OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 1 trial

Preventive drug treatments for adults with chronic migraine: a systematic review with economic modelling

Background

Chronic migraine is a disabling condition, affecting 2-4% of adults globally. With the introduction of expensive calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, it is timely to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preventive drugs for chronic migraine.

Objective

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medications used for chronic migraine through systematic reviews and economic modelling.

Eligibility criteria

Randomised controlled trials of drug treatments for efficacy with > 100 participants with chronic migraine per arm; for adverse events > 100 participants with episodic or chronic migraine per arm. Previous economic analyses of preventive drugs for chronic migraine.

Data sources

Eight databases.

Reviews methods

Systematic reviews, network meta-analysis and economic modelling.

Outcomes

Monthly headache days, monthly migraine days, headache-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness.

Results

We found 51 individual articles, reporting 11 randomised controlled trials, testing 6 drugs (topiramate, Botox, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab), versus placebo, on 7352 adults with chronic migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, Botox and topiramate reduced headache/migraine days by 2.0-2.5, just under two, or by less than 1.5 days per month, respectively. In the network meta-analysis, eptinezumab 300 mg and fremanezumab monthly ranked in first place in both monthly headache day and monthly migraine day analyses. The calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies were consistently the best choices for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life. Topiramate was very unlikely to be the best choice for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life when compared to calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies or Botox. We found no trials of the commonly used drugs, such as propranolol or amitriptyline, to include in the analysis. The adverse events review included 40 randomised controlled trials with 25,891 participants; 3 additional drugs, amitriptyline, atogepant and rimegepant, were included. There were very few serious adverse events - none of which were linked to the use of these medications. Adverse events were common. Most people using some calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies reported injection site issues; and people using topiramate or amitriptyline had nervous system or gastrointestinal issues. The cost-effectiveness review identified 16 studies evaluating chronic migraine medications in adults. The newer, injected drugs are more costly than the oral preventatives, but they were cost-effective. Our economic model showed that topiramate was the least costly option and had the fewest quality-adjusted life-year gains, whereas eptinezumab 300 mg was more costly but generated the most quality-adjusted life-year gains. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showed that topiramate was the most cost-effective medication if the decision maker is willing to pay up to £50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Our consensus workshop brought together people with chronic migraine and headache experts. Consensus was reached on the top three recommendations for future research on medications to prevent chronic migraine: (1) calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and Botox versus calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, (2) candesartan versus placebo and (3) flunarizine versus placebo.

Limitations

Topiramate was the only oral drug for which we were able to include data. We did not find sufficient quality evidence to support the use of other oral drugs.

Conclusions

We did not find evidence that the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies are more clinically and cost-effective when compared to topiramate or Botox. We identified directions for future research these drugs might take.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021265990, CRD42021265993 and CRD42021265995.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132803) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 63. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of medication overuse headache: a systematic review

Purpose

Medication overuse headache (MOH) is a chronic headache caused by regular overuse of medications. OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) is used for preventive treatment of MOH. However, its efficacy and safety remain controversial.

Methods

Seven online databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang data, and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database) were searched for relevant articles published between January 2002 and March 2024. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies on the treatment of MOH using BoNTA versus a placebo or other active treatments.

Results

We retrieved 487 articles in the database search. Of these, four eligible RCTs were identified after detailed screening. A total of 1,259 patients with MOH (622 patients treated with BoNTA, 607 with placebo, and 30 with topiramate) were included in the four RCTs. We found that BoNTA significantly reduced headache frequency compared with placebo (mean difference, 1.89; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-2.67; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between BoNTA and the placebo in terms of secondary outcomes, which included reductions in acute medication intake (MD, 1.30; 95% CI, -1.18-3.78; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.30), Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire scores (MIDAS, MD, -4.04; 95% CI, -29.36-21.28; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.75), and Headache Impact Test scores (HIT-6, MD, 0.03; 95% CI, -1.77-1.83; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.97). BoNTA was more likely to cause adverse events (OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.45-2.42; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.001) than placebo.

Conclusion

The results of this study show that BoNTA reduces headache frequency and is effective for the treatment of MOH.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022315845.

Psychopathological variables in chronic migraine patients with different therapeutic approach: psychological profile differences and impact on therapeutic efficacy in real life

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a debilitating neurological condition linked to various psychological comorbidities. The aims of our study are: 1) to evaluate potential psychopathological differences between patients in treatment with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (SPECIFIC group) and those with onabotulinumtoxin-A/oral pharmacotherapy (Group NON-SPECIFIC), 2) to compare treatment efficacy over time between groups, and examined whether psychopathological comorbidities can influence it.

METHODS

This is a post-hoc ambispective study: a retrospective analysis of patient-level real-life data prospectively collected for clinical evaluation. We enrolled 102 patients with chronic migraine (CM), 64 in treatment with erenumab or galcanezumab, and 38 with botulinum toxin or oral pharmacotherapies. Psychopathological variables are assessed at baseline, whereas clinical factors over time.

RESULTS

The NON-SPECIFIC group showed more pronounced emotion regulation difficulties (DERS, p = 0.001), alexithymia (TAS-20, p = 0.012), and impulsiveness (BIS-11, p = 0.002) with respect to the SPECIFIC group. Moreover, treatment efficacy overtime was more pronounced in the group with anti-CGRP treatment with a reduction of migraine frequency overtime, pain intensity, and improved quality of life up to six months post-treatment. Psychopathological comorbidity did not influence treatment efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlighted more pronounced psychopathological comorbidities in patients in treatment with NON-SPECIFIC therapies in terms of impulsivity, alexithymia, and emotion regulation. Moreover, treatment efficacy overtime was more pronounced and stable over time in the SPECIFIC group, and psychopathological comorbidity did not influence it.

Real-World Evidence of the Safety and Effectiveness of Atogepant Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine: A Retrospective Chart Review

INTRODUCTION

Combination use of atogepant and onabotulinumtoxinA has the potential to be more effective than either alone for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM) due to their complementary mechanisms of action. This analysis collected real-world data to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of adding atogepant to onabotulinumtoxinA as a combination preventive treatment for CM.

METHODS

This retrospective, longitudinal, multicenter chart review included adults with CM who received ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA before ≥ 1 month of onabotulinumtoxinA and atogepant combination treatment. Charts at atogepant prescription (index date) and two subsequent onabotulinumtoxinA treatment visits (~ 3 and ~ 6 months post-index) were reviewed for change from baseline in monthly headache days (MHDs), ≥ 50% reduction in MHDs, discontinuation rates, and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Of the 55 charts that met safety analysis criteria, 31 had data on headache days at index and first post-index visit and were eligible for effectiveness analysis (mean age 46.7 years, 94.5% female). For those with data available prior to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment (n = 25), the mean MHD was 24.0 days, reduced by 8.15 days after onabotulinumtoxinA treatment. After atogepant was added, MHD was incrementally reduced by 4.53 days and 8.75 days from index date to the first (N = 31) and second (N = 23) post-index onabotulinumtoxinA treatment visit, respectively. A ≥ 50% reduction in MHDs was achieved by 45.2% of patients ~ 3 months post-index. Atogepant and onabotulinumtoxinA were discontinued by 16.1% and 6.5% of patients, respectively. In the safety population, 32.7% of patients experienced ≥ 1 AE. No serious AEs were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study of patients with CM demonstrated that adding atogepant to onabotulinumtoxinA as a combination preventive treatment for CM was effective by providing an additional reduction in MHDs over ~ 3 and ~ 6 months of combination treatment. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profiles of onabotulinumtoxinA and atogepant, with no new safety signals identified.

Exploring the effects of extracranial injections of botulinum toxin type A on activation and sensitization of central trigeminovascular neurons by cortical spreading depression in male and female rats

BACKGROUND

OnabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA), is assumed to achieve its therapeutic effect in migraine through blocking activation of unmyelinated meningeal nociceptors and their downstream communications with central dura-sensitive trigeminovascular neurons in the spinal trigeminal nucleus (SPV). The present study investigated the mechanism of action of onabotA by assessing its effect on activation and sensitization of dura-sensitive neurons in the SPV by cortical spreading depression (CSD). It is a follow up to our recent study on onabotA effects on activation and sensitization of peripheral trigeminovascular neurons.

METHODS

In anesthetized male and female rats, single-unit recordings were used to assess effects of extracranial injections of onabotA (five injections, one unit each, diluted in 5 μl of saline were made along the lambdoid (two injection sites) and sagittal (two injection sites) suture) vs. vehicle on CSD-induced activation and sensitization of high-threshold (HT) and wide-dynamic range (WDR) dura-sensitive neurons in the SPV.

