Methodological issues in clinical trials of drug and behavior therapies

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Pediatric Headache and Migraine: Why to Prescribe and What New Research Is Critical for Advancing Integrated Biobehavioral Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight current evidence supporting the prescription of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) as part of first-line preventive treatment for children and adolescents with headache and discuss a research strategy aimed at: (1) understanding how and why CBT works, and (2) developing effective and efficient approaches for integrating CBT into headache specialty, neurology, and primary care settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although preventive medications for pediatric headache and migraine are commonly prescribed, recent meta-analyses and an NIH-funded, multi-center clinical trial suggests that the effect of pill-taking therapies may be mostly due to a placebo effect. These findings have led to greater consideration of prescription of non-pharmacological therapies as first-line interventions (either alone or in combination with pill-based therapy). A literature that extends back to the 1980s and includes recent clinical trials and meta-analyses demonstrates that CBT decreases headache frequency and related disability in youth with headache and migraine and has a favorable benefit to risk profile with almost no negative side effects.

SUMMARY

CBT has been repeatedly demonstrated as effective in treating pediatric headache and migraine. As such, it should be considered as part of first-line preventive treatment for pediatric headache (either alone or in combination with a pill-based therapy). We need to better understand how this therapy works and what makes it distinct (if anything) from the placebo effect. What we need to achieve is empirical support for efficient access to this evidence-based treatment and clarity on how to match the intensity of non-pharmacological intervention to the needs of our patients at the time they present for care.

Treatment Adherence in Child and Adolescent Chronic Migraine Patients: Results From the Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Amitriptyline Trial

OBJECTIVES

To examine treatment adherence among children and adolescents with chronic migraine who volunteered to be in a clinical trial using 3 measures: treatment session attendance, therapy homework completion, and preventive medication use by daily diary.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analyses are secondary from a trial of 135 youth aged 10 to 17 years diagnosed with chronic migraine and with a Pediatric Migraine Disability Score over 20. Participants were randomly assigned to cognitive-behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline (CBT+A, N=64) or headache education plus amitriptyline (HE+A, N=71). Therapists recorded session attendance. Completion of homework/practice between sessions was reported to therapists by patients. Patients reported preventive medication adherence using a daily headache diary.

RESULTS

Mean session attendance adherence out of 10 treatment sessions was 95% for CBT+A and 99% for HE+A. CBT+A participants reported completing a mean of 90% of home practice of CBT skills between the 10 sessions. Participants reported taking amitriptyline daily at a mean level of 90% when missing diaries were excluded and 79% when missing diaries were considered as missed doses of medication.

DISCUSSION

Our findings demonstrate that youth with chronic migraine who agree to be a part of a clinical trial do quite well at attending therapy sessions, and report that they are adherent to completing home/practice between sessions and taking medication. These results lend further support to consideration of CBT+A as a first-line treatment for youth with chronic migraine and suggest that measurement of adherence when this treatment is provided in practice will be important.

Trajectory of Improvement in Children and Adolescents With Chronic Migraine: Results From the Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Amitriptyline Trial

We compared headache frequency trajectories between clinical trial participants who received cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and amitriptyline (CBT+A) or headache education (HE) and amitriptyline (HE+A) to determine if there was a differential time course of treatment response between the groups. One hundred thirty-five patients (age 10-17 years) diagnosed with chronic migraine participated, attending 8 one-hour one-on-one CBT or HE sessions with a trained psychologist for 8 weekly sessions, 2 sessions at weeks 12 and 16, and a post-treatment visit at week 20. Participants kept daily headache diaries and completed take-home assignments between visits. Data from daily headache diaries are presented for each day and according to 28-day periods. Trajectories of improvement indicate initial decrease in headache days began during the first month of treatment, for both groups, and continued to decrease throughout treatment. The CBT+A group had greater daily improvement than the HE+A group. A significantly greater proportion of the CBT+A group had a ≥50% reduction in headache days each month, and a significantly greater proportion of the CBT+A group had ≤4 headache days per month in months 3 through 5. Results indicate the trajectory of decrease in headache days is significantly better for patients receiving CBT+A versus HE+A.

