Evaluating patient and family preferences for acute and preventive pediatric headache treatment

OBJECTIVE

To describe acute and preventive treatment preferences among youth with migraine and their parents/guardians, and to describe the degree of youth-parent/guardian preference agreement.

BACKGROUND

Headache disorders are common in youth, but little is known about patient and family preferences for headache treatments and outcomes.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional survey, a headache treatment preferences questionnaire was co-created with stakeholders, piloted, and distributed to consenting youth with migraine aged 9-18 years and parents/guardians at a tertiary care headache clinic in western Canada. Response data were summarized for youth and parents/guardians separately, and agreement rates within a youth-parent/guardian pair were compared to a hypothesized agreement rate of 80% for the primary questionnaire items.

RESULTS

Seventy-two youth and n = 94 parents/guardians participated, with n = 63 in youth-parent/guardian pairs. Freedom from pain and rapid relief, and reducing pain severity and headache frequency were top acute and preventive treatment priorities, respectively. More than 90% (69/72) agreed that ≥ 50% reduction in headache frequency was a good target. For both acute and preventive interventions, swallowed pill-based options were most often selected as the preferred first-line treatment, with neuromodulation selected as the preferred second-line treatment. The level of agreement within youth-parent/guardian pairs on preferred treatment modalities was lower than hypothesized for acute (63% [40/63], 95% confidence interval [CI] = 52-75%, χ2 = 10.73, p = 0.001) but not for preventive treatment (73% [46/63], 95% CI = 62-84%, χ2 = 1.92, p = 0.166). Regarding which treatment modalities were perceived as most effective, youth-parent agreement was lower than hypothesized for both acute (48% [30/63], 95% CI = 35-60%, χ2 = 41.29, p < 0.001) and preventive treatment (46% [29/63], 95% CI = 34-58%, χ2 = 45.43, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Youth and family preferences aligned qualitatively, but sometimes diverged quantitatively, from typical clinical trial outcomes. The level of agreement within youth-parent/guardian pairs on treatment preferences and perceptions was low. Clinicians should consider both perspectives as they may be divergent.

Acute care of cyclic vomiting syndrome and cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome in the home and emergency department for: Special supplement/proceedings of 3rd international symposium

BACKGROUND

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) and cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) are both characterized by episodic, acute transitions from asymptomatic states to highly symptomatic states of nausea, repetitive vomiting, and often severe abdominal pain. Patients with CVS and CHS face significant challenges to abort or mitigate episodes at home and often require emergency department (ED)-based care.

PURPOSE

This paper reviews the current treatment approach to abort acute CVS and CHS episodes at home and in ED settings. Multiple pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions have been demonstrated to potentially abort CVS or CHS episodes. Systemic pharmacologic agents often used as abortive therapy include triptans, antiemetics, anxiolytics, NK-1 receptor antagonists, antipsychotics, sedatives in general, and various analgesic / anti-inflammatory medications. Nonsystemic, nonpharmacologic approaches include reducing external stimuli (quiet room, dim lights, etc.), and hot water bathing or the application of topical capsaicin cream. More research is needed to develop evidence-based, individualized abortive treatment plans, as well as to determine whether the abortive treatment for CVS requires a fundamentally different approach than for CHS. When home-based approaches fail, all patients with CVS or CHS should receive nonjudgmental, informed, and compassionate care in the ED to abort their episode. Patients with more severe forms of CVS/CHS who require more frequent ED utilization should develop care plans with their ED to assure predictable and effective treatment.

Efficacy and safety of levetiracetam for migraine prophylaxis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Levetiracetam (LEV), an antiepileptic drug, has been effective in adult migraine prevention but lacks extensive research in children. This study evaluates LEV's efficacy and safety for pediatric migraine prophylaxis.

Methods

We reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs in major databases through 8 January 2024, focusing on four efficacy endpoints and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Data synthesis involved pooled relative risks or odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, using fixed- or random-effects models as appropriate.

Results

Eight studies with 190 participants showed that after taking LEV, the mean headache frequency decreased 5.19 per month (MD: -5.19, 95% CI: -7.11 to -3.27, p < 0.00001) and improved headache-free rates to 28% (95% CI: 0.17-0.41). More than 83% experienced a >50% reduction in monthly headache frequency. The migraine disability score decreased by 33.51 points (MD: -33.51, 95% CI: -38.46 to -28.55, p < 0.00001). ADR incidence did not significantly differ between LEV and control groups (RR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.39 to 2.85, p = 0.91), with an overall ADR rate of 18% (95% CI: 0.13-0.24). The most common ADR was irritability (12%), leading to treatment discontinuation in 13% of cases (95% CI: 0.05-0.30).

Conclusion

LEV has shown good efficacy in preventing pediatric migraines. However, its safety requires further confirmation through more extensive and well-designed RCTs.

Systematic Review Registration

Identifier PROSPERO CRD42024497643.

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.