RESULTS

Single cell analysis of onabotA pretreatment effects on CSD-induced activation and sensitization of central trigeminovascular neurons in the SPV revealed the ability of this neurotoxin to prevent activation and sensitization of WDR neurons (13/20 (65%) vs. 4/16 (25%) activated neurons in the control vs. treated groups, p = 0.022, Fisher's exact). By contrast, onabotA pretreatment effects on CSD-induced activation and sensitization of HT neurons had no effect on their activation (12/18 (67%) vs. 4/7 (36%) activated neurons in the control vs. treated groups, p = 0.14, Fisher's exact). Regarding sensitization, we found that onabotA pretreatment prevented the enhanced responses to mechanical stimulation of the skin (i.e. responses reflecting central sensitization) in both WDR and HT neurons. In control but not treated WDR neurons, responses to brush (p = 0.004 vs. p = 0.007), pressure (p = 0.002 vs. p = 0.79) and pinch (p = 0.007 vs. 0.79) increased significantly two hours after CSD. Similarly, in control but not treated HT neurons, responses to brush (p = 0.002 vs. p = 0.79), pressure (p = 0.002 vs. p = 0.72) and pinch (p = 0.0006 vs. p = 0.28) increased significantly two hours after CSD. Unexpectedly, onabotA pretreatment prevented the enhanced responses of both WDR and HT neurons to mechanical stimulation of the dura (commonly reflecting peripheral sensitization). In control vs. treated WDR and HT neurons, responses to dural stimulation were enhanced in 70 vs. 25% (p = 0.017) and 78 vs. 27% (p = 0.017), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability of onabotA to prevent activation and sensitization of WDR neurons is attributed to its preferential inhibitory effects on unmyelinated C-fibers. The inability of onabotA to prevent activation of HT neurons is attributed to its less extensive inhibitory effects on the thinly myelinated Aδ-fibers. These findings provide further pre-clinical evidence about differences and potentially complementary mechanisms of action of onabotA and calcitonin gene-related peptide-signaling neutralizing drugs.

Effectiveness and safety of pharmacological prophylaxis for chronic migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) significantly impacts both the physical and mental health of patients. Current studies on the safety and effectiveness of different pharmacological prophylaxis interventions for CM are limited. To address this gap, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank the efficacy and safety of various drugs in preventing CM.

METHODS

Two independent researchers systematically searched four databases from their inception to August 1, 2023, to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Subsequently, they performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. A NMA was then performed. Continuous outcomes and binary outcomes were displayed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR), respectively, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank each intervention separately.

RESULTS

24 RCTs involving 8789 patients were included. Compared to placebo, Botulinum toxin A demonstrated the most significant effect in reducing the monthly migraine days for CM patients (MD = 3.88, 95% CI 0.48, 7.28); in terms of improving the response rate by a 50% reduction in monthly migraine days, Topiramate (RR = 50.06, 95% CI 3.18, 787.30) was the most effective; there was no statistically significant difference between all preventive drugs and placebo in improving the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score; in terms of the incidence of adverse events, Eptinezumab (RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.8, 1.54) exhibited the highest safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Among all the drugs for the preventive drugs for CM, Botulinum toxin A has the best efficacy and safety profile, closely followed by calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs).

Comparative effectiveness and tolerability of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies and onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine: A multicenter, real-world study in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE

To compare the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine (CM) patients.

METHODS

This multicenter study involved retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of CM patients treated with CGRP mAbs or onabotulinumtoxinA, including difficult-to-treat (DTT) patients (i.e., ≥3 preventive failures). Treatment outcomes were determined at 6 months based on prospective headache diaries and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS).

RESULTS

The study included 316 (55 M/261F, mean age 44.4 ± 13.5 years) and 333 (61 M/272F, mean age 47.9 ± 13.4 years) CM patients treated with CGRP mAbs or onabotulinbumtoxinA, respectively. At 6 months, CGRP mAb treatment was associated with a greater decrease in monthly migraine days (MMDs) (-13.0 vs. -8.7 days/month, p < 0.001) and a higher ≥50% responder rate (RR) (74.7% vs. 50.7%, p < 0.001) compared with onabotulinumtoxinA injections. The findings were consistent in DTT patients (-13.0 vs. -9.1 MMDs, p < 0.001; ≥50% RR: 73.9% vs. 50.3%, p < 0.001) or those with medication-overuse headache (MOH) (-13.3 vs. -9.0 MMDs, p < 0.001; ≥50% RR: 79.0% vs. 51.6%, p < 0.001). Besides, patients receiving CGRP mAbs had greater improvement (-42.2 vs. -11.8, p < 0.001) and a higher ≥50% RR (62.0% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.001) in MIDAS scores and a lower rate of adverse events (AEs) (6.0% vs. 21.0%, p < 0.001). However, none of the patients discontinued treatment due to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicenter, real-world study, CGRP mAbs were more effective than onabotulinumtoxinA in CM patients, even in DTT or MOH patients. All of these injectables were well tolerated. Further prospective studies are needed to verify these findings.

Insights from 25 years of onabotulinumtoxinA in migraine - mechanisms and management

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BTX-A) was first linked to beneficial effects in migraine 25 years ago and was approved by the FDA for preventive treatment of chronic migraine in 2010. The treatment has since had a major impact on the well-being of people with chronic migraine. The clinical development programme for BTX-A and research since its approval have provided insights into the neuromodulatory sensory effect of BTX-A, how it can control chronic migraine despite its peripheral action, and the underlying biology of migraine as a disease. In this Review, we consider the impact that BTX-A has had on the management of chronic migraine and on the research field. We discuss the insights provided by clinical research, encompassing the clinical trials and subsequent real-world evidence, and the mechanistic insights provided by preclinical and translational research. We also provide an overview of future directions of research in the field BTX-A in migraine and the clinical translation of this research.

[Migraine treatment consensus document of the Spanish Society of Neurology (SEN), Spanish Society of Family and Community Medicine (SEMFYC), Society of Primary Care Medicine (SEMERGEN) and Spanish Association of Migraine and Headache (AEMICE) on migraine treatment]

Migraine is a disease with a high prevalence and incidence, in addition to being highly disabling, causing a great impact on the patient's quality of life at a personal, family and work level, but also social, given its high expense due to its direct (care) and indirect (presenteeism and work absenteeism) costs. The multiple and recent developments in its pathophysiological knowledge and in its therapy require updating and, therefore, in this article the Spanish scientific societies most involved in its study and treatment (SEN, SEMFYC and SEMERGEN), together with the Association Spanish Association for Patients with Migraine and other Headaches (AEMICE), we have developed these updated care recommendations. We reviewed the treatment of migraine attacks, which consisted mainly of the use of NSAIDs and triptans, to which ditans and gepants have been added. We also discuss preventive treatment consisting of oral preventive drugs, botulinum toxin, and treatments that block the action of calcitonin-related peptide (CGRP). Finally, we emphasize that pharmacological treatments must be complementary to carrying out general measures consisting of identifying and managing/deletion the precipitating factors of the attacks and the chronicizing factors, controlling the comorbidities of migraine and eliminating analgesic overuse.

Voltage-gated Calcium Channels as Potential Therapeutic Targets in Migraine

Migraine is a complex and highly incapacitating neurological disorder that affects around 15% of the general population with greater incidence in women, often at the most productive age of life. Migraine physiopathology is still not fully understood, but it involves multiple mediators and events in the trigeminovascular system and the central nervous system. The identification of calcitonin gene-related peptide as a key mediator in migraine physiopathology has led to the development of effective and highly selective antimigraine therapies. However, this treatment is neither accessible nor effective for all migraine sufferers. Thus, a better understanding of migraine mechanisms and the identification of potential targets are still clearly warranted. Voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) are widely distributed in the trigeminovascular system, and there is accumulating evidence of their contribution to the mechanisms associated with headache pain. Several drugs used in migraine abortive or prophylactic treatment target VGCCs, which probably contributes to their analgesic effect. This review aims to summarize the current evidence of VGGC contribution to migraine physiopathology and to discuss how current pharmacological options for migraine treatment interfere with VGGC function. PERSPECTIVE: Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) represents a major migraine mediator, but few studies have investigated the relationship between CGRP and VGCCs. CGRP release is calcium channel-dependent and VGGCs are key players in familial migraine. Further studies are needed to determine whether VGCCs are suitable molecular targets for treating migraine.

Open label experience of repeated OnabotulinumtoxinA injections towards the sphenopalatine ganglion in patients with chronic cluster headache and chronic migraine

BACKGROUND

A novel technique for injection of OnabotulinumtoxinA (BTA) towards the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) has shown promise in refractory chronic migraine (CM) and chronic cluster headache (CCH). Open label safety and efficacy data are presented here.

METHODS

Patients with refractory CM or CCH who had received at least one injection and completed headache diaries were included. Efficacy was defined as ≥50% reduction in moderate-to-severe headache days for CM, or ≥50% reduction in attack frequency for CCH, at weeks five to eight.

RESULTS

Over 261 injections, there were 123 adverse events (AE), of which one was serious. Most (93%) AEs were mild and all were transient. The 50% response to one injection was 81% for CM and 69% for CCH. The response gradually reduced over subsequent months for CM but stayed between 55% and 67% for CCH. Repeated injections were beneficial.

CONCLUSIONS

Injections resulted in improvement for both groups and was maintained with repeated injections. Repeat injection after three months may be beneficial in CM. Adverse events were not uncommon, but universally transient, presumably as a result of the mechanism of action of BTA. Repeated BTA injection towards the SPG could be an effective treatment for refractory CM and CCH. Larger, randomised, placebo-controlled trials are required.