PERSPECTIVE

This article presents daily information about headache frequency over a 20-week clinical trial. Youth with chronic migraine who received CBT+A improved faster than those in the control group. Findings provide clinicians with evidence-based expectations for treatment response over time and ways of monitoring treatment success.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00389038.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy plus Amitriptyline for Children and Adolescents with Chronic Migraine Reduces Headache Days to ≤4 Per Month

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this secondary analysis of results from a previously published trial (Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT00389038) in chronic migraine in children and adolescents was to examine if participants who received cognitive behavioral therapy and amitriptyline reached a greater level of reduction in headache frequency that no longer indicated a recommendation for preventive treatment as compared to those who received headache education and amitriptyline.

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine negatively affects children's home, school, and social activities. Preventive medication therapy is suggested for 5 or more headaches per month. Reduction to one headache day per week or less may suggest that preventive treatment is no longer indicated and provide a clinically relevant outcome for treatment efficacy and patient care.

METHODS

Randomized study participants (N = 135) kept a daily record of their headache frequency during 20 weeks of treatment and during a 1 year follow-up period. Baseline headache frequency was determined at the end of a 28 day screening period. Post treatment frequency was determined at 20 weeks (N = 128 completed) and post treatment follow-up was measured 12 months later (N = 124 completed). A chi-square test of independence was conducted by treatment group and by time point to determine group differences in the proportion of headache days experienced.

RESULTS

At 20 weeks (post treatment), 47% of the cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline group had ≤4 headache days per month compared to 20% of the headache education plus amitriptyline group, (P = .0011), and 32% of the cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline group had ≤3 headache days per month at 20 weeks compared to 16% of the headache education plus amitriptyline group, (P = .0304). At the month 12 follow-up, 72% of the cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline group had ≤4 headache days per month compared to 52% of the headache education plus amitriptyline group, (P = .0249), and 61% of the cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline group had ≤3 headache days per month at their month 12 follow-up compared to 40% of the headache education plus amitriptyline group, (P = .0192).

CONCLUSIONS

Participants who received cognitive behavioral therapy and amitriptyline were more likely than participants who received headache education plus amitriptyline to reach the clinically meaningful outcome of less than or equal to 4 headache days per month at both time points. These results may help inform what treatment outcomes are possible for children and adolescents suffering from chronic migraine and provides further evidence for behavioral treatment to be considered as a key part of a first line treatment regimen.

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.

Cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline for chronic migraine in children and adolescents: a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE

Early, safe, effective, and durable evidence-based interventions for children and adolescents with chronic migraine do not exist.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the benefits of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) when combined with amitriptyline vs headache education plus amitriptyline.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized clinical trial of 135 youth (79% female) aged 10 to 17 years diagnosed with chronic migraine (≥15 days with headache/month) and a Pediatric Migraine Disability Assessment Score (PedMIDAS) greater than 20 points were assigned to the CBT plus amitriptyline group (n = 64) or the headache education plus amitriptyline group (n = 71). The study was conducted in the Headache Center at Cincinnati Children's Hospital between October 2006 and September 2012; 129 completed 20-week follow-up and 124 completed 12-month follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

Ten CBT vs 10 headache education sessions involving equivalent time and therapist attention. Each group received 1 mg/kg/d of amitriptyline and a 20-week end point visit. In addition, follow-up visits were conducted at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary end point was days with headache and the secondary end point was PedMIDAS (disability score range: 0-240 points; 0-10 for little to none, 11-30 for mild, 31-50 for moderate, >50 for severe); both end points were determined at 20 weeks. Durability was examined over the 12-month follow-up period. Clinical significance was measured by a 50% or greater reduction in days with headache and a disability score in the mild to none range (<20 points).

RESULTS

At baseline, there were a mean (SD) of 21 (5) days with headache per 28 days and the mean (SD) PedMIDAS was 68 (32) points. At the 20-week end point, days with headache were reduced by 11.5 for the CBT plus amitriptyline group vs 6.8 for the headache education plus amitriptyline group (difference, 4.7 [95% CI, 1.7-7.7] days; P = .002). The PedMIDAS decreased by 52.7 points for the CBT group vs 38.6 points for the headache education group (difference, 14.1 [95% CI, 3.3-24.9] points; P = .01). In the CBT group, 66% had a 50% or greater reduction in headache days vs 36% in the headache education group (odds ratio, 3.5 [95% CI, 1.7-7.2]; P < .001). At 12-month follow-up, 86% of the CBT group had a 50% or greater reduction in headache days vs 69% of the headache education group; 88% of the CBT group had a PedMIDAS of less than 20 points vs 76% of the headache education group. Measured treatment credibility and integrity was high for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among young persons with chronic migraine, the use of CBT plus amitriptyline resulted in greater reductions in days with headache and migraine-related disability compared with use of headache education plus amitriptyline. These findings support the efficacy of CBT in the treatment of chronic migraine in children and adolescents.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00389038.

