Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 75
Filter
2.
Handb Clin Neurol ; 199: 17-42, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38307644

ABSTRACT

The advent of the triptans revolutionized acute migraine treatment. The older migraine-specific drugs, the ergot alkaloids (ergotamine and dihydroergotamine), also relieve migraine attacks through agonism at the 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D receptors, but the triptans have much greater specificity for these receptors. Unlike the ergot alkaloids, the triptans do not activate many other receptor types, and therefore are much better tolerated. This reduction in side effects greatly enhanced their clinical utility as it allowed a far greater proportion of patients to take a full therapeutic dose. As a result, the clinical use of ergotamine is minimal today, although dihydroergotamine still has a significant clinical role. There is extensive evidence that the seven triptans available today, sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, rizatriptan, eletriptan, naratriptan, almotriptan, and frovatriptan, are effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Available formulations include oral tablets, orally dissolving tablets, subcutaneous injections, nasal sprays, and in some countries, rectal suppositories. For optimal benefit, therapy needs to be individualized for a given patient both regarding the triptan chosen and the formulation. This chapter discusses the ergot alkaloids and the triptans, including mechanism of action, evidence for efficacy, clinical use, and adverse effects.


Subject(s)
Ergotamine , Migraine Disorders , Serotonin 5-HT1 Receptor Agonists , Humans , Dihydroergotamine/therapeutic use , Ergotamine/therapeutic use , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Serotonin/therapeutic use , Tryptamines/therapeutic use , Serotonin 5-HT1 Receptor Agonists/therapeutic use
8.
Can J Neurol Sci ; 50(3): 418-427, 2023 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35466897

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: PREDICT was a Canadian, multicenter, prospective, observational study in adults naïve to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for chronic migraine (CM). We descriptively assess health resource utilization, work productivity, and acute medication use. METHODS: OnabotulinumtoxinA (155-195 U) was administered every 12 weeks over 2 years (≤7 treatment cycles). Participants completed a 4-item health resource utilization questionnaire and 6-item Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: Specific Health Problem V2.0. Acute medication use was recorded in daily headache diaries. Treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded throughout the study. RESULTS: A total of 197 participants were enrolled, and 184 received ≥1 treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA and were included in the analysis. Between baseline and the final visit, there were decreases in the percentage of participants who reported headache-related healthcare professional visit(s) (96.2% to 76.8%) and those who received headache-related diagnostic testing (37.5% to 9.9%). Reductions from baseline were also observed in the mean number of headache-related visits to an emergency room/urgent care clinic (2.5 to 1.4) and median headache-related hospital admissions (4.0 to 1.0). OnabotulinumtoxinA improved work productivity and reduced the mean (standard deviation) number of hours missed from work over a 7-day period (6.1 [9.7] to 3.0 [6.8]). Mean (standard deviation) acute medication use decreased from baseline (15.2 [7.6] to 9.1 [6.5] days). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world evidence from PREDICT demonstrates that onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for CM in the Canadian population reduces health resource utilization and acute medication use and improves workplace productivity, supporting the long-term benefits of using onabotulinumtoxinA for CM.


Subject(s)
Botulinum Toxins, Type A , Migraine Disorders , Adult , Humans , Botulinum Toxins, Type A/therapeutic use , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Chronic Disease , Canada , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Migraine Disorders/epidemiology , Headache/drug therapy
9.
Headache ; 62(4): 522-529, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35403223

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess real-world effectiveness, safety, and usage of erenumab in Canadian patients with episodic and chronic migraine with prior ineffective prophylactic treatments. BACKGROUND: In randomized controlled trials, erenumab demonstrated efficacy for migraine prevention in patients with ≤4 prior ineffective prophylactic migraine therapies. The "Migraine prevention with AimoviG: Informative Canadian real-world study" (MAGIC) assessed real-world effectiveness of erenumab in Canadian patients with migraine. METHODS: MAGIC was a prospective open-label, observational study conducted in Canadian patients with chronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) with two to six categories of prior ineffective prophylactic therapies. Participants were administered 70 mg or 140 mg erenumab monthly based on physician's assessment. Migraine attacks were self-assessed using an electronic diary and patient-reported outcome questionnaires. The primary outcome was the proportion of subjects achieving ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) after the 3-month treatment period. RESULTS: Among the 95 participants who mostly experienced two (54.7%) or three (32.6%) prior categories of ineffective prophylactic therapies and who initiated erenumab, treatment was generally safe and well tolerated; 89/95 (93.7%) participants initiated treatment with 140 mg erenumab. At week 12, 32/95 (33.7%) participants including 17/64 (26.6%) CM and 15/32 (48.4%) EM achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD while 30/86 (34.9%) participants including 19/55 (34.5%) CM and 11/31 (35.5%) EM achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD at week 24. Through patient-reported outcome questionnaires, 62/95 (65.3%) and 45/86 (52.3%) participants reported improvement of their condition at weeks 12 and 24, respectively. Physicians observed improvement in the condition of 78/95 (82.1%) and 67/86 (77.9%) participants at weeks 12 and 24, respectively. CONCLUSION: One-third of patients with EM and CM achieved ≥50% MMD reduction after 3 months of erenumab treatment. This study provides real-world evidence of erenumab effectiveness, safety, and usage for migraine prevention in adult Canadian patients with multiple prior ineffective prophylactic treatments.


