Preventive treatment patterns and treatment satisfaction in migraine: results of the OVERCOME (EU) study

Acute Treatment Patterns, Migraine Burden, and Healthcare Resource Use in People With Migraine: Results From the OVERCOME (EU) Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

The ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care Of MigrainE (OVERCOME) European Union (EU) is part of an overarching population-based study program that also includes the United States and Japan. Here, we report data on the migraine/severe headache burden and the use of acute medication and healthcare resources in Spain and Germany.

METHODS

OVERCOME (EU) was an online, non-interventional, cross-sectional survey conducted in adults in Spain and Germany between October 2020 and February 2021. A total migraine cohort was established based on health survey participants who reported headache/migraine in the last 12 months AND identified as having migraine based on modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, third edition criteria OR self-reported physician diagnosis. Data were analyzed for the total migraine cohort and the subcohort with moderate to severe headache attacks, with average pain severity ≥ 5 points, pain duration ≥ 4 h, and at least moderate disability due to migraine [Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score ≥ 11] over the past 3 months.

RESULTS

Pain of moderate or severe intensity was the most frequent symptom in the total migraine cohort (n = 19,103/20,756; 92.0%). Proportions of participants reporting severe disability (MIDAS Grade IV), poorer quality of life (QoL; Migraine-Specific QoL Questionnaire), and higher interictal burden (Migraine Interictal Burden Scale-4), generally increased with number of headache days (HDs)/month. Most participants (92.5%) reported current acute migraine/severe headache medication use, although only 39.0% were using triptans. In the moderate to severe attacks subcohort (n = 5547), 48.4% were using triptans, with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs the most common acute medication. The moderate to severe attacks subcohort also reported poorer QoL and greater pain and disability with increasing HDs/month, although severe interictal burden was reported for ~ 60% of participants regardless of HDs/month. Treatment satisfaction (six-item migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire) in those using triptans was generally poor in both total and subcohorts.

CONCLUSION

High migraine-related burden levels were reported, despite use of acute medication. Although triptans are recommended for moderate to severe migraine attacks in Spanish and German guidelines, less than half of participants were using triptans; treatment satisfaction in those using triptans was generally poor. New tailored treatment options may help address unmet needs in current acute treatment.

Medication "underuse" headache

BACKGROUND

Many risk factors have been associated with migraine progression, including insufficient and ineffective utilization of migraine medications; however, they have been inadequately explored. This has resulted in suboptimal usage of medications without effective altering of prescribing recommendations for patients, posing a risk for migraine chronification.

METHODS

Our aim is to conduct a comprehensive review of the available evidence regarding the underuse of migraine medications, both acute and preventive. The term "underuse" includes, but is not limited to: (1) ineffective use of appropriate and inappropriate medication; (2) underutilization; (3) inappropriate timing of usage; and (4) patient dissatisfaction with medication.

RESULTS

The underuse of both acute and preventive medications has been shown to contribute to the progression of migraine. In terms of acute medication, chronification occurs as a result of insufficient drug use, including failure of the prescriber to select the appropriate type based on pain intensity and disability, patients taking medication too late (more than 60 minutes after the onset or after central sensitization has occurred as evidenced by allodynia), and discontinuation because of lack of effect or intolerable side effects. The underlying cause of inadequate effectiveness of acute medication lies in its inability to halt the propagation of peripheral activation to central sensitization in a timely manner. For oral and injectable preventive migraine medications, insufficient efficacy and intolerable side effects have led to poor adherence and discontinuation with subsequent progression of migraine. The underlying pathophysiology here is rooted in the repetitive stimulation of afferent sensory pain fibers, followed by ascending brainstem pain pathways plus dysfunction of the endogenous descending brainstem pain inhibitory pathway. Although anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) medications partially address pain caused by the above factors, including decreased efficacy and tolerability from conventional therapy, some patients do not respond well to this treatment. Research suggests that initiating preventive anti-CGRP treatment at an early stage (during low frequency episodic migraine attacks) is more beneficial than commencing it during high frequency episodic attacks or when chronic migraine has begun.