Usual and unusual care: existing practice control groups in randomized controlled trials of behavioral interventions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of existing practice control groups in randomized controlled trials of behavioral interventions and the role of extrinsic health care services in the design and conduct of behavioral trials.

METHOD

Selective qualitative review.

RESULTS

Extrinsic health care services, also known as nonstudy care, have important but under-recognized effects on the design and conduct of behavioral trials. Usual care, treatment-as-usual, standard of care, and other existing practice control groups pose a variety of methodological and ethical challenges, but they play a vital role in behavioral intervention research.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the need for a scientific consensus statement on control groups in behavioral trials.

Nocebo is the enemy, not placebo. A meta-analysis of reported side effects after placebo treatment in headaches

The aim was to determine the magnitude of the nocebo (adverse effects following placebo administration) in clinical trials for primary headache disorders. We reviewed randomized, placebo-controlled studies for migraine, tension-type headache (TTH), and cluster headache treatments published between 1998 and 2009. The frequency of nocebo was estimated by the percentage of placebo-treated patients reporting at least one adverse side effect. The dropout frequency was estimated by the percentage of placebo-treated patients who discontinued the treatment due to intolerance. In studies of symptomatic treatment for migraine, the nocebo and dropout frequencies were 18.45% and 0.33%, but rose to 42.78% and 4.75% in preventative treatment studies. In trials for prevention of TTH, nocebo and dropout frequencies were 23.99% and 5.44%. For symptomatic treatment of cluster headache, the nocebo frequency was 18.67%. Nocebo is prevalent in clinical trials for primary headaches, particularly in preventive treatment studies. Dropouts due to nocebo effect may confound the interpretation of many clinical trials.

Tension-type headache and psychiatric comorbidity

Much of the contemporary literature on headache disorders focuses on migraine headaches, despite the fact that tension-type headache (TTH) is highly prevalent and can be as debilitating as migraines. This article reviews the current literature on prevalence rates of psychiatric disorders in TTH populations, psychologic factors associated with TTH, and psychiatric disorders and their relationships with treatment outcomes in TTH. Key conclusions of this review include 1) prevalence rates of TTH vary across clinical and population-based samples; 2) greater TTH chronicity is associated with increased affective distress; 3) Axis II personality disorders may play an important role in TTH prevalence rates and psychologic functioning but have been understudied to date; and 4) maladaptive coping is common in persons with TTH.

Medication-overuse headache: Description, treatment, and relapse prevention

Medication-overuse headache (MOH) has increasingly become a focus within the field of headache. The biologic and physiopathologic origin for MOH likely resides in receptor physiology, but it also is probable that the initiation and sustaining dynamics of this pathologic condition involve several other factors. Not all patients with frequent headache eventually overuse their medications, but when it happens (the percentage is approximately 1%), the diagnosis of MOH is clinically important because patients rarely respond to preventive medications while overusing acute medications. Properly treating medication overuse and preventing relapse require recognition of the different factors that contribute to its development and perpetuation, including some behaviors and psychologic elements that are important in sustaining the overuse of medication. The problem regarding the diagnosis, the classification, and clinical aspects of MOH is reviewed in this article. The different therapeutic approaches, initial outcomes, and long-term durability of treatment also are discussed.