Subject(s)
Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists , Migraine Disorders , Adult , Analgesics/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Canada , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Migraine Disorders/chemically induced , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Migraine Disorders/prevention & control , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
10.
Can J Neurol Sci ; 49(2): 239-248, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33845936

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Migraine, including episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), is a common neurological disorder that imparts a substantial health burden. OBJECTIVE: Understand the characteristics and treatment of EM and CM from a population-based perspective. METHODS: This retrospective population-based cross-sectional study utilized administrative data from Alberta. Among those with a migraine diagnostic code, CM and EM were identified by an algorithm and through exclusion, respectively; characteristics and migraine medication use were examined with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: From 79,076 adults with a migraine diagnostic code, 12,700 met the criteria for CM and 54,686 were considered to have EM. The majority of migraineurs were female, the most common comorbidity was depression, and individuals with CM had more comorbidities than EM. A larger proportion of individuals with CM versus EM were dispensed acute (80.6%: CM; 63.4%: EM) and preventative (58.0%: CM; 28.9%: EM) migraine medications over 1 year. Among those with a dispensation, individuals with CM had more acute (13.6 ± 32.2 vs. 4.6 ± 10.9 [mean ± standard deviation], 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.7-8.3), and preventative (12.6 ± 43.5 vs. 5.0 ± 12.6, 95% CI 6.9-8.4) migraine medication dispensations than EM, over 1-year. Opioids were commonly used in both groups (proportion of individuals dispensed an opioid over 1-year: 53.1%: CM; 25.7%: EM). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with EM and CM displayed characteristics and medication use patterns consistent with other reports. Application of this algorithm for CM may be a useful and efficient means of identifying subgroups of migraine using routinely collected health data in Canada.


Subject(s)
Migraine Disorders , Adult , Alberta/epidemiology , Chronic Disease , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Migraine Disorders/diagnosis , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Migraine Disorders/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies
11.
Can J Neurol Sci ; 49(4): 540-552, 2022 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34218836

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The PREDICT study assessed real-world, long-term health-related quality of life in adults with chronic migraine (CM) receiving onabotulinumtoxinA. METHODS: Canadian, multicenter, prospective, observational study in adults naïve to onabotulinumtoxinA for CM. OnabotulinumtoxinA (155-195 U) was administered every 12 weeks over 2 years (≤7 treatment cycles). Primary endpoint: mean change in Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) at treatment 4 (Tx4) versus baseline. Secondary endpoints: mean change in MSQ at final visit versus baseline, and headache days. RESULTS: 184 participants (average age 45 years; 84.8% female; 94.6% Caucasian) received ≥1 onabotulinumtoxinA treatment; 150 participants completed 4 treatments (1 year) and 123 completed all 7 treatment cycles (2 years). Mean (SD) onabotulinumtoxinA dose per treatment cycle was 171 (18) U and treatment interval was 13.2 (1.8) weeks. Baseline mean (SD) 20.9 (6.7) headache days/month decreased (Tx1: -3.5 [6.3]; Tx4: -6.5 [6.6]; p < 0.0001 versus baseline). Mean (SD) increased from baseline in MSQ at Tx4 (restrictive: 21.5 [24.3], preventive: 19.5 [24.7], emotional: 22.9 [32.9]) and the final visit (restrictive: 21.3 [23.0], preventive: 19.2 [23.7], emotional: 27.4 [30.7]), exceeding minimal important differences (all p < 0.0001). Seventy-seven (41.8%) participants reported 168 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); 38 TEAEs (12.0%) were considered treatment-related. Four (2.2%) participants reported six serious TEAEs; none were considered treatment-related. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world evidence from PREDICT demonstrates that onabotulinumtoxinA for CM in Canada improved MSQ scores and reduced headache frequency and severity, adding to the body of evidence on the long-term safety and effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for CM.


Subject(s)
Botulinum Toxins, Type A , Migraine Disorders , Adult , Botulinum Toxins, Type A/therapeutic use , Canada , Chronic Disease , Female , Headache/complications , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome
12.
Can J Neurol Sci ; 48(5): 690-697, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33234176

