InterMiG: international differences in the therapeutic approach to migraine patients in specialized headache centers.

BACKGROUND: There is currently a wide therapeutic arsenal for migraine patients, without a single first-line preventive drug and we choose the different available alternatives taking into account comorbidities, national guidelines, previous treatments and personal experiences. Our objective was to evaluate the differences in the use of migraine treatments between neurologists from different countries. METHODS: This is a multi-centre observational study carried out by neurologists from specialized headache units in seven countries, retrospective with consecutive inclusion of all patients presenting with a migraine diagnosis, over a period of three months. RESULTS: A total of 734 patients were recruited but only 600 were considered in the analysis in order to homogenize the patient cohorts from countries: 200 Spain (ES), 100 Italy (IT), 85 Russia (RUS), 80 Germany (DE), 60 Portugal (PT), 45 Poland (PL) and 30 Australia (AU). 85.4 % of patients were women with a mean age of 42.6 ± 11.8 years. Considering previous and current preventive treatment, the order of use was: antidepressants (69.3 %), antiepileptic drugs (54.7 %), beta-blockers and antihypertensive drugs (49.7 %), OnabotulinumtoxinA (44.0 %) and others (36.2 %). Statistically significant differences were found between all pharmacological classes: antidepressants were commonly used in all countries, with the exception of Poland (AU: 76.7 %, IT: 71.0 %, DE: 60.0 %, PL: 31.1 %, PT: 71.7 %, RUS: 70.6 %, ES: 78.5 %; p < 0.0001); antiepileptic drugs were more frequently prescribed in Portugal, Australia and Spain (AU: 73.3 %, IT: 40.0 %, DE: 37.5 %, PL: 48.9 %, PT: 85.0 %, RUS: 29.4 % and ES: 69.0 %; p < 0.0001); beta-blockers and antihypertensive drugs were frequently used in all countries except Italy (AU: 60.0 %, IT: 14.0 %, DE: 53.8 %, PL: 48.9 %, PT: 68.3 %, RUS: 49.4 % and ES: 59.0 %; p < 0.0001); BTX-A were predominately used in Spain, Italy and Australia (AU:56.7 %, IT:58.0 %, DE:20.0 %, PL: 42.2 %, PT: 26.7 %, RUS: 24.7 % and ES: 58.5 %; p < 0.0001) and others were most frequently used in Poland (AU: 0.0 %, IT: 19.0 %, DE: 42.5 %, PL: 95.6 %, PT: 31.7 %, RUS: 3.5 % and ES: 49.5 %; p < 0.0001). If only patients without comorbidities are considered (200/600), statistically differences between countries persist in all preventive treatments. CONCLUSIONS: There is heterogeneity in the choice of preventive treatment between different countries. Prospective comparative studies of the different oral and subcutaneous alternatives would help to create a global therapeutic algorithm that would guarantee the best option for our patients.

Long-term effectiveness and safety of natalizumab in a Portuguese population.

OBJECTIVES: Natalizumab long-term effectiveness data in real-world relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) is needed. Our objective is to report the long-term effectiveness and safety of natalizumab in a cohort of RRMS patients. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of natalizumab treatment for two years or longer in RRMS. Annualized relapse rate, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), brain magnetic resonance imaging T2 lesion volume, JC virus antibody status, previous treatments and adverse events were analysed. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients were included with a mean treatment duration of 44.86±17.39months. Over the treatment duration there was a significant decrease in annualized relapse rate (88.37%) and EDSS (28.57%); no evidence of clinical disease activity in 73.24% and 61.97% after one and two-years respectively; and brain magnetic resonance imaging T2 lesion volume remained stable. Forty patients suspended natalizumab, in 85% due to high risk of developing progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML). The major complication was PML (n=3). CONCLUSIONS: Natalizumab showed effectiveness in the long-term follow up period of our cohort, with reduction of ARR, EDSS, and MRI lesion load stabilization. PML was the major complication.

The effectiveness of fingolimod in a Portuguese real-world population.

INTRODUCTION: Fingolimod is an oral treatment for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (RRMS) with established efficacy in clinical trials. Post-marketing studies are important to assess its effectiveness in real-world populations. OBJECTIVES: To report the effectiveness and safety of fingolimod in a real-world population. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients with RRMS treated with fingolimod for at least six months. The demographic characteristics, Annualized Relapse Rate (ARR), Expanded Disability Status Score (EDSS), previous treatments and Adverse Events (AE) were analysed. RESULTS: 104 patients were included, with a mean treatment duration of 21.06 months. First-line disease modifying therapy failure patients (n=56) had an ARR decrease of 68.53% (1.43 vs. 0.45, p<0.001), 66.07% of them were relapse-free, EDSS significantly decreased (2.5 vs. 2.0, p<0.001) and 91.07% showed no disability progression. In patients previously treated with natalizumab as a second-line drug mainly switched due to safety concerns (n=41), although the differences were not statistically significant, both the ARR and EDSS increased in 41.46% and 19.51% of patients, respectively. In treatment-naive patients (n=7) the ARR decreased 94.90% (1.57 vs. 0.08, p=0.027) and there was no disability progression. 56.7% of all patients experienced AE not considered serious in any of the cases. CONCLUSION: In this population, fingolimod was an effective treatment after first-line treatment failure, decreasing both the ARR and EDSS, and may be an effective option after natalizumab.