The state of art on the use of patient reported outcomes in migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to explore the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in migraine. Traditionally assessed through specific features, recent adoption of PROMs allows for a more objective and quantifiable evaluation. PROMs, which are standardized questionnaires collecting health information directly from a patients' perspective, cover various aspects, including migraine specific aspects. The review focuses on delineating the applications and interpretation of commonly used PROMs in migraine research, with an emphasis on their integration in clinical care.

RECENT FINDINGS

Generic and migraine-specific PROMs play a crucial role in clinical research, particularly in assessing health-related quality of life, disability, impact, and associated comorbidities. Some of these measures are strongly recommended to be used by the International Guidelines and are, in fact, mandated by the FDA for product labeling. Recently, there has been an expansion in the use of PROMs to assess migraine in diverse populations, in particular pediatric patients. However, the application of these measures in clinical care shows considerable heterogeneity, and some have not been validated specifically for migraine. The existing multitude of PROMs, coupled with ongoing development of new ones to better capture patient concerns, creates complexity in their research and clinical application. To address these challenges, it becomes imperative to streamline their use, focusing on those that are more validated and better aligned with the patients' perspective including different populations' needs.

SUMMARY

The utilization of PROMs in evaluating migraine enables a more holistic assessment, helps quantify the impact of the disease facilitating change measurement, improves communication between healthcare providers and patients and, guides treatment decisions for improved outcomes. However, the increasing number of PROMs questionnaires, underscores the importance of validating these tools for migraine and, the dynamic nature of the disease makes it relevant to decide with whom, why and when these should be used.

A 12-week randomized double-blind clinical trial of eicosapentaenoic acid intervention in episodic migraine

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) may benefit migraine improvement, though prior studies are inconclusive. This study evaluated the effect of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) on episodic migraine (EM) prevention. Seventy individuals with EM participated in a 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial from March 2020 and May 2022. They were randomly assigned to either the EPA (N = 35, 2 g fish oil with 1.8 g of EPA as a stand-alone treatment daily), or the placebo group (N = 35, 2 g soybean oil daily). Migraine frequency and headache severity were assessed using the monthly migraine days, visual analog scale (VAS), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MSQ), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) in comparison to baseline measurements. The EPA group significantly outperformed the placebo in reducing monthly migraine days (-4.4 ± 5.1 days vs. - 0.6 ± 3.5 days, p = 0.001), days using acute headache medication (-1.3 ± 3.0 days vs. 0.1 ± 2.3 days, p = 0.035), improving scores for headache severity (ΔVAS score: -1.3 ± 2.4 vs. 0.0 ± 2.2, p = 0.030), disability (ΔMIDAS score: -13.1 ± 16.2 vs. 2.6 ± 20.2, p = 0.001), anxiety and depression (ΔHADS score: -3.9 ± 9.4 vs. 1.1 ± 9.1, p = 0.025), and quality of life (ΔMSQ score: -11.4 ± 19.0 vs. 3.1 ± 24.6, p = 0.007). Notably, female particularly benefited from EPA, underscoring its potential in migraine management. In conclusion, high-dose EPA has significantly reduced migraine frequency and severity, improved psychological symptoms and quality of life in EM patients, and shown no major adverse events, suggesting its potential as a prophylactic for EM.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of pharmacological preventive treatment for persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND

Persistent headache attributed to traumatic injury to the head is divided into two subtypes, one attributed to moderate or severe traumatic injury and another attributed to mild traumatic injury (i.e., concussion). The latter is much more prevalent, in part because more than 90% of cases with traumatic brain injury are classified as mild. The pathophysiology of persistent post-traumatic headache is poorly understood and the underlying mechanisms are likely multifactorial. There is currently no approved treatment specifically for persistent post-traumatic headache, and management strategies rely on medications used for migraine or tension-type headache. Therefore, high-quality trials are urgently needed to support clinical decision-making and optimize management strategies. International guidelines can facilitate appropriate trial design and ensure the acquisition of high-quality data evaluating the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of available and novel pharmacological therapies for the preventive treatment of persistent post-traumatic headache.

METHODS

The development of this guideline was based on a literature review of available studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, along with a review of previously published guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment for episodic and chronic migraine. The identified literature was critically appraised, and due to the scarcity of scientific evidence, recommendations were primarily based on the consensus of experts in the field.

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for designing state-of-the-art controlled clinical trials aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of preventive treatments for persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury.

