Acute withdrawal and botulinum toxin A in chronic migraine with medication overuse: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT: Botulinum toxin A (BTA) is widely used as treatment of chronic migraine. Efficacy in studies, however, was only modest and likely influenced by unblinding due to BTA-induced removal of forehead wrinkles. Moreover, most study participants were overusing acute headache medications and might have benefitted from withdrawal. We assessed in a double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial whether add-on therapy with BTA enhances efficacy of acute withdrawal. Participants were enrolled between December 2012 and February 2015, with follow-up to January 2016, in a single academic hospital in the Netherlands. A total of 179 participants, male and female, aged 18-65, diagnosed with chronic migraine and overuse of acute headache medication were included. All participants were instructed to withdraw acutely from all medication for a 12-week period, in an outpatient setting. In addition, they were randomly assigned (1:1) to 31 injections with BTA (155 units) or placebo (saline); to prevent unblinding, placebo-treated participants received low doses of BTA (17.5 units in total) in the forehead, along with saline injections outside the forehead region. Primary endpoint was percentage change in monthly headache days from baseline to the last 4 weeks of double-blind treatment (Weeks 9-12). Among 179 randomized patients, 90 received BTA and 89 received placebo, and 175 (98%) completed the double-blind phase. All 179 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. BTA did not reduce monthly headache days versus placebo (-26.9% versus -20.5%; difference -6.4%; 95% confidence interval: -15.2 to 2.4; P = 0.15). Absolute changes in migraine days at 12 weeks for BTA versus placebo were -6.2 versus -7.0 (difference: 0.8; 95% confidence interval: -1.0 to 2.7; P = 0.38). Other secondary endpoints, including measures for disability and quality of life, did also not differ. Withdrawal was well tolerated and blinding was successful. Thus, in patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse, BTA does not afford any additional benefit over acute withdrawal alone. Acute withdrawal should be tried first before initiating more expensive treatment with BTA.
Project description:Fremanezumab is a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2?a) that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a key neuropeptide involved in the pathophysiology of migraine. Fremanezumab is approved for quarterly and monthly subcutaneous dosing for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The phase 3 clinical development program for fremanezumab aimed to evaluate the efficacy of this preventive treatment across different patient populations, including those with difficult-to-treat migraine. Two pivotal 12-week, phase 3, placebo-controlled studies investigated quarterly and monthly dosing of fremanezumab in participants with chronic migraine (HALO CM) and episodic migraine (HALO EM). The efficacy of fremanezumab was further explored in individuals with difficult-to-treat chronic or episodic migraine in the 12-week FOCUS study, which enrolled participants who had previously experienced an inadequate response to 2-4 pharmacological classes of migraine preventive medications. The long-term efficacy of fremanezumab was assessed in a 12-month long-term study (HALO LTS), which enrolled participants completing the 12-week HALO studies and new participants. Across these studies, treatment with fremanezumab dosed quarterly or monthly provided significant reductions in the frequency of migraine days, headache days of at least moderate severity, and migraine- and headache-related disability compared with placebo. Sustained improvements were seen with long-term fremanezumab treatment. Subgroup analyses of participants with difficult-to-treat migraine (those with comorbid depression, overuse of acute headache medications, and concomitant use of other migraine preventive medications) demonstrated the effectiveness of quarterly or monthly fremanezumab in these populations. Ongoing studies are further exploring the potential benefits of fremanezumab in difficult-to-treat migraine and other headache and pain disorders.