CONCLUSIONS

The term "medication underuse" is underrecognized, but it holds significant importance. Optimal usage of acute care and preventive migraine medications could potentially prevent migraine chronification and improve the treatment of migraine attacks.

Treatment patterns and characteristics of patients with migraine: results from a retrospective database study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Clinical characteristics and treatment practice of patients with migraine in Japan in real-world setting have not been fully investigated. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using claims database to understand the clinical practice of migraine in recent years and to characterize patients potentially not managed well by current treatment options.

METHODS

Our study used data from the large claims database maintained by JMDC Inc. Patients with diagnosis of headache or migraine between January 1, 2018, and July 31, 2022, were defined as the headache cohort, and those with migraine diagnosis and prescription of migraine treatments among the headache cohort were included in the migraine cohort. In the headache cohort, characteristics of medical facilities and status of imaging tests to distinguish secondary headache were examined. Treatment patterns and characteristics of patients potentially not managed well by acute/preventive treatment were described in migraine cohort.

RESULTS

In the headache cohort, 989,514 patients were included with 57.0% females and mean age of 40.3 years; 77.0% patients visited clinics (with ≤ 19 bed capacities) for their primary diagnosis, and 30.3% patients underwent imaging tests (computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging). In the migraine cohort, 165,339 patients were included with 65.0% females and mean age of 38.8 years. In the migraine cohort, 95.6% received acute treatment while 20.8% received preventive treatment. Acetaminophen/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were most common (54.8%) as the initial prescription for migraine treatment followed by triptan (51.4%). First treatment prescription included preventive treatment in 15.6%, while the proportion increased to 82.2% in the fourth treatment prescription. Among patients with more than 12 months of follow-up, 3.7% had prescription patterns suggestive of risk of medication-overuse headache, and these patients were characterized by a higher percentage of females and a higher prevalence of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that approximately one-fifth of the patients with migraine visiting medical facilities use preventive drugs. The presence of potential patients at risk of medication-overuse headache and the role of clinics in migraine treatment were also described.

Documentation of International Classification of Headache Disorders Criteria in Patient Medical Records: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine headache diagnosis and treatment patterns in the outpatient setting, focusing on documentation of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) criteria.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective cohort data were collected from electronic medical records of adults aged 18-35 who presented to resident-staffed family medicine outpatient clinics in the Midwest, USA, for a new or worsening headache between 2015 and 2016. Diagnosis codes were used to summarize the overall nature and prevalence of headaches. A random subset of 30 patients each for migraine headache (MGH) with and without aura and tension-type headache (TTH) were reviewed to determine how many of the five possible ICHD criteria were documented. Demographics/clinical characteristics, ICHD criteria, number and type of medications, and healthcare utilization (imaging, primary and emergency department care) through one year following the initial visit were summarized and compared across headache types.

RESULTS

There were 716 unique patients during the study period (414 MGH, 227 unspecified headaches, 75 TTH, or others). Complete ICHD criteria were documented for two patients in total. There was partial documentation (e.g., one to four of the possible five) for 30% of TTH, 63% of MGH without aura, and 77% of MGH with aura (p<0.05). Across headache types, patients were prescribed an average of 2.3 to 3.3 medications over one year, with MGH patients generally trying more medications (up to eight for those with aura and up to 12 for those without). Abortive or rescue medications were prescribed to nearly all patients; prophylactics were prescribed for 50% of MGH with aura, 66.7% of MGH without aura, and 53.3%. Non-pharmacologic interventions were less prescribed: 33.3% of TTH patients and 3.3% of MGH types combined (p<0.05). Healthcare utilization was highest for MGH with aura (ED visits) and without aura (clinic visits) patients compared to TTH (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Headache-related documentation is often incomplete, which may limit interpretation and associations between diagnoses, prescribing patterns, and healthcare utilization. Future studies should evaluate the use of electronic medical records (EMR)-based templates to improve documentation, and additional detailed studies are needed in the local setting to determine whether treatment, including the use of non-pharmacologic and prophylactic methods of treatment, is optimal.