Effect of Propranolol Prophylaxis on Headache Frequency in Children with Migraine Without Aura: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of propranolol prophylaxis with placebo on headache frequency in children with migraine over the 3-mo follow-up.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial children aged 6-12 y with newly diagnosed migraine without aura as per the International Classification for Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3) criteria were enroled. They were randomized to the intervention group receiving oral propranolol (1-3 mg/kg/d, BID) and the control group receiving a similar looking, inert, oral placebo for migraine prophylaxis for 3 mo. The number of migraine attacks over the 3-mo follow-up (using a headache diary) was the primary outcome. Pediatric Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (PedMIDAS) was used for assessing disability and Visual analogue scale was used for assessing headache severity. Analysis was done on intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

Twenty children (10 in each group) completed the study. The two groups were similar at baseline. Both the study drugs produced significant reduction of headache frequency after the study intervention (p = 0.002). However, there was no difference between the two groups with respect to either the median (IQR) number of headache attacks [22 (20, 25) vs. 14 (10, 20); p = 0.05], headache severity [1 (0, 1) vs. 0.5 (0, 1); p = 0.48] or migraine disability [39.5 (28, 44) vs. 35 (22, 38); p = 0.27]. Adverse effects were higher in the intervention group (p = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Propranolol was effective for migraine prophylaxis in children but the effect was not higher than placebo. Larger placebo-controlled trials of propranolol need to be conducted to decide its place in migraine prophylaxis in children.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Thailand Clinical Trials Registry; TCTR20200621001.

Methodological considerations on real-world evidence studies of monoclonal antibodies against the CGRP-pathway for migraine: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Real-world data are accumulating on the effectiveness, tolerability and safety of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway monoclonal antibodies for the preventive treatment of migraine. We performed a systematic review of the methodology of prospective, observational, clinic-based real-world evidence studies with these drugs in both episodic and chronic migraine.

METHODS

The objectives were to evaluate the definitions and reported outcomes used, and to perform a risk of bias assessment for each of the different studies. PubMed and EMBASE were systematically queried for relevant scientific articles. Study quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using the "National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Study Quality Assessment Tool for Before-After (Pre-Post) Studies with No Control Group".

RESULTS

Forty-six studies fitted the criteria for the systematic review and were included in the analysis. Ten studies (21.7%) defined a migraine day for the study, while only 5 studies defined a headache day for the study (10.9%). The most common primary endpoint/objective of the studies was change in monthly migraine days (n = 16, 34.8%), followed by responder rate (n = 15, 32.6%) and change in monthly headache days (n = 5, 10.9%). Eight studies (17.4%) did not define the primary endpoint/objective. Thirty-three studies were graded as "good" quality and 13 studies were graded as "fair".

CONCLUSION

Our analysis shows rather significant heterogeneity and/or lack of predefined primary outcomes/objectives, definitions of outcomes measures and the use of longitudinal monitoring (e.g. headache diaries). Standardization of terminology, definitions and protocol procedures for real-world evidence studies of preventive treatments for migraine are recommended.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered with PROSPERO with ID CRD42022369366.

Validity of self-reported migraine in adolescents and children

OBJECTIVE

To assess agreement for migraine day between self-report and diagnostic guidelines for children and adolescents using a headache diary.

BACKGROUND

Trial guidelines recommend prospective collection of headache features and adoption of migraine day as an outcome measure, but there is no clear consensus on the definition of migraine day.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of data from two projects-a prospective cohort study validating a pediatric scale of treatment expectancy and a clinical trial of occipital nerve blocks to treat status migrainosus. Participants completed a text message-based diary for 4 or 12 weeks (depending on treatment), and a detailed headache assessment on a random 20% of headache days. Using this assessment, we determined whether a headache day qualified for migraine or probable migraine, based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3).

RESULTS

Of 122 enrolled children and adolescents, 106 (86.9%) completed ≥1 detailed headache assessment (438 entries). We found moderate agreement between self-reported and ICHD-derived migraine day, with a Cohen's Kappa of 0.50 (positive predictive value [PPV]: 0.66; negative predictive value [NPV]: 0.85; correlation: 0.51). Allowing for ICHD-derived probable migraine significantly increased PPV (0.66 vs. 0.94; 95% CI: 0.57-0.74 vs. 0.90-0.97), but decreased NPV (0.85 vs. 0.293; CI: 0.77-0.90 vs. 0.199-0.40), Cohen's Kappa (0.50 vs. 0.237; CI: 0. 389-0.60 vs. 0.139-0.352), and correlation (r = 0.51 vs. 0.302; CI: 0.41-0.61 vs. 0.192-0.41). Pain severity (OR: 5.7; CI: 2.39-13.8), photophobia (OR: 4.1; CI: 1.02-16.6), and phonophobia (OR: 7.5; CI: 1.95-29.3) were significantly associated with participants' perception of migraine.

CONCLUSION

We found only moderate agreement between self-reported and ICHD-derived migraine day, suggesting both measures are not equal but may represent overlapping aspects of migraine as a disease. This highlights the difficulty of applying ICHD criteria to individual attacks. We recommend greater methodological transparency in future research to avoid readers conflating both measures.

