke with migraine, 44% (16/36) and 16% (7/44) were pain‐free in the ADAM zolmitriptan 3.8 mg and placebo groups, respectively ( P = .006) (odds ratio = 4.29, 95% CI: 1.50–12.31), and 72% (26/36) vs 39% (17/44) were MBS‐free, respectively ( P = .003) (odds ratio = 4.40, 95% CI: 1.61–12.05). In those whose treatment was delayed ≥2 hours, pain freedom in the active treatment group and placebo group were 33% (12/36) and 10% (4/39), respectively ( P = .017) (odds ratio = 4.33, 95% CI: 1.24–15.10), and MBS freedom was achieved in 69% (25/36) and 41% (16/39), respectively, in the delayed treatment group ( P = .014) (odds ratio = 3.37, 95% CI: 1.27–8.95). No significant effects (overall interaction P = .353) were observed in logistical regression models of treatment by subgroup interaction. Conclusion Severe pain, delayed treatment, awakening with a headache, and the presence of nausea are factors that predict a poorer response to acute migraine treatment. In these post hoc analyses of subgroups of patients with each of these characteristics in the ZOTRIP trial, participants receiving ADAM zolmitriptan 3.8 mg displayed nearly uniformly better headache responses (2‐hour headache freedom and 2‐hour MBS freedom) compared with those who received placebo.

The Ice Hockey Summit III provided updated scientific evidence on concussions in hockey to inform these five objectives: 1) describe sport-related concussion (SRC) epidemiology, 2) classify prevention strategies, 3) define objective, diagnostic tests, 4) identify treatment, and 5) integrate science and clinical care into prioritized action plans and policy. Our action plan evolved from 40 scientific presentations. The 155 attendees (physicians, athletic trainers, physical therapists, nurses, neuropsychologists, scientists, engineers, coaches, and officials) voted to prioritize these action items in the final Summit session. 1) Establish a national and international hockey data base for SRC at all levels, 2) eliminate body checking in Bantam youth hockey games, 3) expand a behavior modification program (Fair Play) to all youth hockey levels, 4) enforce game ejection penalties for fighting in Junior A and professional hockey leagues, 5) establish objective tests to diagnose concussion at point of care (POC), and 6) mandate baseline testing to improve concussion diagnosis for all age groups. Expedient implementation of the Summit III prioritized action items is necessary to reduce the risk, severity, and consequences of concussion in the sport of ice hockey.

Background: Monoclonal antibodies that target calcitonin gene-related peptide or the canonical calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor have emerged as effective and well tolerated for the preventive treatment of migraine. These large molecules appear ideally suited for migraine prevention. They have an extended biological half-life, are administered either monthly or quarterly either by subcutaneous injection or intravenous infusion, require minimal or no dose-titration and have the potential for a rapid onset of effect compared to conventional oral preventive drugs. There is high selectivity and they target an important mediator in the pathogenesis of migraine. Investigation: Phase II and pivotal phase III studies have all yielded positive results with a favorable adverse event profile. No serious treatment-related adverse outcomes have thus far been reported in controlled or long-term open-label extension studies. This tolerability profile promises to improve adherence and, possibly, long-term outcomes. Conclusions: Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies are effective and well tolerated for the preventive treatment of migraine. They have distinct advantages over currently available oral preventive drugs. While treatment-related serious adverse events have not been observed in open-label extension studies, long-term outcomes and safety will require broad exposure in heterogeneous patient populations in clinical practice. In addition, their safety in women, especially during pregnancy, will require longitudinal surveillance. Given the overlapping mechanism(s), the effectiveness of existing (triptans) and emerging (calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists) acute therapies in those using a calcitonin gene-related peptide mAb will require further study.

Objective This study aimed to identify the essential content and amount of information to be collected from people with migraine via a patient‐facing smartphone‐based migraine tracker for them to share with clinicians during live discussions to assist in optimizing migraine management. The proposed tracker is intended for use in non‐interventional research to evaluate disease burden in episodic migraine and chronic migraine patients as assessed by demographic and clinical characteristics and health resource utilization in an integrated delivery network setting. The proposed tracker is not intended for commercial purposes. Background Epidemiological studies suggest migraine is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Studies of patient‐clinician interactions suggest that effective medical communication may help address these issues. Methods Four migraine practice leaders, an epidemiologist with extensive migraine experience, and a measurement expert took part in a modified Delphi panel process to identify data elements that could be collected from people with migraine through a smartphone‐based migraine tracker. Importantly, the proposed tracker would not be intended to replace the patient‐clinician encounter but to support the encounter through enabling the patient to document migraine symptoms and experiences in a timely and accurate manner for sharing with a clinician as part of a broader face‐to‐face discussion. The panel reviewed questions derived from the existing migraine diaries in the public domain, those used in clinical trials, and patient‐centric surveys assessing the impact of migraine on physical function and other related concepts. Key considerations included identification of the most clinically useful data elements for a shared communication tool for people with migraine under the care of a clinician. The panel also identified numerous functionality requirements for such a tool and provided recommendations on the most effective way to present results to a clinician. Results The expert panel opined that people with migraine may value the ability to capture a relatively broad range of information for their own migraine‐tracking purposes, while clinicians will likely find greater value in a small set of data relevant to the management of migraine. The panel identified the 3 most essential concepts in categories of data for a clinician, for which they coined the term “The 3 Fs”: F requency of days with headache; F requency of acute medication usage; and F unctional impairment. Information on the frequency of days with headache was felt to combine with the information on the frequency of acute medication usage to provide essential insights into current migraine management strategy and its outcomes, and to assist considerations of preventive measures. Functional impairment was treated as an effective surrogate for headache severity and was assessed based on the following: degree of difficulty in performing activities of daily living, impact on absenteeism (taking leave from work or cancelling/avoiding other activities) and presenteeism (performing work or other daily activities, with reduced productivity/capability), and amount of rest required as a result of a migraine attack. The modified Delphi panel process resulted in the selection of 13 questions in 8 categories to elicit sufficient and meaningful data comprising headache occurrence, symptoms, daily/preventive and as‐needed/acute medication usage, triggers, ability to concentrate, and functional impairment. The panel also agreed that the tracker should generate 2 distinct reports: one for people with migraine that would include a wider range of data about symptoms and perceived triggers, and a targeted report for the clinician that would place prime emphasis on the 3 Fs for aggregating the results of each headache occurrence and the trend over time. Conclusions A system that easily captures critical data elements about migraine, with specific feedback displays for patients to share with clinicians during live discussions, may offer some benefit to people with migraine and their clinicians by facilitating more objective communication and optimizing management. The tracker’s output may enable people with migraine to track a wide range of data for their own purposes, allowing them to better understand their condition, while a synthesized view of the selected data may support more informed clinical decision‐making for the clinician and individualized, evidence‐based discussion with the patient. As a result, this shared decision‐making tool may enable patients to more accurately convey essential migraine information during live patient‐clinician discussions to drive improved management and patient outcomes.