Project description:Objective: Assessing the effects of caffeine withdrawal on migraine. Background: The effects of caffeine withdrawal on migraineurs are at large unknown. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, crossover study (NCT03022838), designed to enroll 80 adults with episodic migraine and a daily consumption of 300-800 mg caffeine. Participants substituted their estimated dietary caffeine with either placebo capsules or capsulated caffeine tablets for 5 weeks before switching the comparators for 5 more weeks. Results: The study was terminated due to low recruitment. Ten subjects with a mean age of 46.3 ± 9.9 years, BMI of 24.9 ± 3.7, and a mean blood pressure of 134/83 ± 17/12 mmHg were enrolled. The average consumption of caffeine per day was 539 ± 196.3 mg. The average monthly headache days and migraine attack frequency at baseline was 11.5 ± 4.9 and 5.2 ± 1.2, respectively. At baseline Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was 5.8 ± 2.5 and HIT-6 was 62.8 ± 3.9. There were no differences in these or in parameters from actigraphy during the caffeine period compared with the placebo period. One subject withdrew just after entering the study. In the remaining nine, withdrawal triggered severe migraine attacks in seven, causing one more drop-out, and a typical caffeine withdrawal syndrome in two. Caffeine continuation did not trigger migraines, but one attack occurred in the wake of caffeine reintroduction. Conclusions: The study failed to answer how caffeine withdrawal affects migraineurs over time, but showed that abrupt withdrawal of caffeine is a potent trigger for migraine attacks.
Project description:To compare the efficacy of ketorolac nasal spray (NS) vs. placebo and sumatriptan NS for the acute treatment of migraine.This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo and active-comparator, crossover study. Adult migraineurs were randomized to ketorolac NS 31.5 mg, sumatriptan NS 20 mg, or placebo to treat three moderate to severe migraine attacks and switched treatments with each attack. Patients seeking headache care at a headache center or in response to community advertisement were recruited. Adult participants with episodic migraine who experienced ?2 migraine attacks per month were eligible for the Ketorolac vs. Sumatriptan vs. Placebo Nasal Spray migraine study. Participants were randomized to treatment arms by a research pharmacist, in a 1:1:1 ratio using computer-generated lists. The primary outcome was 2-hour pain relief. Secondary outcomes included 2-hour pain freedom and absence of migraine associated symptoms, and 24-hour sustained pain relief and pain freedom.Of the 72 randomized participants, 54 (75%) treated at least one attack and 49 (68%) completed all three treatments, for a total of 152 treated migraine attacks. Both ketorolac NS (72.5%, P?<?.001) and sumatriptan NS (69.4%, P?=?.001) were more effective than placebo (38.3%) for 2-hour pain relief and 2-hour pain freedom (ketorolac: 43.1%, P?=?.004; sumatriptan: 36.7%, P?=?.046; placebo: 18.4%). Ketorolac NS, but not sumatriptan NS, was more effective than placebo in 2-hour absence of nausea. Both ketorolac NS and sumatriptan NS were more effective than placebo for 24-hour sustained pain relief (ketorolac: 49%, P?<?.001; sumatriptan: 31%, P?=?.01, placebo: 20%). Only ketorolac NS was superior to placebo for 24-hour (ketorolac: 35.3%, P?=?.003; sumatriptan: 22.4%, P?=?.18, placebo: 12.2%) sustained pain freedom. Nasal burning and dysgeusia were the most common adverse effects for active treatments.This study supports that ketorolac NS is superior to placebo and that it is non-inferior to sumatriptan NS for the acute abortive treatment of migraine.
Project description:Importance:Migraine is a disabling neurological disease characterized by severe headache attacks. Treatment options reduce migraine frequency for many patients, but adverse effects lead to discontinuation in many patients. Objective:To demonstrate that galcanezumab is superior to placebo in the prevention of episodic migraine with or without aura. Design, Setting, and Participants:The EVOLVE-1 (Evaluation of LY2951742 in the Prevention of Episodic Migraine 1) trial was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled (January 11, 2016, to March 22, 2017) trial comparing galcanezumab (120 mg and 240 mg) vs placebo. Patients received treatments once monthly for 6 months (subcutaneous injection via prefilled syringe) and were followed up for 5 months after their last injection. It was a multicenter, clinic-based study involving 90 sites in North America. Participants in the study were adults (aged 18 to 65 years) with at least a 1-year history of migraine, 4 to 14 migraine headache days per month and a mean of at least 2 migraine attacks per month within the past 3 months, and were diagnosed prior to age 50 years. During the study, no other preventive medications were allowed. A total of 1671 patients were assessed; 809 did not meet study entry or baseline criteria, and 858 were included in the intent-to-treat population. Interventions:Patients were randomized (2:1:1) to monthly placebo, galcanezumab, 120 mg, and galcanezumab, 240 mg. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was overall mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days during the treatment period. Secondary measures included at least 50%, at least 75%, and 100% reduction in monthly migraine headache days, migraine headache days with acute medication use, and scores from the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire, Patient Global Impression of Severity, and Migraine Disability Assessment. Treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events were reported. Results:Of the 1671 patients assessed, 858 (mean age, 40.7 years; 718 women [83.7%]) met study entry criteria and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. The primary objective was met for both galcanezumab doses; treatment with galcanezumab significantly reduced monthly migraine headache days (both P < .001) by 4.7 days (120 mg) and 4.6 days (240 mg) compared with placebo (2.8 days). All key secondary objectives were also significant after multiplicity adjustment. There were no meaningful differences between 120-mg and 240-mg doses of galcanezumab on measures of efficacy. Completion rate during treatment was high (81.9%; n = 718), and the incidence of discontinuation owing to adverse events was less than 5% across all treatment groups. Conclusions and Relevance:Galcanezumab 120-mg and 240-mg monthly injections provided clinical benefits and improved functioning. The incidence rate of adverse events was low, demonstrating the favorable tolerability profile of galcanezumab. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02614183.