Management of chronic migraine

Chronic migraine is a neurologic disorder associated with considerable disability, lost productivity, and a profound economic burden worldwide. The past five years have seen a dramatic expansion in new treatments for this often challenging condition, among them calcitonin gene related peptide antagonists and neuromodulatory devices. This review outlines the epidemiology of and diagnostic criteria and risk factors for chronic migraine. It discusses evidence based drug and non-drug treatments, their advantages and disadvantages, and the principles of patient centered care for adults with chronic migraine, with attention to differential diagnosis and comorbidities, clinical reasoning, initiation and monitoring, cost, and availability. It discusses the international guidelines on drug treatment for chronic migraine and evaluates non-drug treatments including behavioral and complementary therapies and lifestyle modifications. Finally, it discusses the management of chronic migraine in special populations, including pediatrics, pregnancy, and older people, and considers future questions and emerging research in the field.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for Clinic-Based Headache Registries, 1st edition

Clinic-based headache registries collect data for a wide variety of purposes including delineating disease characteristics, longitudinal natural disease courses, headache management approaches, quality of care, treatment safety and effectiveness, factors that predict treatment response, health care resource utilization, clinician adherence to guidelines, and cost-effectiveness. Registry data are valuable for numerous stakeholders, including individuals with headache disorders and their caregivers, healthcare providers, scientists, healthcare systems, regulatory authorities, pharmaceutical companies, employers, and policymakers. This International Headache Society document may serve as guidance for developing clinic-based headache registries. Use of registry data requires a formal research protocol that includes: 1) research aims; 2) methods for data collection, harmonization, analysis, privacy, and protection; 3) methods for human subject protection; and 4) publication and dissemination plans. Depending upon their objectives, headache registries should include validated headache-specific questionnaires, patient reported outcome measures, data elements that are used consistently across studies (i.e., "common data elements"), and medical record data. Amongst other data types, registries may be linked to healthcare and pharmacy claims data, biospecimens, and neuroimaging data. Headache diagnoses should be made according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders diagnostic criteria. The data from well-designed headache registries can provide wide-ranging and novel insights into the characteristics, burden, and treatment of headache disorders and ultimately lead to improvements in the management of patients with headache.

Development of a text message-based headache diary in adolescents and children

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend diaries in migraine trials for prospective collection of headache symptoms. Studies in other patient populations suggest higher adherence with electronic diaries instead of pen-and-paper. This study examines the feasibility of a text message-based (texting) diary for children and adolescents with headache.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of data from a study validating a pediatric scale of treatment expectancy. We developed a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant texting diary collecting headache characteristics, medication use, and disability with 3-5 core daily questions for 4 or 12 weeks depending on headache treatment. Adherence was incentivized.

RESULTS

93 participants consented to the expectancy study. Five participants opted for a paper diary for follow-up. 88 participants chose the texting diary with 28 4-week and 60 12-week participants. Five participants did not complete the enrollment visit. Of those remaining 83, 89% of 4-week and 93% of 12-week participants responded on at least 80% of days. On average, participants fully completed 88% (4-week cohort) and 90% (12-week) of diary entries.

CONCLUSIONS

Text messages are a promising method for collecting patient-reported data. Adherence was similar to that reported for paper diaries in other pediatric migraine trials, but time-stamped entries ensure real-time data collection.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for Controlled Clinical Trials in Cluster Headache

In 1995, a committee of the International Headache Society developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for Controlled Trials of Drugs in Cluster Headache. These have not been revised. With the emergence of new medications, neuromodulation devices and trial designs, an updated version of the International Headache Society Guidelines for Controlled Clinical Trials in Cluster Headache is warranted. Given the scarcity of evidence-based data for cluster headache therapies, the update is largely consensus-based, but takes into account lessons learned from recent trials and demands by patients. It is intended to apply to both drug and neuromodulation treatments, with specific proposals for the latter when needed. The primary objective is to propose a template for designing high quality, state-of-the-art, controlled clinical trials of acute and preventive treatments in episodic and chronic cluster headache. The recommendations should not be regarded as dogma and alternative solutions to particular methodological problems should be explored in the future and scientifically validated.

Beyond pain control: Outcome and treatment preferences in pediatric migraine

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe treatment preferences and perceived quality of existing outcome measures among children and adolescents with migraine and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND

Across disciplines, there is increasing recognition of the value of direct input from stakeholders. Little empirical work has been done to determine what outcomes matter most to pediatric patients with migraine and their caregivers.

METHODS

In this qualitative study, we recruited participants from the multicenter, prospective Pediatric Migraine Registry. We used stratified purposive sampling to recruit children and adolescents of varied ages and headache frequency. Patients with migraine and their caregivers completed semistructured interviews targeting treatment preferences and perceived quality of existing outcome measures. Emergent themes and subthemes were identified using conventional content analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty dyads of children/adolescents and their caregivers were enrolled and completed 59 interviews (n = 29 children/adolescent interviews and n = 30 caregiver interviews). Three themes emerged. (1) Symptom relief: Looking beyond headache resolution: Participants described the value of outcomes in addition to pain relief, including a reduction in migraine intensity and improvement in non-pain symptoms. (2) Trade-offs between side effects and relief: Participants described cost-benefit analyses that can occur with headache treatment and acknowledged the impact of drug side effects on daily life and medication adherence. (3) Child-centered treatment: Participants described medication attributes salient to the pediatric context, including age-appropriate routes of administration and adequate safety data.

