Migraine prophylactic medication usage patterns in The Netherlands

[Botulinum toxin type A (Relatox) in the treatment of chronic migraine in adults: results of phase IIIb, randomized, one-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, parallel-group trial]

OBJECTIVE

To access the efficacy and safety of the first Russian botulinum toxin type A (Relatox) as a headache prophylaxis in adult with chronic migraine (CM).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The randomized, one-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, parallel-group trial study involved 209 patients with CM aged from 19 to 65 years. The patients were randomized to injections of the Russian botulinum toxin type A - Relatox (n=101) or onabotulinumtoxinA injections - Botox (n=108). The duration of the study was 16 weeks, which included five visits of patients every 4 weeks. Relatox and Botox were injected once into seven muscle groups of the head and neck at a dose of 155-195 units. Primary efficacy variable was mean change from baseline in frequency of headache days after 12 weeks. Secondary efficacy variables were mean changes from the baseline to week 12 in frequency of migraine days, acute headache pain medication intakes days; headache intensity; proportion of patients achieving ≥50% reduction from baseline in headache days, the proportion of the patients with medication overuse, the proportion of the patients with severe (≥60) Headache Impact Test-6 score and with a severe (≥21) MIDAS score.

RESULTS

Analyses demonstrated a large mean decrease from baseline in frequency of headache days, without statistically significant between-group differences Relatox vs Botox at week 12 (-10.89 vs -10.06; p=0.365) and at other time points. Significant differences from baseline were also observed for all secondary efficacy variables at all time points without differences between the groups. The proportion of patients achieving ≥50% reduction from baseline in headache days was 75.0% and 70% in the Relatox and Botox groups, respectively (OR, CI 95% 1.58 [0.84; 3.02], p=0.155). Adverse events (AE) occurred in 15.8% of Relatox patients and 15.7% of Botox patients (p=1.000). No unexpected AE were identified.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate that the first Russian botulinum toxin type A (Relatox) is an effective prophylactic treatment for CM in adult patients. Relatox led to significant improvements from baseline in multiple measures of headache symptoms, headache-related disability and quality of life. For the first time, a comparative analysis of two botulinum toxin type A products in parallel groups showed no less (not inferior) efficacy and safety of Relatox relative to Botox in the treatment of CM in adults.

Preventive and Therapeutic Aspects of Migraine for Patient Care: An Insight

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common neurological condition marked by frequent mild to extreme headaches that last 4 to 72 hours. A migraine headache may cause a pulsing or concentrated throbbing pain in one part of the brain. Nausea, vomiting, excessive sensitivity to light and sound, smell, feeling sick, vomiting, painful headache, and blurred vision are all symptoms of migraine disorder. Females are more affected by migraines in comparison to males.

OBJECTIVE

The present review article summarizes preventive and therapeutic measures, including allopathic and herbal remedies for the treatment of migraine.

RESULTS

This review highlights the current aspects of migraine pathophysiology and covers an understanding of the complex workings of the migraine state. Therapeutic agents that could provide an effective treatment have also been discussed.

CONCLUSION

It can be concluded that different migraines could be treated based on their type and severity.

Single-Pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the preventive treatment of difficult-to-treat migraine: a 12-month prospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Initial evidence have shown the short-term efficacy of sTMS in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. It is unknown whether this treatment approach in the long-term is effective and well tolerated in difficult-to-treat migraine.

METHODS

This is a prospective, single centre, open-label, real-world analysis conducted in difficult-to-treat patients with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and chronic migraine (CM) with and without medication overuse headache (MOH), who were exposed to sTMS therapy. Patients responding to a three-month sTMS treatment, continued the treatment and were assessed again at month 12. The cut-off outcome for treatment continuation was reduction in the monthly moderate to severe headache days (MHD) of at least 30% (headache frequency responders) and/or a ≥ 4-point reduction in headache disability using the Headache Impact test-6 (HIT-6) (headache disability responders).