Project description:Cilostazol is an inhibitor of phosphodiesterase 3 and thus causes accumulation of cAMP. It induces migraine-like attacks in migraine patients. Whether the cilostazol model responds to sumatriptan in migraine patients and therefore is valid for testing of future anti-migraine medications has never been investigated.In a cross-over study, 30 patients received cilostazol (200 mg p.o.) on two separate days each day followed by oral self-administered placebo or sumatriptan 50 mg. We recorded headache characteristics and associated symptoms using a questionnaire. The 30 participants were asked to subsequently treat their spontaneous attacks with sumatriptan (50 mg) or placebo in a double-blind cross-over design and 15 participants did so.Cilostazol induced headache with some migraine characteristics in all participants; 18 patients on the sumatriptan day and 19 patients on the placebo day fulfilled criteria for a migraine-like attack. The difference in median headache intensity between sumatriptan and placebo at 2 h was not significant (p?=?0.09), but it was at 4 h (p?=?0.017). During spontaneous attacks, the difference between placebo and sumatriptan was not significant at 2 h (p?=?0.26), but it was highly significant at 4 h (p?=?0.006).The cilostazol model in migraine patients could not be validated by a sufficient sumatriptan response. The model may perhaps respond to new drugs that act intracellularly or directly on ion channels.The study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02486276 ).
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Melatonin has been studied in headache disorders. Amitriptyline is efficacious for migraine prevention, but its unfavourable side effect profile limits its use. METHODS:A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out. Men and women, aged 18-65 years, with migraine with or without aura, experiencing 2-8 attacks per month, were enrolled. After a 4-week baseline phase, 196 participants were randomised to placebo, amitriptyline 25?mg or melatonin 3?mg, and 178 took a study medication and were followed for 3?months (12?weeks). The primary outcome was the number of migraine headache days per month at baseline versus last month. Secondary end points were responder rate, migraine intensity, duration and analgesic use. Tolerability was also compared between groups. RESULTS:Mean headache frequency reduction was 2.7 migraine headache days in the melatonin group, 2.2 for amitriptyline and 1.1 for placebo. Melatonin significantly reduced headache frequency compared with placebo (p=0.009), but not to amitriptyline (p=0.19). Melatonin was superior to amitriptyline in the percentage of patients with a greater than 50% reduction in migraine frequency. Melatonin was better tolerated than amitriptyline. Weight loss was found in the melatonin group, a slight weight gain in placebo and significantly for amitriptyline users. CONCLUSIONS:Melatonin 3?mg is better than placebo for migraine prevention, more tolerable than amitriptyline and as effective as amitriptyline 25?mg.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Approximately 1.4%-2.2% of the global population suffers from chronic migraine. Acupuncture may serve as an alternative management for chronic migraine, where pharmacological prophylaxis is not suitable. However, the effects of acupuncture as migraine prophylaxis have not been confirmed. This study is designed as a single-blinded, double-dummy randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture compared with topiramate in patients with chronic migraine. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A total of 60 participants will be randomly assigned to two different groups. Participants will receive verum acupuncture and placebo medicine in the treatment group, while participants in the control group will be treated with sham acupuncture and real medicine (topiramate). All participants will receive a 12-week treatment and then be followed up for another 12 weeks. The primary outcome is the reduction of monthly headache days, and the secondary outcomes include the reduction of the number of days with acute headache medications, and changes of Migraine Disability Assessment, Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, Headache Impact Test, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-trait, and Beck Depression Inventory-II scores from baseline to endpoints. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval of this study was granted by the Research Ethical Committee of Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University (2017BL-045-01). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Outcomes of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN13563102; Pre-results.