CONCLUSIONS

Children, adolescents, and caregivers impacted by migraine value outcomes in addition to traditionally studied migraine endpoints. Participants valued decreased pain severity, even in the absence of pain resolution. Participants also prioritized the absence of side effects and key medication attributes, including fast onset and age-appropriate routes of administration. These results highlight an opportunity to design patient-centered clinical trials, develop drugs, and support product labeling that align with the outcomes valued most by children and adolescents with migraine and their caregivers.

Emerging Pharmacological Treatments for Migraine in the Pediatric Population

Headaches in children and adolescents have high incidence and prevalence rates, with consequent elevated disability costs to individuals and the community. Pediatric migraine is a disorder with substantial clinical differences compared to the adult form. Few clinical trials have been performed specifically on primary headache in pediatric populations using acute and preventative treatments, often with conflicting findings. The limited high-quality data on the effectiveness of treatments are also due to the high placebo effect, in terms of reductions in both the frequency and intensity of migraine attacks in the pediatric population. The recent introduction of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway inhibitors and ditans is changing the treatment of migraine, but the majority of the data are still limited to adulthood. Thus, few drugs have indications for migraine treatment in the pediatric age group, and limited evidence gives guidance as to the choice of pharmacotherapy. Herein, we review the current evidence of pharmacological treatments and ongoing clinical trials on acute and preventative treatments in the pediatric population with migraine.

Emerging Pharmacological Treatments for Migraine in the Pediatric Population

Headaches in children and adolescents have high incidence and prevalence rates, with consequent elevated disability costs to individuals and the community. Pediatric migraine is a disorder with substantial clinical differences compared to the adult form. Few clinical trials have been performed specifically on primary headache in pediatric populations using acute and preventative treatments, often with conflicting findings. The limited high-quality data on the effectiveness of treatments are also due to the high placebo effect, in terms of reductions in both the frequency and intensity of migraine attacks in the pediatric population. The recent introduction of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway inhibitors and ditans is changing the treatment of migraine, but the majority of the data are still limited to adulthood. Thus, few drugs have indications for migraine treatment in the pediatric age group, and limited evidence gives guidance as to the choice of pharmacotherapy. Herein, we review the current evidence of pharmacological treatments and ongoing clinical trials on acute and preventative treatments in the pediatric population with migraine.

Predicting quality of life outcomes in children with migraine

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have shown that the response of children with migraine to medications is suboptimum and inferior to the response reported in adults, despite the similar pathogenesis and biological mechanisms. The poor response may be related to the significant differences that make assessment and treatment of children with migraine more challenging than in adults.

AREAS COVERED

The purpose of this review is to discuss the whole process of assessment of children with migraine, the necessary skills for eliciting the clinical features, making the correct diagnosis and exploring lifestyle issues, co-morbid conditions (psychological and physical) and social influences on disease presentations. Also, to establish and address peculiarities of migraine in children that would enable clinicians to advise on lifestyle modifications, co-morbid conditions and the correct choice of treatment options including non-pharmacologic therapies and medications.

EXPERT OPINION

The choice of treatment should be based on an assessment of each individual child taking into account, age, gender, pubertal status, body weight, comorbid disorders and family history. Also considering the profile of migraine episodes, frequency, duration, associated symptoms and effects of nausea and vomiting. Using the appropriate medications in appropriate dosage, formulation and route and timing of administration may improve adherence to treatment and outcome.

Acute and chronic management of posttraumatic headache in children: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this paper is to provide a compilation of the evidence for the treatment of posttraumatic headache (PTH) in the pediatric population. Headache features and timing of therapy were considered.

BACKGROUND

Headache is the most common symptom following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), affecting more than 80% of children and adolescents. It is unclear whether treatment for PTH should be tailored based on headache characteristics, particularly the presence of migraine features, and/or chronicity of the headache.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases (1985-2021, limited to English) were performed, and key characteristics of included studies were entered into RedCAP^® (Prospero ID CRD42020198703). Articles and conference abstracts that described randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, retrospective analyses, and case series were included. Participants included youth under 18 years of age with acute (<3 months) and persistent (≥3 months) PTH. Studies that commented on headache improvement in response to therapy were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven unique studies met criteria for inclusion describing abortive pharmacologic therapies (9), preventative pharmacotherapies (5), neuromodulation (1), procedures (5), physical therapy and exercise (6), and behavioral therapy (2). Five RCTs were identified. Studies that focused on abortive pharmacotherapies were completed in the first 2 weeks post-mTBI, whereas other treatment modalities focused on outcomes 1 month to over 1-year post-injury. Few studies reported on migrainous features (7), personal history of migraine (7), or family history of migraine (3).