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-three patients were included in the analysis (F:M = 126:27, median age 43, IQR 32.3-56.8). At month 3, 93 out of 153 patients (60%) were responders to treatment. Compared to baseline, the median reduction in monthly headache days (MHD) for all patients at month 3 was 5.0 days, from 18.0 (IQR: 12.0-26.0) to 13.0 days (IQR: 5.75-24.0) (P = 0.002, r = - 0.29) and the median reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) was 4.0 days, from 13.0 (IQR: 8.75-22.0) to 9.0 (IQR: 4.0-15.25) (P = 0.002, r = - 0.29). Sixty-nine out of 153 patients (45%) reported a sustained response to sTMS treatment at month 12. The percentage of patients with MOH was reduced from 52% (N = 79/153) at baseline to 19% (N = 29/153) at month 3, to 8% (N = 7/87) at month 12. There was an overall median 4-point reduction in HIT-6 score, from 66 (IQR: 64-69) at baseline to 62 at month 3 (IQR: 56-65) (P < 0.001, r = - 0.51). A total of 35 mild/moderate adverse events were reported by 23 patients (15%). One patient stopped sTMS treatment due to scalp sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

This open label analysis suggests that sTMS may be an effective, well-tolerated treatment option for the long-term prevention of difficult-to-treat CM and HFEM.

Ergotamine Use and Overuse in Taiwan: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the pattern of ergotamine prescription and overuse in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND

Ergotamine is a frequently prescribed medication for the treatment of migraine, although excessive use may lead to medication-overuse headache.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study by using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database 2005 in Taiwan. Patients enrolled in the study were between the ages of 18 and 80 years, received at least two prescriptions of ergotamine, and follow-up for more than 1 year at outpatient clinics during 1999 to 2013. Each ergotamine prescription was converted into a defined daily dose (DDD) and patients were sorted into two groups: occasional users, having fewer than 3 consecutive months of use, and regular users, with 3 consecutive months of use or more. Regular users were further divided into overusers (DDDs ≥ 10 per month) and non-overusers.

RESULTS

A total of 41,023 migraine patients were enrolled in the study; 5803 patients were classified as regular users, with 859 of those being overusers. Of the ergotamine overusers, around 698/859 (82%) continued to use, and 443/859 (52%) remained overusers of ergotamine in the subsequent year after the index date. The most frequently prescribed prophylactic medications were propranolol and flunarizine, which were prescribed in 30.4% and 20.0% of overuse patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Ergotamine overuse remains common in Taiwan, while prophylactic medicine is still underutilized. More education on ergotamine-overuse headache is needed to improve awareness.

The Practice Pattern of Migraine Management among Neurologists in Taiwan

To assess the prevalence of migraine and the attitudes and practice patterns of Taiwanese neurologists regarding migraine management, we mailed the survey questionnaire to all of the actively practicing board-certified neurologists from the membership list of the Taiwan Neurological Association. Of the targeted 531 neurologists, 123 (23.2%) participated in this study. Thirty of the participants (27.6%) reported having migraine. Most neurologists (88.5%) felt that headache was an important part of their practice. Many neurologists (65.0%) used neuroim- aging to evaluate patients with severe headache and 44.7% used electroencephalography for headache evaluation. Many participants knew that combination analgesic was a common cause of medication-overuse headache, but did not know that ergotamine, acetaminophen and triptans were possible aetiologies of medication-overuse headache. Our study suggests that awareness of medication- overuse headache and the indications of neuroimaging should be stressed in Taiwan, and headache guidelines should be modified according to local factors.

Migraine in The Elderly: A Review

Although migraine is less prevalent in older than in younger age groups, the absolute increase in the number of subjects in older age groups may lead to an increase in the total number of migraine patients. Consequently, more elderly migraine patients may seek medical attention. In this review, the epidemiology and clinical aspects of migraine in the age group of ≥60 years are summarized, with special attention to comorbidity. The review will focus on treatment choices in elderly migraine patients. These must be based on knowledge of mechanisms of physiological and pathological ageing.

Treatment adherence in patients with headache: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review and critically evaluate the extant research literature pertaining to adherence in youth and adults with headache and to provide recommendations for future research.

BACKGROUND

This article provides the first systematic review of pediatric headache adherence and updates a previous review of treatment adherence in adults with headache.

DESIGN

Systematic review of empirical literature.

METHODS

A literature search with no date restriction was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO electronic databases and bibliographies of relevant articles.