Long-term persistence to onabotulinumtoxinA to prevent chronic migraine: results from 11 years of patient data from a tertiary headache center

OBJECTIVE

To determine if patients with chronic migraine continue onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) long-term.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis using aggregated, de-identified patient data from the Stanford Headache Center. We included patients in California who received at least one prescription for onabotA during the years of 2011-2021. The primary outcome was the number of onabotA treatments each patient received. Secondary outcomes included sex, age, race, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), distance to the treatment facility, and zip code income quartile.

RESULTS

A total of 1551 patients received a mean of 7.60 ± 7.26 treatments and a median of 5 treatments, with 16.2% of patients receiving only one treatment and 10.6% receiving at least 19. Time-to-event survival analysis suggested 26.0% of patients would complete at least 29 treatments if able. Younger age and female sex were associated with statistically significant differences between quartile groups of number of onabotA treatments (P = .007, P = .015). BMI, distance to treatment facility, and zip code income quartile were not statistically significantly different between quartile groups (P > .500 for all). Prescriptions of both triptans and non-onabotA preventive medications showed a statistically significant increase with each higher quartile of number of onabotA treatments (P < .001; P < .001).

DISCUSSION

We show long-term persistence to onabotA is high and that distance to treatment facility and income are not factors in continuation. Our work also demonstrates that as patients continue onabotA over time, there may be an increased need for adjunctive or alternative treatments.

Sustained benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA treatment in chronic migraine: An analysis of the pooled Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the long-term (56-week) benefits of continuous onabotulinumtoxinA treatment response in individuals with chronic migraine (CM) who achieved reduction to <15 headache days/month with treatment.

BACKGROUND

There are limited data exploring reductions in monthly headache days to levels consistent with episodic migraine among those experiencing CM. Understanding the impact of sustained preventive treatment response in CM can provide important information about the impact of successful therapy.

METHODS

The two Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy trials of onabotulinumtoxinA in adults included a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase and a 32-week open-label phase. Data were pooled to determine proportions of individuals with <15 headache days/month while on treatment during several time periods in the double-blind phase (Weeks 21-24; any 12 consecutive weeks; Weeks 13-24) and the entire study (Weeks 53-56; any 12 consecutive weeks; any 4-week period). We assessed the long-term impact on mean monthly headache days and changes from baseline on the six-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2.1).

RESULTS

We analyzed 1384 participants with chronic migraine (double-blind: onabotulinumtoxinA, n = 688; placebo, n = 696; open-label: n = 688 [onabotulinumtoxinA]). The discontinuation rates prior to the completion of the full 56-week treatment period for onabotulinumtoxinA and placebo were 25.4% (n = 175) and 29.3% (n = 204), respectively. During Weeks 13-24 of the double-blind phase, significantly more onabotulinumtoxinA-treated (386/688 [56.1%]) than placebo-treated (342/696 [49.1%]) individuals had <15 headache days/month (p = 0.010), with fewer monthly headache days for onabotulinumtoxinA versus placebo responders. The proportions of participants achieving <15 monthly headache days with onabotulinumtoxinA were 60.9% (419/688) at Weeks 25-56, 81.1% (558/688) at Weeks 53-56, and 79.4% (546/688) during any consecutive 12-week period. Mean changes from baseline on the HIT-6 and MSQv2.1 questionnaire surpassed within-group minimal important difference thresholds in all periods. At Week 24, onabotulinumtoxinA-treated participants who achieved <15 monthly headache days during Weeks 21-24 had a greater mean HIT-6 score reduction (-6.5 vs. -1.4) and greater mean MSQv2.1 Role-Function Restrictive score improvements (21.3 vs. 6.4) than those who did not achieve <15 monthly headache days during the same period.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants who achieved <15 monthly headache days with onabotulinumtoxinA treatment achieved meaningful benefits in headache-related disability and migraine-specific quality of life compared with those who remained at or above the 15-monthly headache days threshold. Sustained benefits observed over 56 weeks support long-term onabotulinumtoxinA use for the prevention of CM.

Onabotulinumtoxina in the Prevention of Migraine in Pediatric Population: A Systematic Review

Migraine is a leading cause of disability worldwide, yet it remains underrecognized and undertreated, especially in the pediatric and adolescent population. Chronic migraine occurs approximately in 1% of children and adolescents requiring preventive treatment. Topiramate is the only FDA-approved preventative treatment for children older than 12 years of age, but there is conflicting evidence regarding its efficacy. OnabotulinumtoxinA is a known and approved treatment for the management of chronic migraine in people older than 18 years. Several studies examine its role in the pediatric population with positive results; however, the clear-cut benefit is still unclear. OnabotulinumtoxinA seems not only to improve disability scores (PedMIDAS) but also to improve the quality, characteristics, and frequency of migraines in the said population. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence on the efficacy, dosing, administration, long-term outcomes, and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA in pediatric and adolescent migraine. Eighteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. The mean monthly migraine days (MMDs), decreased from of 21.2 days per month to 10.7 after treatment. The reported treatment-related adverse effects were mild and primarily injection site related and ranged from 0% to 47.0%. Thus, this review provides compelling evidence suggesting that OnabotulinumtoxinA may represent a safe and effective preventive treatment option for pediatric migraine.

Additional effect of erenumab for patients with chronic migraine treated with onabotulinumtoxin A-real-world data from a preliminary cohort study

Background

This preliminary retrospective cohort study investigates the potential additive prophylactic effect of erenumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, in combination with ongoing onabotulinumtoxin A (onaBoNT-A) treatment in patients suffering from chronic migraine.

Methods

The study included 218 patients and investigated the effects of adding erenumab to the existing treatment regimen. The primary outcome was the MIDAS (Migraine Disability Assessment) score assessed 3 months after the introduction of erenumab.

Results

The results indicated a significant improvement of the MIDAS score, suggesting a reduction in migraine-related disability following the addition of erenumab to onaBoNT-A. In the inter group comparison, dual therapy showed a significantly greater reduction of the MIDAS when compared to a switch from onaBoNT-A to erenumab monotherapy, but not compared to initiation of onaBoNT-A monotherapy. It is hypothesized that the observed additive effects are due to the independent modes of action of erenumab and onabotulinumtoxin A.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the combination of erenumab with onaBoNT-A may offer an improved approach for the treatment of chronic migraine in selected patients. However, the results highlight the need for prospective, controlled studies to validate these findings and determine the optimal combination of treatments tailored to the individual patient.

The effectiveness and predictors influencing the outcome of onabotulinumtoxinA treatment in chronic migraine: understanding from diverse patient profiles in a single session

Objective

This real-world study aimed to investigate how onabotulinumtoxinA affects the outcome of migraine, along with accompanying anxiety, depression, and bruxism among a group of patients with chronic migraine (CM) and define predictors of good response.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with CM who received onabotulinumtoxinA were included in this single-center, real-world retrospective cohort study. Monthly headache days (MHDs), monthly migraine days (MMDs), headache intensity (numeric rating scale-NRS) and headache characteristics were evaluated at baseline and 12 weeks post-treatment. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) included Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS), Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) scores, 12-item Allodynia Symptom Checklist (ASC-12), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Response to onabotulinumtoxinA (% reduction in MHDs) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were also evaluated. OnabotulinumA was applied to the masseter muscles in patients complaining of bruxism.

Results

A total of 72 patients (mean ± SD age: 36.3 ± 8.5 years; 91.7% were female) diagnosed with CM were included. OnabotulinumtoxinA revealed significant decrease in median (IQR) MHDs [from 20(15-25) at baseline to 6(4-10), p < 0.001], MMDs [from 9(6-12) to 3(1-6), p < 0.001] and NRS [from 9(8-10) to 7(6-8), p < 0.001], and the MIDAS [from 54(30-81) to 16(7-24), p < 0.001], HIT-6 [from 67(65-69) to 58(54-64), p < 0.001], ASC-12 [from 6(1.5-9) to 2(0-9), p = 0.002], BAI [from 12(6.5-19) to 9(3-17), p < 0.001] and BDI [from 11(6.5-17) to 3(2-7) p < 0.001] scores at 12 weeks post-treatment. Patients complaining of bruxism received onabotulinumtoxinA injections in the first n = 27 (37.5%) and 12. week post-treatment n = 19 (70.4%) periods. Overall, 70.8% of patients responded (≥50% reduction in MHDs), while 29.2% did not (<50% reduction). Both groups showed similar characteristics in demographics, migraine history, baseline PROMs scores, comorbidities, and prior treatments.

Conclusion

OnabotulinumtoxinA is an effective treatment option that rapidly improves migraine outcomes, disability, and impact while also alleviating comorbid depression and/or anxiety. This study's noteworthy finding is that onabotulinumtoxinA is effective in a majority of CM patients, irrespective of their prior treatment history, migraine characteristics, or concurrent comorbidities. Furthermore, we identified no specific predictors for a favorable response to onabotulinumtoxinA. Applying onabotulinumtoxinA to the masseter muscles can relieve discomfort associated with concurrent bruxism; however, it does not impact migraine outcomes.