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Occipital nerve regional stimulation (ONS) is reported to improve pain in several studies. We examined long-term pain and functional outcomes of ONS in an open-label prospective study. METHODS: Patients with medically refractory and disabling craniofacial pain were prospectively selected for ONS. Primary outcome was a change in mean daily pain intensity on the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in NPRS, Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Pain Disability Index (PDI), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale - Revised (CESD-R), and Short Form-36 version 2 (SF36) at last follow-up. RESULTS: Thirteen patients (mean age 49.7 ± 8.4) diagnosed with occipital neuralgia (6), hemicrania continua (2), persistent idiopathic facial pain (2), post-traumatic facial pain (1), cluster headache (1), and chronic migraine (1) were enrolled. Mean NPRS improved by 2.1 ± 2.1 at 6 months and 2.1 ± 1.9 at last follow-up (23.5 ± 18.1 months). HIT-6 decreased by 8.7 ± 8.8, MIDAS decreased by 61.3 ± 71.6, and PDI decreased by 17.9 ± 18. SF36 physical functioning, bodily pain, and social functioning improved by 16.4 ± 19.6, 18.0 ± 31.6, and 26.1 ± 37.3, respectively. Moderate to severe headache days (defined as ≥50% of baseline mean NPRS) were reduced by 8.9 ± 10.2 days per month with ONS. CONCLUSION: ONS reduced the long-term NPRS and moderate-severe monthly headache days by 30% and improved functional outcomes and quality of life. A prospective registry for ONS would be helpful in accumulating a larger cohort with longer follow-up in order to improve the use of ONS.


Subject(s)
Electric Stimulation Therapy , Facial Neuralgia , Adult , Facial Pain/therapy , Humans , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Treatment Outcome
13.
Toxins (Basel) ; 12(12)2020 12 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33348571

ABSTRACT

Botulinum toxin type A has been used in the treatment of chronic migraine for over a decade and has become established as a well-tolerated option for the preventive therapy of chronic migraine. Ongoing research is gradually shedding light on its mechanism of action in migraine prevention. Given that its mechanism of action is quite different from that of the new monoclonal antibodies directed against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor, it is unlikely to be displaced to any major extent by them. Both will likely remain as important tools for patients with chronic migraine and the clinicians assisting them. New types of botulinum toxin selective for sensory pain neurons may well be discovered or produced by recombinant DNA techniques in the coming decade, and this may greatly enhance its therapeutic usefulness. This review summarizes the evolution of botulinum toxin use in headache management over the past several decades and its role in the preventive treatment of chronic migraine and other headache disorders.


Subject(s)
Botulinum Toxins, Type A/administration & dosage , Botulinum Toxins, Type A/metabolism , Headache/drug therapy , Headache/metabolism , Animals , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/metabolism , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide/antagonists & inhibitors , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide/metabolism , Clinical Trials as Topic/methods , Headache/diagnosis , Humans , Migraine Disorders/diagnosis , Migraine Disorders/drug therapy , Migraine Disorders/metabolism , Pain Measurement/drug effects , Pain Measurement/methods , Treatment Outcome
14.
Cephalalgia ; 40(10): 1026-1044, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32722936

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Analgesics/therapeutic use , Migraine Disorders/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Humans , Middle Aged
16.
Disabil Rehabil ; 42(10): 1462-1473, 2020 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30689453

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To describe the new-patient Education Session provided by the Calgary Headache Assessment and Management Program, analyze patient evaluations, and generate potential patient-centered improvements based on themes in patient feedback.Materials and Methods: Between 2008 and 2012, 1873 new patients attended the Education Session, and 913 evaluations were completed. Session objectives ratings were analyzed. Open-ended questions regarding most- and least-helpful components and suggestions for improvement were examined using thematic analysis.Results: Eighty-seven percent of respondents indicated they would recommend the session to others with headache. Median objectives ratings ranged from 9.0-10.0 out of 10 and were stable over time. Most-helpful themes included medication, types of headache, our program's multi-faceted management approach, medication overuse, triggers, and not feeling alone. Most respondents left the least-useful and suggestions sections blank or commented "nothing" or "not applicable". Least-useful themes included migraine overemphasis, insufficient or excessive medication content, participant over-disclosure, and lack of practical trigger management strategies.Conclusion: Most attendees found the Education Session useful. Those who did not provided valuable input that will allow us to modify the content. Our findings may benefit other headache programs seeking to implement or improve patient education programing. Implications for RehabilitationHeadache is a common and debilitating condition.Education is an important part of headache treatment, and has been associated with decreases in headache frequency, intensity, and disability, as well as increases in self-efficacy.A new-patient Education Session is a practical and inexpensive way to provide evidence-based medical and behavioral headache information.Quantitative and qualitative analysis of patient evaluations can help gauge relevance and direct content changes.


Subject(s)
Disabled Persons , Migraine Disorders , Headache/therapy , Humans , Patient-Centered Care , Surveys and Questionnaires
17.
Lancet Neurol ; 18(12): 1068-1069, 2019 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31701886
19.
Cephalalgia ; 39(6): 687-710, 2019 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30806518

ABSTRACT

The quality of clinical trials is an essential part 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. Scientific and clinical developments in headache medicine led to second and third editions in 2000 and 2012, respectively. The current, fourth edition of the Guidelines retains the structure and much content from previous editions. However, it also incorporates evidence from clinical trials published after the third edition as well as feedback from meetings with regulators, pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, and patient associations. Its final form reflects the collective expertise and judgement of the Committee. These updated recommendations and commentary are intended to meet the Society's continuing objective of providing a contemporary, standardized, and evidence-based approach to the conduct and reporting of randomised controlled trials for the acute treatment of migraine attacks.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/standards , Migraine Disorders/therapy , Research Design/standards , Adult , Female , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...