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence on the timing and types of therapies that are effective for treating PTH in the pediatric population. Prospective studies that account for headache characteristics and thoughtfully address the timing of therapies and outcome measurement are needed.

Trajectory of treatment response in the child and adolescent migraine prevention (CHAMP) study: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

Identify preventive medication treatment response trajectories among youth participating in the Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention study.

METHODS

Data were evaluated from 328 youth (ages 8-17). Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention study participants completed headache diaries during a 28-day baseline period and a 168-day active treatment period during which youth took amitriptyline, topiramate, or placebo. Daily headache occurrence trajectories were established across baseline and active treatment periods using longitudinal hierarchical linear modeling. We tested potential treatment group differences. We also compared final models to trajectory findings from a clinical trial of cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline for youth with chronic migraine to test for reproducibility.

RESULTS

Daily headache occurrence showed stability across baseline. Active treatment models revealed decreases in headache frequency that were most notable early in the trial period. Baseline and active treatment models did not differ by treatment group and replicated trajectory cognitive behavioral therapy plus amitriptyline trial findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Replicating headache frequency trajectories across clinical trials provides strong evidence that youth can improve quickly. Given no effect for medication, we need to better understand what drives this clinically meaningful improvement. Results also suggest an expected trajectory of treatment response for use in designing and determining endpoints for future clinical trials.Trial Registration. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01581281.

The efficacy and safety of antiepileptics in the prophylaxis of pediatric migraine: the meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Migraine is the most common primary headache among children and adolescents. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of antiepileptic drugs in the prevention of pediatric migraine.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched for eligible published RCTs from January 1970 to June 2020. Migraine frequency and ≥50% response rate were measured as the efficacy outcomes. We used "Risk of Bias" tool for quality assessment and RevMan5.3 software for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Four articles containing 7 RCTs with 794 participants compared the efficacy of AEDs with placebo. Four RCTs assessed topiramate vs. placebo and 3 RCTs evaluated divalproex sodium extended-release (DVPX ER) vs. placebo. The results demonstrated that children receiving antiepileptic drugs had a significant advantage in remitting the mean monthly migraine days compared to those who received placebo, with an MD of -0.48 (n=930, 95% CI: -0.84 to -0.12, Z=2.60, P=0.009). Topiramate significantly reduced monthly migraine days (MD =-0.70, n=489, 95% CI: -1.16 to -0.25, Z=3.01, P=0.003) but failed to improve the ≥50% response rate (MD =-1.50, n=489, 95% CI: 0.70 to 3.22, Z=1.05, P=0.30). DVPX ER did not significantly reduce monthly headache frequency (n=441, 95% CI: -0.70 to 0.47, Z=0.38, P=0.70) or improve the ≥50% response rate (n=441, 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.25, Z=0.82, P=0.41) compared with placebo. Topiramate and DVPX ER were related to higher rates of side effects and adverse reactions.

DISCUSSION

Topiramate can reduce monthly headache days in children and adolescents with migraine. However, it failed to improve the ≥50% response rate. DVPX ER showed no difference from placebo in the prophylactic treatment pediatric migraine. Side effects seemed to be more frequent in topiramate and DVPX ER treated children but generally well-tolerated.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for clinical trials with neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

Although the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration have cleared several devices that use neuromodulation to provide clinical benefits in the acute or preventive treatment of migraine, the Clinical Trials Committee of the International Headache Society has not developed guidelines specifically for clinical trials of neuromodulation devices. In recognition of the distinct needs and challenges associated with their assessment in controlled trials, the Committee provides these recommendations for optimizing the design and conduct of controlled trials of neuromodulation devices for the acute and/or preventive treatment of migraine.

METHODS

An international group of headache scientists and clinicians with expertise in neuromodulation evaluated clinical trials involving neuromodulation devices that have been published since 2000. The Clinical Trials Committee incorporated findings from this expert analysis into a new guideline for clinical trials of neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine.

RESULTS

Key terms were defined and recommendations provided relative to the assessment of neuromodulation devices for acute treatment in adults, preventive treatment in adults, and acute and preventive treatment in children and adolescents. Ethical and administrative responsibilities were outlined, and a bibliography of previous research involving neuromodulation devices was created.

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of these recommendations will improve the quality of evidence regarding this important area in migraine treatment.