Long-term safety of OnabotulinumtoxinA treatment in chronic migraine patients: a five-year retrospective study

Background

Real-world studies have shown the sustained therapeutic effect and favourable safety profile of OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) in the long term and up to 4 years of treatment in chronic migraine (CM). This study aims to assess the safety profile and efficacy of BoNTA in CM after 5 years of treatment in a real-life setting.

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with CM in relation to BoNTA treatment for more than 5 years in 19 Spanish headache clinics. We excluded patients who discontinued treatment due to lack of efficacy or poor tolerability.

Results

489 patients were included [mean age 49, 82.8% women]. The mean age of onset of migraine was 21.8 years; patients had CM with a mean of 6.4 years (20.8% fulfilled the aura criteria). At baseline, patients reported a mean of 24.7 monthly headache days (MHDs) and 15.7 monthly migraine days (MMDs). In relation to effectiveness, the responder rate was 59.1% and the mean reduction in MMDs was 9.4 days (15.7 to 6.3 days; p < 0.001). The MHDs were also reduced by 14.9 days (24.7 to 9.8 days; p < 0.001). Regarding the side effects, 17.5% experienced neck pain, 17.3% headache, 8.5% eyelid ptosis, 7.5% temporal muscle atrophy and 3.2% trapezius muscle atrophy. Furthermore, after longer-term exposure exceeding 5 years, there were no serious adverse events (AE) or treatment discontinuation because of safety or tolerability issues.

Conclusion

Treatment with BoNTA led to sustained reductions in migraine frequency, even after long-term exposure exceeding 5 years, with no evidence of new safety concerns.

Sequential administration of peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of chronic migraine and other headache disorders-A retrospective tolerability and safety study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the tolerability and safety of concurrent peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA treatment during a single outpatient clinic procedure visit.

BACKGROUND

Procedural interventions are available for the treatment of headache disorders. OnabotulinumtoxinA and peripheral nerve blocks are used as alternatives or in addition to oral therapies to reduce the frequency and intensity of migraine attacks. There is currently a lack of safety data focusing on the sequential administration of local anesthetic via peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA during a single clinical encounter for the treatment of headache. The primary aim of the study was to determine the safety and tolerability of concurrent peripheral nerve blockade and onabotulinumtoxinA injections during a single outpatient clinic procedure visit. We hypothesized that the dual intervention would be safe and well tolerated by patients with chronic migraine and other headache disorders.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed using clinical data from patients seen by multiple providers over a 16-month timeframe at one outpatient headache clinic. Patients were identified by procedure codes and those receiving peripheral nerve block(s) and onabotulinumtoxinA injections during a single encounter within the study period were eligible for inclusion. Inclusion criteria were (1) patients 18 years and older who were (2) receiving both peripheral nerve blocks and onabotulinumtoxinA injections for the treatment of chronic migraine. Patients were excluded if they were under age 18, received their procedure outside of the clinic (emergency room, inpatient ward), or were receiving sphenopalatine ganglion blocks. Age- and sex-matched patients who received one procedure, either peripheral nerve blocks or onabotulinumtoxinA, were used for control. The primary outcome of this safety study was the number of adverse events that occurred in the dual intervention group compared to the single intervention control arms. Information regarding adverse events was gathered via retrospective chart review. If an adverse event was recorded, it was then graded by the reviewer utilizing the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ranging from Grade 1 Mild Event to Grade 5 Death. Additionally, it was noted whether the adverse event led to treatment discontinuation.

RESULTS

In total, 375 patients were considered eligible for inclusion in the study. After age and sex matching of controls, 131 patients receiving dual intervention were able to be compared to 131 patients receiving onabotulinumtoxinA alone and 104 patients receiving dual intervention were able to be compared to 104 patients receiving peripheral nerve block(s) alone. The primary endpoint analysis showed no significant difference in total adverse events between dual intervention compared to nerve blocks alone or onabotulinumtoxinA alone. The number of adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation approached but did not reach statistical significance for those receiving dual intervention versus onabotulinumtoxinA alone in the number of adverse events that led to treatment termination (4.6%, 6/131 vs. 0.8%, 1/131, p = 0.065); however, the number of patients who discontinued therapy was not significantly different between those groups (2.3%, 3/131 vs. 0.8%, 1/131; p = 0.314; odds ratio 0.3 [0-3.2]; p = 0.338).

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective chart review, there was no significant difference in adverse events or therapy discontinuation between patients receiving sequential peripheral nerve block(s) and onabotulinumtoxinA injections versus those receiving either peripheral nerve block(s) or onabotulinumtoxinA injections alone. As a result, we concluded that the combination procedure is likely safe and well tolerated in routine clinical practice.

Synergism of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies and OnabotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Chronic Migraine: A Real-World Retrospective Chart Review

BACKGROUND

Many patients with chronic migraine do not achieve clinically meaningful improvement in their headache frequency with monotherapy. The burden associated with chronic migraine calls for a multifaceted treatment approach targeting multiple aspects of migraine pathophysiology.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of concurrent anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb) and onabotulinumtoxinA (onabot) treatment on median monthly migraine days (MMD) in patients with chronic migraine, through a retrospective study.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of Cleveland Clinic patients either concurrently (dual therapy) or consecutively (monotherapy) treated with anti-CGRP mAbs and onabot between June 2018 and November 2021 were extracted. Only adult patients (≥ 18 years of age) were included in this study. MMDs for 194 concurrently treated (86.6% female and a median [interquartile range] age of 51 [41-61] years) and 229 consecutively treated (88.2% female and median age of 47 [IQR 39-57] years) patients were examined at baseline, after first therapy of either anti-CGRP mAb or onabot, and following dual therapy for 3 consecutive months. The reduction of MMDs for each treatment group were compared. The same approach was utilized to compare consecutive monotherapy at separate times (n = 229) and dual-therapy groups.

RESULTS

The initial treatment of the dual-therapy group reduced the median (IQR) MMDs from 30 (30-30) to 15 (12-30) [p < 0.0001]. After initiation of dual therapy, the median MMDs was further decreased from 15 (12-30) to 8 (3-22) [p < 0.0001]. A majority [132/194 (68.0%)] of the dual-therapy patients reported a ≥ 50% reduction in MMD and 90/194 (46.4%) reported a ≥ 75% reduction. For the consecutive monotherapy group, median MMDs changed from a baseline of 30 (25-30) to 15 (8-25) from onabot monotherapy and decreased from 25 (15-30) to 12 (4-25) after anti-CGRP mAb monotherapy. Almost half (113/229 [49.3%] from onabot, and 104/229 [45.4%] from anti-CGRP mAb) of these patients achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in MMDs and a minority (38/229 [16.6%] from onabot, and 45/229 [19.7%] from anti-CGRP mAb) achieved a reduction of ≥ 75%. Additionally, dual therapy showed significant improvement in MMDs compared with monotherapy of either treatment (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Dual therapy of anti-CGRP mAbs and onabot may be more efficacious than monotherapy, possibly due to their synergistic mechanisms of action.

Effectiveness and Safety of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Adolescent Patients with Chronic Migraine

Chronic migraine (CM) significantly affects underage individuals. The study objectives are (1) to analyze the effectiveness and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX-A) in adolescents with CM; (2) to review the literature on BTX-A use in the pediatric population. This prospective observational study included patients under 18 years old with CM treated with BTX-A (PREEMPT protocol) as compassionate use. Demographic, efficacy (monthly headache days-MHD; monthly migraine days-MMD; acute medication days/month-AMDM) and side effect data were collected. A ≥ 50% reduction in MHD was considered as a response. Effectiveness and safety were analyzed at 6 and 12 months. A systematic review of the use of BTX-A in children/adolescents was conducted in July 2023. In total, 20 patients were included (median age 15 years [14.75-17], 70% (14/20) females). The median basal frequencies were 28.8 [20-28] MHD, 18 [10-28] MMD and 10 [7.5-21.2] AMDM. Compared with baseline, at 6 months (n = 20), 11 patients (55%) were responders, with a median reduction in MHD of -20 days/month (p = 0.001). At 12 months (n = 14), eight patients (57.1%) were responders, with a median reduction in MHD of -17.5 days/month (p = 0.002). No adverse effects were reported. The literature search showed similar results. Our data supports the concept that BTX-A is effective, well tolerated, and safe in adolescents with CM resistant to oral preventatives.

Botulinum toxin-A as a treatment option for refractory idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia of the ophthalmic branch: a case report and literature review

Trigeminal neuralgia is one of the most common neurological pains affecting the head and neck and is associated with severe, lancinating, electrical pain episodes. The maxillary and mandibular branches are usually affected. The ophthalmic branch is rarely involved and, when present, it requires a comprehensive workup to rule out major conditions. Pharmacotherapy and surgery are the most common treatment options for this condition. Systemic medications may pose a wide range of side effects and effectiveness may decrease over time while surgery has inherent complications. Injectable onabotulinum toxins have been utilized for various applications in medicine and dentistry. There is, however, limited data on their use for the management of refractory trigeminal neuralgia of the ophthalmic branch. We present the case of a 58-year-old male diagnosed with refractory idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia affecting the ophthalmic branch, which was unresponsive to standard care and successfully managed with onabotulinum toxin type A. This treatment should be considered in cases of refractory trigeminal neuralgia prior to surgery. We reviewed the relevant literature concerning the application of Onabotulinum toxin A for managing trigeminal neuralgia of the ophthalmic branch. This case report and review aim to enlighten the application of Onabotulinum toxin A for managing refractory trigeminal neuralgia of the ophthalmic branch. Our case report and review show that Onabotulinum toxin A could be used for managing TN of the ophthalmic branch.