Project description:Introduction:Daily oral beta-adrenoreceptor antagonist has been shown to be effective in preventing migraine headaches. Timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution is a non-selective beta-adrenoreceptor antagonist, where the primary use is for glaucoma. There have been case reports that timolol is effective in aborting or improving an acute migraine headache. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy (decrease of ? 50% in pain scale at 120 minutes) of timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution compared to placebo in acute treatment of migraine headache. Methods:We performed a randomized, double-blind, crossover, placebo-controlled, study. Study entry criteria required subjects to have one to eight migraine episodes per month. The primary outcome was comparison of the change in a visual analog pain scale (VAS) at 120 minutes after taking the study medication. Study subjects were given a pain scale with a range of 1 (no pain) to 10 (most severe pain) to complete after onset of migraine but before administration of study drops and 120 minutes after administration of study drops. Improvement was defined as a ? 50% decrease in pain scale. Results:Nineteen subjects completed the study and were used for analysis. The primary outcome changes in pain scale, 120 minutes after dose, showed a similar decrease for placebo and drug with a slightly wider 95% CI for placebo. Six subjects in each arm experienced a ? 50% decrease in pain scale. Conclusion:These results support that timolol 0.5% ophthalmic solution is not an efficacious treatment for acute migraine headache.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the efficacy of ubrogepant on patient-reported functional disability, satisfaction with study medication, and global impression of change. BACKGROUND:Ubrogepant is a small-molecule, oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute treatment of migraine. In 2 phase 3 trials (ACHIEVE I and II), ubrogepant demonstrated efficacy vs placebo on the 2 co-primary endpoints of headache pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours post dose for the 50 and 100 mg doses. Patient-reported outcomes, such as functional disability, satisfaction, and patient global impression of change, can provide additional evidence of the efficacy of an acute treatment for migraine on clinically meaningful and patient-relevant outcomes. METHODS:ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II were multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-attack trials in adults (18-75 years) with migraine. In ACHIEVE I, participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant 50 or 100 mg; in ACHIEVE II, participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant 25 or 50 mg to treat a migraine attack with moderate or severe headache pain. Participants rated ability to perform daily activities on the Functional Disability Scale, before dosing and at 1, 2, 4, and 8 hours after the initial dose; satisfaction with study medication at 2 and 24 hours; and impression of overall change in migraine on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale at 2 hours. In prespecified analyses for each trial, each outcome was compared between each ubrogepant dose group and the relevant placebo group. Data were pooled from the ubrogepant 50 mg and placebo groups of the 2 trials in a post hoc analysis. RESULTS:In ACHIEVE I, 559 participants were randomized to placebo, 556 to ubrogepant 50 mg, and 557 to ubrogepant 100 mg; in ACHIEVE II, 563 were randomized to placebo, 561 to ubrogepant 25 mg, and 562 to ubrogepant 50 mg. At 2 hours post dose, significantly higher proportions of ubrogepant-treated participants vs placebo-treated participants reported being able to function normally (ACHIEVE I: ubrogepant 50 mg, 40.6% [171/421], P = .0012 vs placebo; ubrogepant 100 mg, 42.9% [192/448], P < .0001 vs placebo; placebo, 29.8% [136/456]; ACHIEVE II: ubrogepant 25 mg, 42.6% [185/434], P = .0015 vs placebo; ubrogepant 50 mg, 40.5% [188/464], P = .0118 vs placebo; placebo, 34.2% [156/456]; pooled 50 mg, 40.6% [359/885], vs pooled placebo, 32.0% [292/912]; P < .0001), were satisfied/extremely satisfied with study medication (ACHIEVE I: 50 mg, 36.3% [147/405], P < .0001 vs placebo; 100 mg, 