RESULTS

Adherence rates in adults with headache range considerably from 25% to 94% across treatment, assessment method, and definition of adherence utilized. Methods to assess adherence included retrospective prescription claims data, paper or electronic diaries, follow-up appointment attendance, written and verbal self-report of general adherence, verbal self-report of adherence over a specific amount of time via in person interview or telephone, validated adherence measures, adherence questionnaires without validation, and counselor ratings of homework. Each methodology and assessment tool demonstrated strengths and weaknesses. No studies have systematically examined medication adherence in children with headache, and the few available studies examining adherence to behavioral treatment have documented adherence rates ranging from 52% to 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence research in adults with headache is growing, but studies demonstrate a number of methodological shortcomings. Adherence research in children with headache, and adherence intervention research in both adults and children, is scant. Future research should use objective measures of adherence, consider over-the-counter medications and medication overuse, examine demographic, psychological, and behavioral correlates of adherence, assess adherence to botulinum toxin type A, and examine the efficacy of adherence interventions in individuals with headache.

Preventive treatment for migraine in primary care, a population-based study in the Netherlands

Background

Preventive treatment of migraine contributes to reducing the impact of migraine but its extent of use in routine care is unknown.

Objective

The objective of this article is to assess current use, previous use, duration and course of preventive treatment of migraine in Dutch general practice.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study, for the period between 1997 and 2007, in the Interdisciplinary Processing of Clinical Information (IPCI) database, a GP research database in the Netherlands (source population of more than half a million subjects). All prevalent and incident migraine patients ( N = 7367) were included.

Results

About 13% of all migraine patients currently use preventive therapy and almost half of migraine patients have prior use. Of those starting with preventive treatment, 56% (95% CI: 54.3–64.7) still used it after nine months. There was a long delay between migraine diagnosis and preventive treatment start. Forty-four percent (95% CI 43.0–45.7) started preventive therapy in the study period.

Conclusion

This large primary-care database study shows that a limited number of patients are current users of preventive treatment, but many patients have prior use. After diagnosis there is often an extended time before preventive treatment is applied. Also there is often only one attempt. The continuation in time seems appropriate. Preventive therapy in migraine still deserves focus.

How general practitioners treat migraine patients—evaluation of a headache guideline

Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the pharmacological treatment of migraine patients by general practitioners before referral to a neurologist. First, was the pharmacological treatment in accordance with the Dutch College of General Practitioners headache guideline? Second, which migraine characteristics were associated with receiving migraine-specific medication?

Methods: Migraine patients (age ≥18 years) who visited the neurology outpatient clinic for the first time were included. Migraine characteristics and pharmacological status were collected retrospectively for each patient from the general practitioner’s referral letter, hospital record and a headache characteristics questionnaire.

Results: A total of 420 migraine patients were included. Only 18.3% of the patients with two or more migraine attacks per month were using prophylactic medication. Furthermore, only 11.7% of patients with symptoms of nausea and/or vomiting were using anti-emetic medication. More than half of patients (51.7%) were using triptans and were likely to have typical migraine symptoms and a long history of migraine.

Conclusions: Migraine prophylactic medication and anti-emetics are underutilized in the primary care setting for migraine patients in the Netherlands, when compared to the general practitioners guideline. It is important to enhance the knowledge of general practitioners regarding the diagnosis of migraine, and to increase awareness of the headache guideline.

Critical analysis of the use of onabotulinumtoxinA (botulinum toxin type A) in migraine

OnabotulinumtoxinA, a neurotoxin, has been studied in numerous trials as a novel preventive therapy for migraine headache. The data would support that it may be effective at reducing headache days in patients suffering from chronic migraine (≥15 headache days/month, with eight or more of those migraine headache days). The mechanism by which onabotulinumtoxinA exerts its effects on migraine is not yet understood. It is known to inhibit acetylcholine release at the neuromuscular junction, but this probably does not explain the observed antinociceptive properties noted in preclinical and clinical trials. This review will discuss the known mechanisms of action of botulinum toxin type A, and will review the available randomized, placebo-controlled trials that have looked at its efficacy as a migraine preventative. We also describe the onabotulinumtoxinA injection sites used at our institution.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: pooled results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phases of the PREEMPT clinical program

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX) as headache prophylaxis in adults with chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine is a prevalent, disabling, and undertreated neurological disorder. Few preventive treatments have been investigated and none is specifically indicated for chronic migraine.