Beyond Pain: The Effects of OnabotulinumtoxinA Therapy on Sensitization and Interictal Symptoms in Chronic Migraine

Chronic migraine is a disease with a high burden on patients from both a working and quality of life point of view. The pathophysiology of this subtype of migraine is due to several factors, such as medication overuse. Nevertheless, the detrimental recurring of headache attacks with central and peripheral sensitization plays a central role and explains some additional symptoms complained about by these patients even in the interictal phase. OnabotulinumtoxinA is a therapy indicated for chronic migraine since it has proven to reduce peripheral sensitization, showing even efficacy on central symptoms. The aim of this narrative review is to present the current evidence regarding the effect of OnabotulinumtoxinA on sensitization and interictal symptoms.

Adverse and serious adverse events incidence of pharmacological interventions for managing chronic and episodic migraine in adults: a systematic review

Background

Migraine is the second most common prevalent disorder worldwide and is a top cause of disability with a substantial economic burden. Many preventive migraine medications have notable side effects that affect different body organs.

Method

We systematically searched for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using terms for migraine/headache and preventive medications. Using eligibility criteria, two reviewers independently assessed the articles. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was applied to assess the quality of the studies. Data were classified by system organ class (SOC).

Results

Thirty-two RCTs with 21 780 participants met the eligibility criteria for the incidence of adverse events (AEs). Additionally, 33 RCTs with 22 615 participants were included to synthesise the incidence of serious AEs (SAEs). The percentage of attributed AEs and SAEs to each SOC for 10 preventive drugs with different dosing regimens was calculated. Amitriptyline and topiramate had a higher incidence of nervous system disorders; Topiramate was also associated with a higher incidence of psychiatric disorders. All drugs showed a certain incidence of infections and infestations, with Onabotulinumtoxin A (BTA) having the lowest rate. BTA had a higher incidence of musculoskeletal disorders than the other drugs. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) such as fremanezumab and galcanezumab were linked to more general disorders and administration site conditions than other drugs.

Conclusion

Notably, the observed harm to SOCs varies among these preventive drugs. We suggest conducting head-to-head RCTs to evaluate the safety profile of oral medications, BTA, and CGRP MAbs in episodic and/or chronic migraine populations.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42021265993.

Pharmacological management of migraine: current strategies and future directions

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a complex neurological disorder that affects a significant portion of the global population. As traditional pharmacological approaches often fall short in alleviating symptoms, the development of innovative therapies has garnered significant interest. This text aims to summarize the current pharmacological options for managing migraine and to explore the potential impact of novel therapies.

AREAS COVERED

We focused on conventional treatments, emerging therapies, and novel compounds in clinical development, including therapies targeting the trigeminovascular system, cannabis-based therapies, hormonal and metabolic therapies, and other options. English peer-reviewed articles were searched in PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases.

EXPERT OPINION

Several novel treatment options for migraine have become available in recent years. Emerging pharmacological therapies targeting the trigeminovascular system, cannabis-based therapies, hormonal and metabolic interventions, and other emerging treatment modalities, may prove to be valuable for the treatment of migraine. Further research, clinical trials, and substantiated evidence are necessary to validate the efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes of these therapeutic options.

Preventive Treatment of Migraine

OBJECTIVE

This article describes strategies for the preventive treatment of migraine including the emerging role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies and introduces novel paradigms for the preventive treatment of migraine.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Multiple migraine medications targeting CGRP have been introduced since 2018, including injectable monoclonal antibodies (ie, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab) and oral small-molecule CGRP receptor antagonists (ie, ubrogepant, rimegepant, atogepant, and zavegepant). With the exceptions of ubrogepant and zavegepant, which are approved only as acute treatments, all of these agents have demonstrated efficacy in the preventive treatment of migraine; the monoclonal antibodies and atogepant have evidence of effectiveness in adults with either episodic or chronic migraine. The safety and tolerability profiles of CGRP-targeted therapies in migraine are favorable.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

The goals of preventive migraine therapy include reducing the frequency, severity, duration, and disability associated with attacks, reducing the need for acute treatment and the risk of medication overuse, enhancing self-efficacy and health-related quality of life, and reducing headache-related distress and interictal burden. Six drugs targeting CGRP (four monoclonal antibodies and two gepants) are now available for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. The efficacy of CGRP-targeted medications in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine, together with good safety and tolerability, has led to the emergence of new approaches to preventive treatment.

Pericranial Muscle Stiffness, Pain Thresholds, and Tenderness during a Treatment Cycle of OnabotulinumtoxinA for Chronic Migraine Prevention

BACKGROUND

Treatment with OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) is effective as a preventive treatment for chronic migraine (CM). Preclinical studies suggest that the mechanism of action of BoNT-A in migraine is based on blocking unmyelinated C fibers. We aimed to investigate whether the muscle-relaxing effect of BoNT-A is associated with the preventive mechanism in patients with chronic migraine by measuring the stiffness, pain thresholds, and tenderness of the BoNT-A-applied muscles.

METHODS

A total of 22 patients with CM who were already in BoNT-A treatment participated in this longitudinal prospective study. Pericranial muscle stiffness was measured using ultrasound shear wave elastography, which measures the speed of shear waves propagating through the muscle. Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) were obtained via algometry, and muscle tenderness was measured via manual palpation. Measurements were made before BoNT-A injections and six weeks after the treatment. The measurements were performed while the muscles were maximally relaxed. The patients also completed daily diaries on headache and neck pain.

RESULTS

No change was observed in muscle stiffness (p = 0.737) or pericranial muscle tenderness (p = 0.400). The PPT over the trapezius muscles increased from 250 kPa before treatment to 304 kPa six weeks after treatment (p = 0.027). No change was observed on the temporalis muscles (p = 0.200) nor the non-dominant index finger (p = 0.067). BoNT-A decreased neck pain (p = 0.008) and headache (p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that BoNT-A leads to the desensitization of cutaneous and muscle nociceptors in the head and neck regions, whereas muscle relaxation might not be an important part of the anti-migraine effect.

Real-world effectiveness of Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies compared to OnabotulinumtoxinA (RAMO) in chronic migraine: a retrospective, observational, multicenter, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) is a disabling condition with high prevalence in the general population. Until the recent approval of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (Anti-CGRP mAbs), OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) was the only treatment specifically approved for CM prophylaxis. Direct comparisons between the two treatments are not available so far.

METHODS

We performed an observational, retrospective, multicenter study in Italy to compare the real-world effectiveness of Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A. Patients with CM who had received either treatment according to Italian prescribing regulations were extracted from available clinical databases. Efficacy outcomes included the change from baseline in monthly headache days (MHD), MIgraine Disability ASsessment test (MIDAS), and monthly acute medications (MAM) evaluated at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was MHD change from baseline at 12 months. Safety outcomes included serious adverse events (SAE) and treatment discontinuation. Unadjusted and adjusted models were used for the analyses.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixteen potentially eligible patients were screened; 183 (86 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 97 BoNT-A) were included. One hundred seventy-one (80 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 91 BoNT-A) and 154 (69 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 85 BoNT-A) patients were included in the efficacy analysis at 6 and 12 months of follow-up, respectively. Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A both resulted in a mean MHD reduction at 6 (-11.5 and -7.2 days, respectively; unadjusted mean difference -4.3; 95%CI -6.6 to -2.0; p = 0.0003) and 12 months (-11.9 and -7.6, respectively; unadjusted mean difference -4.4; 95%CI -6.8 to -2.0; p = 0.0002) of follow-up. Similar results were observed after adjusting for baseline confounders. Anti-CGRP mAbs showed a significant MIDAS (-31.7 and -19.2 points, p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0296, respectively) and MAM reduction (-5.1 and -3.1 administrations, p = 0.0023 and p = 0.0574, respectively) compared to BoNT-A at 6 and 12 months. No SAEs were reported. One patient receiving fremanezumab discontinued treatment due to arthralgia. Treatment discontinuations, mainly for inefficacy, were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Both Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A were effective in CM patients with Anti-CGRP mAbs presenting higher effect magnitude, with comparable safety. Still, BoNT-A remains a valuable option for CM patients with contraindications to Anti-CGRP mAbs or for frail categories who are candidates to local therapy with limited risk of systemic administration.