35.8% [149/416], P = .0002 vs placebo; placebo, 24.1% [104/432]; ACHIEVE II: 25 mg, 35.1% [141/402], P = .0018 vs placebo; 50 mg, 37.8% [163/431], P < .0001 vs placebo; placebo, 24.8% [106/427]; pooled ubrogepant 50 mg, 37.1% [310/836], vs pooled placebo, 24.5% [210/859]; P < .0001), and indicated that their migraine was much/very much better on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale (ACHIEVE I: 50 mg, 34.4% [103/299], P = .0006 vs placebo; 100 mg, 34.3% [102/297], P = .0009 vs placebo; placebo, 22.0% [69/313]; ACHIEVE II: 25 mg, 34.1% [124/364], P < .0001 vs placebo; 50 mg, 33.4% [131/392], P = .0002 vs placebo; placebo, 20.7% [78/376]; pooled 50 mg, 33.9% [234/691], vs pooled placebo, 21.3% [147/689]; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS:A significantly higher proportion of participants treated with ubrogepant were able to function normally, were satisfied with the study medication, and reported clinically meaningful improvement compared with those receiving placebo. The results reinforce the potential benefits of ubrogepant on patient-centered outcomes in the acute treatment of migraine.
Project description:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of AVP-825, a drug-device combination of low-dose sumatriptan powder (22 mg loaded dose) delivered intranasally through a targeted Breath Powered device vs an identical device containing lactose powder (placebo device) in the treatment of migraine headache.Early treatment of migraine headaches is associated with improved outcome, but medication absorption after oral delivery may be delayed in migraineurs because of reduced gastric motility. Sumatriptan powder administered with an innovative, closed-palate, Bi-Directional, Breath Powered intranasal delivery mechanism is efficiently absorbed across the nasal mucosa and produces fast absorption into the circulation. Results from a previously conducted placebo-controlled study of AVP-825 showed a high degree of headache relief with an early onset of action (eg, 74% AVP-825 vs 38% placebo device at 1 hour, P<.01).In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in adults with a history of migraine with or without aura, participants were randomized via computer-generated lists to AVP-825 or placebo device to treat a single migraine headache of moderate or severe intensity. The primary endpoint was headache relief (defined as reduction of headache pain intensity from severe or moderate migraine headache to mild or none) at 2 hours post-dose.Two hundred and thirty patients (116 AVP-825 and 114 placebo device) were randomized, of whom 223 (112 and 111, respectively) experienced a qualifying migraine headache (their next migraine headache that reached moderate or severe intensity). A significantly greater proportion of AVP-825 patients reported headache relief at 2 hours post-dose compared with those using the placebo device (68% vs 45%, P=.002, odds ratio 2.53, 95% confidence interval [1.45, 4.42]). Between-group differences in headache relief were evident as early as 15 minutes, reached statistical significance at 30 minutes post-dose (42% vs 27%, P=.03), and were sustained at 24 hours (44% vs 24%, P=.002) and 48 hours (34% vs 20%, P=.01). Thirty-four percent of patients treated with AVP-825 were pain-free at 2 hours compared with 17% using the placebo device (P=.008). More AVP-825 patients reported meaningful pain relief (patient interpretation) of migraine within 2 hours of treatment vs placebo device (70% vs 45%, P<.001), and fewer required rescue medication (37% vs 52%, P=.02). Total migraine freedom (patients with no headache, nausea, phonophobia, photophobia, or vomiting) reached significance following treatment with AVP-825 at 1 hour (19% vs 9%; P=.04). There were no serious adverse events (AEs), and no systemic AEs occurred in more than one patient. Chest pain or pressure was not reported, and only one patient taking AVP-825 reported mild paresthesia. No other triptan sensations were reported.Targeted delivery of a low-dose of sumatriptan powder via a novel, closed-palate, Breath Powered, intranasal device (AVP-825) provided fast relief of moderate or severe migraine headache in adults that reached statistical significance over placebo by 30 minutes. The treatment was well tolerated with a low incidence of systemic AEs.