METHODS

The 2 multicenter, pivotal trials in the PREEMPT: Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy clinical program each included a 24-week randomized, double-blind phase followed by a 32-week open-label phase (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT00156910, NCT00168428). Qualified patients were randomized (1:1) to onabotulinumtoxinA (155-195 U) or placebo injections every 12 weeks. Study visits occurred every 4 weeks. These studies were identical in design (eg, inclusion/exclusion criteria, randomization, visits, double-blind phase, open-label phase, safety assessments, treatment), with the only exception being the designation of the primary and secondary endpoints. Therefore, the predefined pooling of the results was justified and performed to provide a complete overview of between-group differences in efficacy, safety, and tolerability that may not have been evident in individual studies. The primary endpoint for the pooled analysis was mean change from baseline in frequency of headache days at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints were mean change from baseline to week 24 in frequency of migraine/probable migraine days, frequency of moderate/severe headache days, total cumulative hours of headache on headache days, frequency of headache episodes, frequency of migraine/probable migraine episodes, frequency of acute headache pain medication intakes, and the proportion of patients with severe (> or =60) Headache Impact Test-6 score at week 24. Results of the pooled analyses of the 2 PREEMPT double-blind phases are presented.

RESULTS

A total of 1384 adults were randomized to onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 688) or placebo (n = 696). Pooled analyses demonstrated a large mean decrease from baseline in frequency of headache days, with statistically significant between-group differences favoring onabotulinumtoxinA over placebo at week 24 (-8.4 vs -6.6; P < .001) and at all other time points. Significant differences favoring onabotulinumtoxinA were also observed for all secondary efficacy variables at all time points, with the exception of frequency of acute headache pain medication intakes. Adverse events occurred in 62.4% of onabotulinumtoxinA patients and 51.7% of placebo patients. Most patients reported adverse events that were mild to moderate in severity and few discontinued (onabotulinumtoxinA, 3.8%; placebo, 1.2%) due to adverse events. No unexpected treatment-related adverse events were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled PREEMPT results demonstrate that onabotulinumtoxinA is an effective prophylactic treatment for chronic migraine. OnabotulinumtoxinA resulted in significant improvements compared with placebo in multiple headache symptom measures, and significantly reduced headache-related disability and improved functioning, vitality, and overall health-related quality of life. Repeat treatments with onabotulinumtoxinA were safe and well tolerated.

Treatment of migraine and tension-type headache in Croatia

The aim of this study was to assess the treatment patterns of migraine and tension-type headache in the Croatian population. Analysis included the proportion of patients who were taking specific antimigraine therapy and the number of tablets per attack per month, the proportion of patients who were taking prophylactic therapy or using alternative treatment methods and their satisfaction with the treatment. The design of the study was a cross-sectional survey. Self-completed questionnaires were randomly distributed to adults >18 years of age in the Croatian population. A total of 616 questionnaires were analyzed: 115 patients with migraine (M), 327 patients with tension-type headache (TTH), and 174 patients with probable migraine (PM) and TTH. Specific antimigraine therapy was taken by half of patients with migraine: 35.7% of patients used triptans and 21.7% ergotamines. Prophylactic treatment had been used by 13.9% of M, 1.2% of TTH, and 6.9% of PM patients. Alternative methods of treatment were tried by 27% of M and TTH patients. Only 16.8% of patients with M pay regular visits to physicians, while 36.3% never visited a physician. More than half of TTH patients have never visited a physician. The majority of patients are only partially satisfied with their current treatment, and almost one-third are not satisfied. Results of this study indicate that the treatment of primary headaches in Croatia should be improved.

Persistence with migraine prophylactic treatment and acute migraine medication utilization in the managed care setting

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe persistence with migraine prophylactic treatment and acute migraine medication utilization in patients prescribed migraine prophylaxis.

METHODS

For this retrospective cohort study, the Health Core Integrated Research Database provided pharmacy/medical claims data from 5 commercial health insurance plans (ie, excluding Medicare and Medicaid) on adult patients with migraine. Eligible patients had >or=1 pharmacy claim for a migraine prophylactic medication between July 1, 2000, and May 31, 2005, and >or=12 U of any combination of acute treatment (serotonin receptor agonist [triptan], ergotamine, or ergotamine combination) dispensed during the 180-day period preceding a first pharmacy claim for a prophylactic medication (index date). The prophylactic medication identified at index date was used for categorizing patients into 1 of 4 cohorts: amitriptyline, propranolol/timolol, divalproex sodium, or topiramate (reference). Kaplan-Meier curves were used for evaluating unadjusted risk for discontinuation over time, and a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was developed to analyze factors associated with discontinuation of prophylactic medication.