A Retrospective Comparison of Onabotulinum Toxin A and Incobotulinum Toxin A in Terms of Efficacy, Tolerability, Duration of Effect, and Pain on Injection Administration Site for the Treatment of Chronic Migraine

Background Onabotulinum toxin A (OnA) is a well-tolerated and effective treatment for chronic migraine (CM). However, based on research indications that incobotulinum toxin A (InA) would be equally effective, a Veterans Health Administration medical center mandated a two-year trial of InA as a more cost-effective alternative to OnA. Although InA is used for many similar indications as OnA, it is not Food and Drug Administration-approved for treating CM, and complications occurred in several patients with CM following this treatment change. We conducted this retrospective analysis to evaluate differences in the efficacy of OnA and InA and identify the reasons for the adverse effects of InA in some of these patients. Methods We performed a retrospective review of 42 patients who had been effectively treated with OnA and were then switched to InA. The differences between treatment responses to OnA and InA were assessed through the evaluation of pain on injection, number of headache days, and duration of action. Patients received injections at 10- to 13-week intervals. Those who reported severe pain on injection of InA were switched back to OnA. Results Severe burning pain on InA injection was reported by 38% of patients (nine males and seven females, i.e., a total of 16 patients out of 42 patients). One male patient reported the same degree of pain from both InA and OnA injections. A total of 66.7% of women with obesity and 83.3% of men with obesity or diabetes experienced severe pain on injection. Neither migraine suppression nor the duration of effect was significantly different between OnA and InA. Conclusions OnA is better tolerated than InA in the treatment of CM. InA appears to effectively suppress migraines, but some patients complain of a severe localized burning sensation during the injections. Some of these patients, all of whom were previously treated with OnA, requested to switch back to OnA. This suggested that InA is not equivalent to OnA in terms of tolerability and effectiveness. The present study found 2.38% of patients experienced an insufficient duration of effect with InA, and none with OnA. However, these lower rates may, in part, be due to variability in injection intervals in this sample, which could be because of scheduling considerations at the Harry S. Truman Veterans Health Administration Medical Center. In cases where OnA fails because of the development of antibodies, it might be reasonable to switch to InA treatment. Reformulation of InA with a pH-buffered solution may eliminate the difference in pain on injection. InA would then be a good alternative to OnA for treating CM.

Efficacy and Safety Analysis of Botox Application and Iatrogenic Botulism: Panacea or Peril?

Clostridium botulinum toxin-A (BoNT-A) creates temporary paralysis in the muscles by acting on the muscle-nerve junction. It is injected into the mimic muscles when a decrease in the movements of the mimic muscles is desired. Despite many favorable applications, the use of BoNT-A is not without drawbacks. Although there is no expected serious side effect on health in BoNT-A treatments, various problems can be encountered in patients treated for aesthetic purposes. Botulism is a rare but potentially life-threatening syndrome, which is caused by the toxin produced by the bacterium Clostridium botulinum, which acts on the nervous system, vegetative forms of C. botulinum can only survive in anaerobic conditions, while spore forms are common in nature and can withstand harsh conditions. Botulism can stem from bacterial spores which release toxin in the body; in the form of enteric botulism, and wound botulism. The cases that develop 'iatrogenic botulism' after such procedures are usually those receiving high-dose toxin for therapeutic purposes. The treatment of botulism mainly consists of anti-toxin therapy and, if necessary, intensive care to prevent organ failures, including respiratory support. This article aims to cover all these issues related to botulism and other adverse outcomes related to BoNT-A injection in light of the most recent literature.

Clinical effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for managing chronic migraine in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine can be a profoundly disabling disorder that may be treated with preventive medications. However, uncertainty remains as to which preventive medication is the most effective. We present a network meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness and rank of preventive drugs for chronic migraine in adults.

METHODS

We identified, reviewed, and extracted data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of preventive drugs for chronic migraine with at least 200 participants. Data were analysed using network meta-analysis.

FINDINGS

We included 12 RCTs of six medications (Eptinezumab, Erenumab, Fremanezumab, Galcanezumab, Onabotulinumtoxin A, and Topiramate) compared to placebo or each other. All drugs effectively reduced monthly headache and migraine days compared with placebo. The most effective drug for monthly headache days was Eptinezumab 300mg, with a mean difference of -2.46 days, 95% Credible Interval (CrI): -3.23 to -1.69. On the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Area (SUCRA) analysis, the probability that Eptinezumab 300mg was ranked highest was 0.82. For monthly migraine days, the most effective medication was Fremanezumab-monthly, with a mean difference: -2.77 days, 95% CrI: -3.36 to -2.17, and 0.98 probability of being ranked the highest. All included drugs, except Topiramate, improved headache-related quality of life. No eligible studies were identified for the other common preventive oral medications such as Amitriptyline, Candesartan, and Propranolol. The main reasons were that the studies did not define chronic migraine, were undertaken before the definition of chronic migraine, or were too small.

INTERPRETATION

All six medications were more effective than the placebo on monthly headache and migraine days. The absolute differences in the number of headache/migraine days are, at best, modest. No evidence was found to determine the relative effectiveness of the six included drugs with other oral preventive medications.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (number CRD42021265990).

Competing treatments for migraine: a headache for decision-makers

BACKGROUND

Migraine is the world's second most common disabling disorder, affecting 15% of UK adults and costing the UK over £1.5 billion per year. Several costly new drugs have been approved by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.

AIM

To assess the cost-effectiveness of drugs used to treat adults with chronic migraine.

METHODS

We did a systematic review of placebo-controlled trials of preventive drugs for chronic migraine. We then assessed the cost-effectiveness of the currently prescribable drugs included in the review: Onabotulinum toxin A (BTA), Eptinezumab (100mg or 300mg), Fremanezumab (monthly or quarterly dose), Galcanezumab or Topiramate, each compared to placebo, and we evaluated them jointly. We developed a Markov (state-transition) model with a three-month cycle length to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for the different medications from a UK NHS and Personal Social Services perspective. We used a two-year time horizon with a starting age of 30 years for the patient cohort. We estimated transition probabilities based on monthly headache days using a network meta-analysis (NMA) developed by us, and from published literature. We obtained costs from published sources and applied discount rates of 3.5% to both costs and outcomes.

RESULTS

Deterministic results suggest Topiramate was the least costly option and generated slightly more QALYs than the placebo, whereas Eptinezumab 300mg was the more costly option and generated the most QALYs. After excluding dominated options, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between BTA and Topiramate was £68,000 per QALY gained and the ICER between Eptinezumab 300mg and BTA was not within plausible cost-effectiveness thresholds. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showed that Topiramate is the most cost-effective medication for any amount the decision maker is willing-to-pay per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the various prophylactic medications for managing chronic migraine, only Topiramate was within typical cost-effectiveness threshold ranges. Further research is needed, ideally an economic evaluation alongside a randomised trial, to compare these newer, expensive CGRP MAbs with the cheaper oral medications.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for Pediatric Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a painful, prevalent, and problematic condition among children. Children need access to safe and effective treatment options to alleviate the impact of this chronic condition on their wellbeing.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Nurses have a crucial role in supporting patient access to BTX-A. Given the results of this and other studies demonstrating the safety and efficacy of BTX-A in children, nurses can support policy change for health plans to fund this intervention for pediatric migraineurs. Allowing children to receive the safe and effective BTX-A injections will lessen the already significant impact of chronic migraine on their physical, emotional and mental health. Nurses can also play a key role in providing education to patients regarding safe administration of BTX-A for migraine.

AIM

The objective of this study was to define the experiences, effects, and clinical response of children to onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX-A) for migraine prevention.

METHODS

Clinical documentation for patients aged 13-17 years presenting for BTX-A treatment for chronic migraine between 2016-2022 in a community-based specialty clinic within a large, urban, pediatric academic medical center were included. A series of one-way repeated measures (analysis of variance [ANOVA]) were conducted to compare headache frequency, severity, and duration at baseline, and following first and second injections of BTX-A.

RESULTS

Of 32 eligible participants, administration of BTX-A demonstrated a decrease in headache frequency and severity. Participants reported nearly seven fewer headache days per month. Participants reported neck stiffness, fever or flu-like symptoms, fatigue, and worsening pain following BTX-A administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric migraineurs need therapies that are safe, effective, and accessible. BTX-A was a safe and effective treatment for migraine among the children included in this study.

The chronicle of headache treatment throughout human history from trepanation to perisutural botulinum toxin injections

To provide a historic snapshot as regards the evolution of headache treatment throughout the human history, i.e. starting from trepanation to perisutural botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections. Ancient surgeons had aimed to reach the cranium with trepanation (a surgical operation) for headache. As BoNT inhibits the release of nociceptive and pro-inflammatory neuropeptides, it has been recently suggested as an effective alternative in the prophylactic treatment of chronic migraine headache. Chronic migraine is a complex neurological disorder for which the underlying pathophysiology is yet not totally explained. According to the generally accepted hypotheses, peripheral neurogenic activation and central trigeminal sensitization are the two main mechanisms through which its pain develops. Since the headache most commonly occurs around the perisutural areas, and as the primary pathogenesis stem from the meningeal nerve fibers; collateral sensorial branches of the meningeal nerves can be optimal paths to transport BoNT inside the cranium. Concerning the therapeutic efficacy, we anticipate that perisutural injections would be technically challenging with blind techniques and actually possible only if performed under an imaging guidance, e.g. very conveniently with high frequency ultrasound.