Pharmacoprophylaxis of tension-type headache

Although tension-type headache typically is not as disabling as migraine, its chronic form may significantly impair patients' functional ability. The pathogenesis of tension-type headache remains largely unknown. Compared with migraine, tension-type headache is the object of much less research. For a number of years, research on headache therapy has vastly emphasized migraine. Even cluster headache, which is far less frequent than tension-type headache, has been subject to more therapeutic trials than tension-type headache. Therefore, it is not surprising that since the advent of studies (as early as 1964) on amitriptyline, which remains a pivotal treatment choice, the number of emerging treatments for this condition remains scarce, even in 2005. This emphasizes the need for renewed interest in this field. However, alternate treatment approaches, such as botulinum toxin injections, albeit controversial, have renewed hopes lately. In addition, recent progress in the understanding of tension-type headache pathophysiology, such as the role of peripheral and central sensitization, has revived interest in the field. This is a review of available, proven, or suspected prophylactic therapies for tension-type headache.

Behavioral headache research: methodologic considerations and research design alternatives

Behavioral headache treatments have garnered solid empirical support in recent years, but there is substantial opportunity to strengthen the next generation of studies with improved methods and consistency across studies. Recently, Guidelines for Trials of Behavioral Treatments for Recurrent Headache were published to facilitate the production of high-quality research. The present article compliments the guidelines with a discussion of methodologic and research design considerations. Since there is no research design that is applicable in every situation, selecting an appropriate research design is fundamental to producing meaningful results. Investigators in behavioral headache and other areas of research consider the developmental phase of the research, the principle objectives of the project, and the sources of error or alternative interpretations in selecting a design. Phases of clinical trials typically include pilot studies, efficacy studies, and effectiveness studies. These trials may be categorized as primarily pragmatic or explanatory. The most appropriate research designs for these different phases and different objectives vary on such characteristics as sample size and assignment to condition, types of control conditions, periods or frequency of measurement, and the dimensions along which comparisons are made. A research design also must fit within constraints on available resources. There are a large number of potential research designs that can be used and considering these characteristics allows selection of appropriate research designs.

Guidelines for Trials of Behavioral Treatments for Recurrent Headache, First Edition: American Headache Society Behavioral Clinical Trials Workgroup

Guidelines for design of clinical trials evaluating behavioral headache treatments were developed to facilitate production of quality research evaluating behavioral therapies for management of primary headache disorders. These guidelines were produced by a Workgroup of headache researchers under auspices of the American Headache Society. The guidelines are complementary to and modeled after guidelines for pharmacological trials published by the International Headache Society, but they address methodologic considerations unique to behavioral and other nonpharmacological treatments. Explicit guidelines for evaluating behavioral headache therapies are needed as the optimal methodology for behavioral (and other nonpharmacologic) trials necessarily differs from the preferred methodology for drug trials. In addition, trials comparing and integrating drug and behavioral therapies present methodological challenges not addressed by guidelines for pharmacologic research. These guidelines address patient selection, trial design for behavioral treatments and for comparisons across multiple treatment modalities (eg, behavioral vs pharmacologic), evaluation of results, and research ethics. Although developed specifically for behavioral therapies, the guidelines may apply to the design of clinical trials evaluating many forms of nonpharmacologic therapies for headache.

Behavioral Headache Treatment: History, Review of the Empirical Literature, and Methodological Critique

Theoretical developments and burgeoning research on stress and illness in the mid-20th century yielded the foundations necessary to conceptualize headache as a psychophysiological disorder and eventually to develop and apply contemporary behavioral headache treatments. Over the past three decades, these behavioral headache treatments (relaxation training, biofeedback, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and stress-management training) have amassed a sizeable evidence base. Meta-analytic reviews of the literature consistently have shown behavioral interventions to yield 35% to 55% improvements in migraine and tension-type headache and that these outcomes are significantly superior to control conditions. The strength of the evidence has lead many professional practice organizations to recommend use of behavioral headache treatments alongside pharmacologic treatments for primary headache. The present overview was prepared as a companion article to and intended to provide a background for the Guidelines for Trials of Behavioral Treatments for Recurrent Headache also published within this journal supplement. This article begins with a synopsis of key historical developments leading to our current conceptualization of migraine and tension-type headache as psychophysiological disorders amenable to behavioral intervention. The evolution of the behavioral headache literature is discussed, exemplified by publication trends in the journal Headache. Leading empirically-based behavioral headache interventions are described, and meta-analytic reviews examining the migraine and tension-type headache literatures are summarized, compared, and contrasted. A critique of the methodological quality of the clinical trials literature is presented, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses in relation to recruitment and selection of patients, sample size and statistical power, the use of a credible control, and the reproducibility of the study interventions in clinical practice.