RESULTS

A total of 12,783 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis (amitriptyline, 3749; propranolol/timolol, 2718; divalproex sodium, 1644; and topiramate, 4672). The mean (SD) ages were not significantly different across cohorts (43.9 [11.3], 42.0 [11.1], 43.1 [11.3], and 43.9 [10.6] years, respectively). The mean duration of treatment was significantly longer (131 [184] days) with topiramate compared with amitriptyline (94 [152] days), propranolol/ timolol (119 [180] days), and divalproex sodium (109 [158] days) (P < 0.001, P = 0.005, and P<0.001,respectively). The risks for discontinuing prophylactic treatment were 23%, 6%, and 11% higher with amitriptyline, propranolol/timolol, and divalproex sodium, respectively, compared with topiramate (P<0.001, P = 0.024, and P <0.001). Patients prescribed topiramate had a higher mean consumption rate of triptans preindex; postindex, decreases in triptan use were observed in all cohorts, although the magnitude of the decrease was greatest in patients prescribed topiramate compared with the other cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, prescription of topiramate was associated with greater persistence with prophylactic treatment than the other prophylactic drugs. Furthermore, greater reductions in acute treatment utilization, particularly triptans, were observed among patients prescribed topiramate compared with the other prophylactic cohorts.

Influence of disease features on adherence to prophylactic migraine medication

OBJECTIVES

Randomized controlled trials of prophylactic treatments for migraine focus on the effects in an ideal situation and underestimate the impact of non-adherence, which in this study was examined in a natural setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A sample of 174 adult migraineurs with a current prescription of pharmacological prophylaxis were consecutively recruited at a specialist clinic. Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyse the association between adherence (self-reported with the Medication Adherence Report Scale) and number of years with migraine, frequency of attacks, number of days with migraine per month, attack duration, presence of cardinal features, mean intensity of pain, and recovery between attacks.

RESULTS

One third (35%) were non-adherent. Neither demographic characteristics nor any of the disease specific variables were significantly associated with adherence.

CONCLUSION

Characteristics of the disease per se did not predict non-adherence which was also observed among patients with severe migraine. The full benefit of drugs cannot be realized at currently achieved levels of adherence.

Methods for evaluation of medication adherence and persistence using automated databases

PURPOSE

Our aim was to perform a systematic review of the methods currently being used to assess adherence and persistence in pharmacoepidemiological and pharmacoeconomic studies using automated databases.

METHODS

A MEDLINE search of English language literature was performed to identify studies published between January 1, 1980 and March 31, 2004 that evaluated adherence, compliance, persistence, switching, or discontinuations of medications using automated dispensing data (pharmacy records). Two study investigators independently reviewed the abstracts and articles to determine relevant studies according to specified criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 136 articles met the criteria for evaluation. The types of measures of adherence and persistence commonly reported include the medication possession ratio and related measures of medication availability (77 studies), discontinuation/continuation (58 studies), switching (34 studies), medication gaps (13 studies), refill compliance (7 studies), and retentiveness/turbulence (4 studies). Specific issues considered include the assessment of exposed time to drug therapy and specification of the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The terminology, definitions, and methods to determine adherence and persistence differ greatly in the published literature. The appropriateness and choice of the specific measure employed should be determined by the overall goals of the study, as well as the relative advantages and limitations of the measures.

Migraine: a review and future directions for treatment

Migraine is a chronic, neurological disorder generally manifesting itself in attacks with severe headache, nausea and an increased reactivity to sensory stimuli. A low migraine threshold is set by genetic factors, although the phenotype also modulates the manifestations. The 1-year prevalence is approximately 13% and is higher among women. Patients usually experience neuropsychological dysfunction, and sometimes also reversible focal neurological symptoms. The trajectories of the characteristic symptoms of acute migraine usually follow a similar time course, indicating a reciprocal underlying mechanism. A central nervous system hyperexcitability has been demonstrated in neurophysiological studies. The dibilitating effects of migraine are not confined to the attacks per se. Many individuals do not recover completely between the attacks and most report a negative impact on the most important life domains, and an interest in testing other treatments. Young persons have a higher frequency of attacks. Acute treatment should routinely be initiated with an analgesic plus a prokinetic anti-emetic. Triptans must not be provided early during the attack to ensure their efficacy. The natural course of attacks is commonly only temporarily altered by acute treatment. Non-pharmacological treatment and drugs may be equally viable in prophylaxis for migraine. In more complicated cases, conjoint therapy should be considered. New strategies to improve adherence with existing therapeutic regimens might yield greater benefits than will new pharmacological agents.