Eptinezumab for the Prevention of Migraine: Clinical Utility, Patient Preferences and Selection - A Narrative Review

The new Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies have proven high efficacy and tolerability in episodic and chronic migraine. Eptinezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds CGRP with high affinity. Eptinezumab was approved by the Food and Drug Administration on February 21st, 2020, for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. It is administered intravenously over 30 minutes with a standard dose of 100 mg and has a T-max of 30 minutes-1 hour and a half-life of 27 days. These pharmacological properties allow for a very rapid onset of effect and a quarterly administration. It is the first time that a preventive treatment for migraine can be offered as an intravenous administration. As the range of therapeutic possibilities in migraine is expanding, the treatment process must include common decision-making, where physicians should explain in detail to patients the different characteristics of treatment options beyond efficacy and side effects. Patients can now express a preference on a range of opportunities: pharmacological versus non-pharmacological approaches, route of administration, frequency of administration, efficacy, rapidity, side effects, costs, the possibility of titration or dosing, and durability of effectiveness at suspension. Also, patient preferences can be influenced by age, country, migraine severity, and earlier experience with CGRP-targeted therapies. Besides, adherence may be influenced by several factors, including route and the schedule of administration. This narrative review describes a new perspective from the patient's point of view. Clinicians should ally with patients to select treatments that meet each patient's needs and thus apply a tailored approach, addressing not only headaches. In this way, physicians would care for the patients globally and stand out their preferences on different aspects of treatment. Besides, healthcare professionals shall be aware that patients' beliefs about therapies are subject to change with increasing experience with new therapeutic approaches.

Nonpharmacologic Treatments for Chronic and Episodic Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques for treatment-resistant migraine have been developed on recent insights into the peripheral pathogenesis of migraines. Although there is a growing body of evidence supporting these techniques, no study has yet compared the effects of these treatments on headache frequency, severity, duration, and cost.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify randomized placebo-controlled trials that compared radiofrequency ablation, botulinum toxin type A (BT-A), nerve block, neurostimulation, or migraine surgery to placebo for preventive treatment. Data on changes from baseline to follow-up in headache frequency, severity, duration, and quality of life were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 30 randomized controlled trials and 2680 patients were included. Compared with placebo, there was a significant decrease in headache frequency in patients with nerve block ( P = 0.04) and surgery ( P < 0.001). Headache severity decreased in all treatments. Duration of headaches was significantly reduced in the BT-A ( P < 0.001) and surgery cohorts ( P = 0.01). Quality of life improved significantly in patients with BT-A, nerve stimulator, and migraine surgery. Migraine surgery had the longest lasting effects (11.5 months) compared with nerve ablation (6 months), BT-A (3.2 months), and nerve block (11.9 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine surgery is a cost-effective, long-term treatment to reduce headache frequency, severity, and duration without significant risk of complication. BT-A reduces headache severity and duration, but it is short-lasting and associated with greater adverse events and lifetime cost. Although efficacious, radiofrequency ablation and implanted nerve stimulators have high risks of adverse events and explantation, whereas benefits of nerve blocks are short in duration.

Beyond the Guidelines: A Narrative Review of Treatments on the Horizon for Migraine in Children and Adolescents

Migraine is common in children and adolescents and can cause significant disability. There are relatively limited evidence-based treatment options available, especially when compared with treatment of migraine in adults. The Pediatric Research Equity Act requires the study of a new drug or biologic in pediatric populations. As such it is mandatory that the newest migraine treatment options available for adults be evaluated in children and adolescents. It will take years before results from clinical trials in pediatric patients become available. In the meantime, there is eagerness among clinicians to seek out the existing evidence that may help provide clarity on utilization of the newer migraine therapies in children and adolescents because many of the currently available, guideline-recommended treatments do not provide benefit for all patients. In this narrative review, the literature regarding onabotulinumtoxinA, neuromodulatory devices, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies, 5-hydroxytryptamine (1F) agonists (i.e., ditans), and CGRP small-molecule receptor antagonists (i.e., gepants) for the treatment of migraine in children and adolescents will be summarized.

Mechanism and clinical use of botulinum neurotoxin in head and facial region

PURPOSE

Botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) is a biological toxin produced by Clostridium botulinum. BoNT is a potent toxin extensively used in therapeutic interventions. This review provides an updated overview of the mechanisms of action and clinical applications of BoNT in head and facial region.

STUDY SELECTION

MEDLINE/PubMed searches were conducted using the terms "botulinum neurotoxin" and "dentistry" along with a combination of other related terms. In addition, studies were manually selected from reference lists of the selected articles.

RESULTS

The Food and Drug Administration in the United States initially approved BoNT to treat strabismus, blepharospasm, and hemifacial spasms. The use of BoNT in dermatology and cosmetics has been widely established and has created a revolution in these fields. Over the years, its applications in various medical specialties have expanded widely. Owing to its safety, efficacy, and long duration of action, it is well-accepted by patients. BoNT/A and BoNT/B are widely used in clinical practice. Several off-label uses of BoNT in the dental fraternity have yielded promising results. We have elaborated on the speculated mechanism of action, dosage, effective sites of injection, and adverse effects of each therapeutic application. The various clinical indications for BoNT include bruxism, myofascial pain, temporomandibular joint dislocation, hemifacial pain, orofacial dystonia, facial paralysis, chronic migraine, and trigeminal neuralgia.

CONCLUSIONS

BoNT is a safe treatment that can be used effectively, provided that the clinician has adequate knowledge regarding the mechanism, injection techniques, and local and systemic side effects and that it is administered cautiously and purposefully.

Atogepant for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (PROGRESS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of atogepant for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine.

METHODS

We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 142 clinical research sites across the USA, the UK, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Poland, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and Taiwan. Adults aged 18-80 years with a 1-year or longer history of chronic migraine were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral atogepant 30 mg twice a day, oral atogepant 60 mg once a day, or placebo. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs) across the 12-week treatment period. The primary analysis was done in the modified intent-to-treat population and included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study intervention, had an evaluable baseline period of electronic diary (eDiary) data, and had at least one evaluable post-baseline 4-week period (weeks 1-4, 5-8, and 9-12) of eDiary data during the double-blind period. The safety population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03855137).

FINDINGS

Between March 11, 2019 and Jan 20, 2022, 1489 participants were assessed for eligibility. 711 were excluded, and 778 participants were randomly assigned to atogepant 30 mg twice a day (n=257), atogepant 60 mg once a day (n=262), or placebo (n=259). Participants in the safety population were aged 18-74 years (mean 42·1 years). 459 (59%) of 773 patients were White, 677 (88%) patients were female, and 96 (12%) were male. 84 participants discontinued treatment during the trial, and 755 comprised the modified intent-to-treat population (atogepant 30 mg twice a day n=253, atogepant 60 mg once a day n=256, and placebo n=246). Baseline mean number of MMDs were 18·6 (SE 5·1) with atogepant 30 mg twice a day, 19·2 (5·3) with atogepant 60 mg once a day, and 18·9 (4·8) with placebo. Change from baseline in mean MMDs across 12 weeks was -7·5 (SE 0·4) with atogepant 30 mg twice a day, -6·9 (0·4) with atogepant 60 mg once a day, and -5·1 (0·4) with placebo. Least squares mean difference from placebo was -2·4 with atogepant 30 mg twice a day (95% CI -3·5 to -1·3; adjusted p<0·0001) and -1·8 with atogepant 60 mg once a day (-2·9 to -0·8; adjusted p=0·0009). Most common adverse events for atogepant were constipation (30 mg twice a day 28 [10·9%]; 60 mg once a day 26 [10%]; and placebo 8 [3%]) and nausea (30 mg twice a day 20 [8%]; 60 mg once a day 25 [10%]; and placebo 9 [4%]). Potentially clinically significant weight decrease (≥7% reduction at any time post-baseline) was observed in each treatment group (atogepant 30 mg twice a day 14 [6%]; atogepant 60 mg once a day 15 [6%]; and placebo 5 [2%]).

INTERPRETATION

Atogepant 30 mg twice a day and 60 mg once a day showed clinically relevant reductions in MMDs across 12 weeks in chronic migraine patients. Both atogepant doses were well tolerated, consistent with the known safety profile of atogepant.

FUNDING

Allergan (now AbbVie).

Sonographic guide for botulinum toxin injections for chronic migraine headache: EURO-MUSCULUS/USPRM approach

Application of botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A) into the muscles of the head and neck area has become a widespread and reliable treatment modality for chronic migraine. The mechanism of action for BoNT-A is the inhibition of acetylcholine and local nociceptive peptide release at the terminal nerve endings. Cranial sutures have the highest concentration of nociceptive structures; therefore BoNT-A injection into the suture lines - as opposed to head and neck muscles - has been proposed for the treatment of chronic migraine. Nerve endings in sutures rapidly absorb BoNT-A and transfer it across the afferent nerve fibers in dura mater via orthodromic and antidromic transmission. In this article, ultrasound-guided BoNT-A application around the cranial sutures will be illustrated. It is noteworthy that suture injections would be safer and more efficient when applied with such guidance.