The bottom-up approach: Non-invasive peripheral neurostimulation methods to treat migraine: A scoping review from the child neurologist's perspective

Migraine is a common and invalidating disorder worldwide. Patients of all ages experience the disorder as very impairing regarding their personal and occupational lives. The current approach in migraine therapy is multimodal including lifestyle management, psychoeducation and, if available, psychotherapeutic interventions, and pharmacotherapy. The lack of non-pharmacological and non-invasive treatment options call for new and innovative therapeutic approaches. Peripheral neurostimulation is a relatively new method in migraine management offering a painless and non-pharmacological way of targeting specific mechanisms involved in migraine. This review summarizes 15 recent randomized clinical trials to provide an overview of non-invasive peripheral neurostimulation methods currently available for the treatment of migraine. Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of the different interventions and their feasibility in the pediatric setting are evaluated. Vagal nerve stimulation (VNS), remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SNS) are considered effective in treating acute migraine attacks, the latter being more pronounced in migraine without aura. Regarding migraine prevention, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SNS) demonstrated efficacy, whereas repetitive neuromuscular magnetic stimulation (rNMS) may represent a further effective option in episodic migraine. REN and rNMS were found to be well-accepted with fewer patients discontinuing treatment than those receiving direct cranial nerve stimulation. In summary, peripheral neurostimulation represents a promising option to complement the multimodal therapy concept for pediatric migraine. In particular, rNMS opens a new field for research and treatment fitting the requirements of "non-invasiveness" for children. Given the reported efficacy, safety, and feasibility, the therapy decision should be made on an individual level.

Pain in Women: A Perspective Review on a Relevant Clinical Issue that Deserves Prioritization

Introduction

Gender equity and gender medicine are opportunities not to be missed, and this Expert Group Opinion Paper on pain in women aims to review the treatment of pain conditions mainly affecting women, as well as the fundamental aspects of the different clinical response to drug treatment between the genders, and what can be done for gender-specific rehabilitation.

Methods

Perspective review.

Results

Genotypic and phenotypic differences in pain between the sexes are conditioned by anatomical, physiological, neural, hormonal, psychological, social, and cultural factors, such as the response to pharmacological treatment to control pain. The examination of these factors shows that women are affected by pain diseases more frequently and severely than men and that they report pain more frequently and with a lower pain threshold than men. Some forms of pain are inherently related to gender differences, such as pain related to the genitourinary system. However, other forms of chronic pain are seen more frequently in women than men, such as migraine, rheumatological, and musculoskeletal pain, in particular fibromyalgia.

Discussion

Research is needed into the pathophysiological basis for gender differences in the generation of acute pain and maintenance of chronic pain, including the factors that put women at higher risk for developing chronic pain. In addition, different specialties need to collaborate to develop gender-related diagnostic and therapeutic guidelines, and healthcare professionals need to upskill themselves in the appropriate management of pain using existing diagnostic tools and therapeutic options.

Headache Gauge: a real-life calendar-based tool for headache monitoring

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to validate a semi-quantitative composite score tool, "Headache Gauge" (HG), to monitor the treatment effect in primary headaches in everyday clinic practice, adjustable to any chosen timeframe.

METHOD

A cohort validation study of HG was performed in primary headache patients, recovering their clinical data and patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) for headache (HIT-6, MIDAS, HURT), work impact (WPAIQ), quality-of-life (SF-12), and mood (STAI, ZUNG). HG score distribution, its relation to clinical variables, its internal consistency, and its convergent validity were determined.

RESULTS

HG was plotted in 233 patients: 90.1% females, age average 37 years, 86% with migraine, 27% with chronic headaches, and 28% with medication overuse. HG ranged from 0.21 to 58.3 in this sample, higher in chronic headaches (HG 16) and medication overuse (HG 15). HG presented good concurrent validity, significantly correlating with HIT-6 (p < 0.0001), SF-12 (p = 0.001), WPAIQ (p < 0.0001), MIDAS (p < 0.0001), and HURT (p < 0.0001). Good sensitivity to change (p < 0.001) and moderate test-retest reliability (p = 0.001) were calculated after reassessment of 147 patients (63.1% of the initial sample).

CONCLUSIONS

Headache Gauge is a clinical data-based outcome measure that conceptually translates the percentage of lost time to headache in any given timeframe. It relates to headache impact, therefore bearing the potential to be relevant in real-life clinical monitoring.

Identification of neural and psychophysical predictors of headache reduction after cognitive behavioral therapy in adolescents with migraine

ABSTRACT

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a psychological intervention that involves development of coping strategies to reduce the experience of pain. Although CBT is a promising intervention to reduce headache days in patients with migraine, it may not be effective for all patients. Thus, there is a need to identify markers that could predict which patients will respond to CBT. We aimed to determine whether baseline brain function and amygdalar connectivity, assessed by functional magnetic resonance imaging, or pain modulation capacities, assessed by the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) response, can predict a reduction in headache days after CBT in adolescents with migraine. Patients with migraine (n = 20; age range 10-17 years) completed 8 weekly CBT sessions. The CPM response was examined in the trapezius and the leg. Headache days significantly decreased after CBT (P < 0.001). Greater functional connectivity before CBT between the right amygdala and frontal gyrus, anterior cingulate cortex, and precentral gyrus was related to greater headache reduction after CBT. Greater reduction in headache days after CBT was related with less efficient CPM response before CBT at the trapezius (r = -0.492, P = 0.028) but not at the leg. This study found that headache reduction after CBT was related to right amygdala connectivity with frontal and sensorimotor regions at baseline as well as baseline pain modulation capacities. These findings suggest that individual differences in brain function and pain modulation can be associated with clinical improvements and help with determination of CBT responsiveness.

The Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin in Pediatric Chronic Migraine: A Literature Review

AIMS

To conduct a review of the literature on the use of botulinum toxin for the treatment of pediatric chronic migraine.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane/Ovid. Using our inclusion and exclusion criteria, we targeted any study, published before April 2020, evaluating the efficacy of botulinum toxin in migraineurs younger than 18 years.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included: 2 retrospective analyses, 3 case series, a case report, and a randomized control trial. Studies included 1 to 125 patients, with the number of botulinum toxin treatments ranging from 1 to 11 treatments. The results of the randomized controlled trial showed nonsuperiority between placebo and botulinum toxin. Results of the other studies were generally favorable but were difficult to compare because of lack of standardization of botulinum toxin dosing, injection paradigm, frequency and duration of treatment, usage of accompanying prophylaxis, and variation in outcome measures across studies. There was low-quality evidence that botulinum toxin improved headache frequency and intensity, though some studies demonstrated efficacy in treatment with botulinum toxin.

CONCLUSION

This review is the first of its kind, updating the literature on the efficacy of botulinum toxin in pediatric patients. Given evidence of its utility in treating pediatric migraines, off-label use should be considered in certain cases. Further study is warranted to better characterize injection paradigms and patient selection because of the limited and inconsistent data available.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of migraine attacks in episodic migraine in adults

Clinical trials are a key component of the evidence base for the treatment of headache disorders. In 1991, the International Headache Society Clinical Trials Standing Committee developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for Controlled Trials of Drugs in Migraine. Advances in drugs, devices, and biologicals, as well as novel trial designs, have prompted several updates over the nearly 30 years since, including most recently the Guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine (2018), the Guidelines for controlled trials of acute treatment of migraine attacks in adults (2019), and Guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment of migraine in children and adolescents (2019). The present update incorporates findings from new research and is intended to optimize the design of controlled trials of preventive pharmacological treatment of episodic migraine in adults. A guideline for clinical trials with devices will be published separately.

Migraine and Ischemic Stroke: Deciphering the Bidirectional Pathway

Migraine and stroke are common, disabling neurological conditions with several theories being proposed to explain this bidirectional relationship. Migraine is considered as a benign neurological disorder, but research has revealed a connection between migraine and stroke, predominantly those having migraine with aura (MA). Among migraineurs, females with MA are more susceptible to ischemic stroke and may have a migrainous infarction. Migrainous infarction mostly occurs in the posterior circulation of young women. Although there are several theories about the potential relationship between MA and stroke, the precise pathological process of migrainous infarction is not clear. It is assumed that cortical spreading depression (CSD) might be one of the essential factors for migrainous infarction. Other factors that may contribute to migrainous infarction may be genetic, hormonal fluctuation, hypercoagulation, and right to left cardiac shunts. Antimigraine drugs, such as ergot alkaloids and triptans, are widely used in migraine care. Still, they have been found to cause severe vasoconstriction, which may result in the development of ischemia. It is reported that patients with stroke develop migraines during the recovery phase. Both experimental and clinical data suggest that cerebral microembolism can act as a potential trigger for MA. Further studies are warranted for the treatment of migraine, which may lead to a decline in migraine-related stroke. In this present article, we have outlined various potential pathways that link migraine and stroke.

The crossover design for migraine preventives: an analyses of four randomized placebo-controlled trials

Aims

To evaluate the crossover design in migraine preventive treatment trials by assessing dropout rate, and potential period and carryover effect in four placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

In order to increase statistical power, the study combined data from four different RCTs performed from 1998 to 2015 at St. Olavs Hospital, Norway. Among 264 randomized patients, 120 received placebo treatment before and 144 after active treatment.

Results

Only 26 (10%) dropped out during the follow-up period of 30–48 weeks, the majority (n = 19) in the first 12 weeks. No period effect was found, since the treatment sequence did not influence the responder rate after placebo treatment, being respectively for migraine 30.5% vs. 27.4% (p = 0.59) and for headache 25.0% vs. 24.8% (p = 0.97, Chi-square test) when placebo occurred early or late. Furthermore, no carryover effect was identified, since the treatment sequence did not influence the treatment effect (difference between placebo and active treatment). There was no significant difference between those who received active treatment first and those who received placebo first with respect to change in number of days per 4 week of headache (− 0.9 vs. -1.3, p = 0.46) and migraine (− 1.2 vs. -0.9, p = 0.35, Student’s t-test).

Conclusions

Summary data from four crossover trials evaluating preventive treatment in adult migraine showed that few dropped out after the first period. No period or carryover effect was found. RCT studies with crossover design can be recommended as an efficient and cost-saving way to evaluate potential new preventive medicines for migraine in adults.