Assessing change in functional outcomes and quality of life in myogenic temporomandibular disorders undergoing botulinum toxin injection: A before and after comparison

PURPOSE

This prospective study aimed to evaluate the changes in functional outcomes and quality of life after the injection of botulinum toxin (BTX) into the masticatory muscles for the management of myogenic temporomandibular disorders (TMDs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted with 45 individuals who presented with clinically myogenic TMDs according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. All patients received BTX injections in the temporalis and masseter muscles. The Oral Health Impact Profile-Temporomandibular Dysfunction (OHIP-TMD) questionnaire was used to evaluate the effects of treatment on quality of life. The OHIP-TMD, visual analogue scale (VAS), and maximum mouth opening (MMO) scores before and 3 months after BTX injection were evaluated.

RESULTS

The preoperative and postoperative assessments revealed a statistically significant reduction (p ≤ 0.001) in the average overall OHIP-TMD scores. A significant increase in the MMO scores and a significant decrease in the VAS scores were observed (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The injection of BTX into the masticatory muscles is beneficial for improving the clinical and quality of life parameters in the management of myogenic TMD.

Early Wearing-Off Effect of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Chronic Migraine: A Prospective Real-Life Study

OBJECTIVE

Chronic migraine (CM) is a significant public health problem that affects 2.2% of the global population. Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) is a safe and effective prophylactic treatment for patients with CM. The standard injection interval for OnabotA is 12 weeks. Nevertheless, some patients experience a wearing-off effect (WOE) in the weeks preceding the next scheduled cycle. The objectives of this study are to determine the prevalence of early WOE, to analyze variables that could be clinical predictors and to specify which interval is the most appropriate to define the existence of this phenomenon.

METHODS

This is a prospective single-center study of consecutive adult patients with CM who, after failing previous prophylactic therapies, started OnabotA treatment following the PREEMPT protocol between June and December of 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients (93.2% female, age 44 ± 12 years) were included. A total of 37 patients (64.9%) fulfilled medication overuse criteria. Of the total patients, 40.6% reported WOE and this was more frequent after the first cycle (35.6%). Depression and anxiety disorder was a statistically significant clinical predictor of WOE (OR 3.4; CI 95% 1.22-10.84; p = 0.028). A better cut-off point to consider WOE seems to be at 10 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Early WOE is common in patients on OnabotA treatment for CM. Individualizing the standard 12-week injection, using total doses of 195 U, and managing psychiatric comorbidities with pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies may improve treatment outcomes and reduce OnabotA WOE.

Comparison of indirect treatment methods in migraine prevention to address differences in mode of administration

Aim: Indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) are anchored on a placebo comparator, and the placebo response may vary according to drug administration route. Migraine preventive treatment studies were used to evaluate ITCs and determine whether mode of administration influences placebo response and the overall study findings. Materials & methods: Change from baseline in monthly migraine days produced by monoclonal antibody treatments (subcutaneous, intravenous) was compared using fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), network meta-regression (NMR), and unanchored simulated treatment comparison (STC). Results: NMA and NMR provide mixed, rarely differentiated results between treatments, whereas unanchored STC strongly favors eptinezumab over other preventive treatments. Conclusion: Further investigations are needed to determine which ITC best reflects the impact of mode of administration on placebo.

Treatment of chronic migraine with Botox (onabotulinumtoxinA): Development, insights, and impact

Chronic migraine (CM) is a neurological disease characterized by frequent migraine attacks that prevent affected individuals from performing daily activities of living, significantly diminish quality of life, and increase familial burden. Before onabotulinumtoxinA was approved for CM, there were few treatment options for these seriously disabled patients and none had regulatory approval. The terminology and recognition of CM evolved in parallel with the onabotulinumtoxinA clinical development program. Because there were no globally accepted classification criteria for CM when onabotulinumtoxinA was in development, the patient populations for the trials conducted by Allergan were determined by the Allergan migraine team in collaboration with headache scientists and clinicians. These trials and collaborations ultimately led to improvements in CM classifications. In 2010, onabotulinumtoxinA became the first medication and first biologic approved specifically to prevent headaches in patients with CM. Approval was based on 2 similarly designed phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical studies. Both studies showed significantly greater improvements in mean change from baseline in headache-day frequency in patients with CM receiving onabotulinumtoxinA compared with those receiving placebo. The safety and effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA have been established globally in >5000 patients with CM with or without medication overuse treated in clinical and observational studies. Benefits also include improvements in quality of life, fewer psychiatric comorbidities, and reduced healthcare resource utilization. Across studies, onabotulinumtoxinA was well tolerated; adverse events tended to be mild or moderate in severity and to decline over subsequent treatment cycles.

Injection technique of the upper face with onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine

BACKGROUND

The objective is to review the technique of onabotulinumtoxinA injection treatment in the glabellar and frontal regions using the PREEMPT (Phase III REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy) paradigm, with review of the aesthetic issues related to the procedure. OnabotulinumtoxinA is an effective medication for the prevention of chronic migraine. The PREEMPT injection paradigm has been validated in randomized clinical trials and real-world settings. This treatment includes injections in the forehead and glabella area. In addition, for aesthetic uses, glabella onabotulinumtoxinA injections are done in similar muscles specifically the procerus, corrugator supercilii, and frontalis muscles. Often patients who have been injected with onabotulinumtoxinA for chronic migraine have concerns about their appearance and will ask if they can see an aesthetic injector to improve this. This is a difficult issue as onabotulinumtoxinA should be injected with an interval of 10-12 weeks to avoid development of antibodies against onabotulinumtoxinA, so all injections (migraine and aesthetic) should ideally be done close together; however, if an aesthetic injection is done on the same day as a PREEMPT injection, the effect of the PREEMPT injection will not yet be visible as it takes time for onabotulinumtoxinA effects to be seen. Thus, there is a risk of a potential overdose in a particular area if aesthetic injections are done without input from the PREEMPT injector.

METHODS

This is a narrative review supported by photographic documentation showing the technique of onabotulinumtoxinA injection of the upper face, considering anatomical differences between patients, and combining the needs in neurology and aesthetic medicine fields.

RESULTS

Practitioners treating chronic migraine often modify some of the principles of the PREEMPT paradigm. Many practitioners are unsure about injections in the glabellar and frontal areas. The authors present a technique for using the PREEMPT protocol and adapting this to the individual patient's anatomy to prevent an unsightly appearance or ptosis. In addition, sites are provided where an aesthetic injector could inject to improve the patient's appearance without overlapping with the PREEMPT injection sites.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to the PREEMPT injection protocol provides an evidence-based approach to achieving clinical benefit for patients with chronic migraine. Aesthetic elements of the treatment of the glabella and forehead require additional attention. The authors provide practical considerations and recommendations regarding this.

Early development history of Botox (onabotulinumtoxinA)

The development of Botox (onabotulinumtoxinA) began in the 1970s as Dr. Scott was attempting to identify an injectable substance that would weaken the extraocular eye muscles in patients with strabismus as an alternative to muscle surgery. This search led to botulinum toxin type A, which was tested and developed over the next 15 years. As botulinum toxin type A moved from an experimental drug to a product in need of licensing by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the first manufacturing methods and quality control procedures were developed for Oculinum, the botulinum toxin type A product that would eventually be sold to Allergan and become known as Botox.

[Clinical use of botulinum toxin type A in pain medicine]

Botulinum toxin has been used for decades in the treatment of a variety of painful diseases. Botulinum toxin not only blocks neuromuscular transmission, but also the secretion of neuropeptides, such as substance P, glutamate and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and thus inhibits neurogenic inflammation. In addition, it has a modulatory pain-relieving effect via retrograde transport into the central nervous system. In addition to approval for the treatment of dystonia or spasticity, onabotulinum toxin A is also approved for the prophylaxis of chronic migraine if the oral prophylactic migraine medication has had an insufficient effect or has not been tolerated. In addition, botulinum toxin is also recommended in guidelines as a third-line treatment for neuropathic pain, but in Germany this is an off-label application. This article provides an overview of the current clinically relevant areas of application of botulinum toxin in the field of pain medicine.

Migraine and treatment-resistant depression

Migraine and major depressive disorders (MDD) or treatment resistant depression (TRD) represent a significant global burden and are often comorbid, further complicating diagnosis and treatment. Epidemiological studies have demonstrated a bidirectional relationship between migraine and MDD/TRD, with patients suffering from one disorder exhibiting a heightened risk of developing the other. This association is believed to result from shared genetic factors, neurotransmitter dysregulation, inflammation, hormonal alteration, and other conditions comorbid with both disorders. Emerging evidence suggests that therapeutics targeting common pathways in both disorders may be beneficial for comorbid patients. Novel therapeutics for migraine or MDD/TRD, such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeting therapy, onabotulinumtoxinA, ketamine/esketamine, vagus nerve stimulation or transcranial magnetic stimulation, may be helpful in selected patients with comorbid migraine-MDD/TRD. Nevertheless, continued efforts are needed to improve early detection and intervention, to better understand the complex interplay between genetic, environmental, and psychosocial factors contributing to this comorbidity, to identify novel therapeutic targets, and ultimately, to alleviate the disease burden caused by this comorbidity.