LayerRx Mapping ID
337
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin
Reverse Chronological Sort
Medscape Lead Concept
1457

Severe Headache or Migraine Raises Risk for Erectile Dysfunction

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:42

Key clinical point: This cross-sectional study demonstrated a significant association between severe headache or migraine and erectile dysfunction (ED) in adult men in the US; however, the results should be interpreted carefully as it did not investigate the effects of depression and anxiety on ED.

Major finding: Presence vs absence of severe headache or migraine was associated with 51% increased risk of ED (adjusted odd ratio 1.51; P = .0036). Age of 40-60 years (P = 0.0292), body mass index < 25 kg/m2 (P = .0406) or ≥30 kg/m2 (P = .0222), metabolic disorders, such as hypertension (P = .0029), diabetes mellitus (P < .001), and hyperlipidemia (P = .0281), were significant risk factors for ED in those with severe headache or migraine.

Study details: This cross-sectional study included 3117 adult men with (n = 582) and without (n = 2535) history of ED from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2001-2 and 2003-4), of whom 16.85% had severe headache or migraine.

Disclosures: This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wu X, Zhang Y, Liu G, et al. Association between severe headache or migraine and erectile dysfunction in American adults: A cross-sectional of data study from the NHANES. Int J Impot Res. 2024 (Apr 12). doi: 10.1038/s41443-024-00867-w Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: This cross-sectional study demonstrated a significant association between severe headache or migraine and erectile dysfunction (ED) in adult men in the US; however, the results should be interpreted carefully as it did not investigate the effects of depression and anxiety on ED.

Major finding: Presence vs absence of severe headache or migraine was associated with 51% increased risk of ED (adjusted odd ratio 1.51; P = .0036). Age of 40-60 years (P = 0.0292), body mass index < 25 kg/m2 (P = .0406) or ≥30 kg/m2 (P = .0222), metabolic disorders, such as hypertension (P = .0029), diabetes mellitus (P < .001), and hyperlipidemia (P = .0281), were significant risk factors for ED in those with severe headache or migraine.

Study details: This cross-sectional study included 3117 adult men with (n = 582) and without (n = 2535) history of ED from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2001-2 and 2003-4), of whom 16.85% had severe headache or migraine.

Disclosures: This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wu X, Zhang Y, Liu G, et al. Association between severe headache or migraine and erectile dysfunction in American adults: A cross-sectional of data study from the NHANES. Int J Impot Res. 2024 (Apr 12). doi: 10.1038/s41443-024-00867-w Source

Key clinical point: This cross-sectional study demonstrated a significant association between severe headache or migraine and erectile dysfunction (ED) in adult men in the US; however, the results should be interpreted carefully as it did not investigate the effects of depression and anxiety on ED.

Major finding: Presence vs absence of severe headache or migraine was associated with 51% increased risk of ED (adjusted odd ratio 1.51; P = .0036). Age of 40-60 years (P = 0.0292), body mass index < 25 kg/m2 (P = .0406) or ≥30 kg/m2 (P = .0222), metabolic disorders, such as hypertension (P = .0029), diabetes mellitus (P < .001), and hyperlipidemia (P = .0281), were significant risk factors for ED in those with severe headache or migraine.

Study details: This cross-sectional study included 3117 adult men with (n = 582) and without (n = 2535) history of ED from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2001-2 and 2003-4), of whom 16.85% had severe headache or migraine.

Disclosures: This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China. The authors declared no competing interests.

Source: Wu X, Zhang Y, Liu G, et al. Association between severe headache or migraine and erectile dysfunction in American adults: A cross-sectional of data study from the NHANES. Int J Impot Res. 2024 (Apr 12). doi: 10.1038/s41443-024-00867-w Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Study Shows Reciprocal Causal Association Between Migraine and Venous Thromboembolism

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: Presence of migraine poses a strong risk for incident venous thromboembolism (VTE), whereas VTE is modest risk factor for the onset of migraine.

Major finding: The risk of developing VTE was significantly higher in patients with vs without migraine (odds ratio [OR] 96.155; P = .004). Conversely, the risk for migraine was modestly higher in patients with vs without VTE (OR 1.002; P = .016).

Study details: This two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomization study evaluated the causal association between migraine and VTE using single-nucleotide polymorphisms as instrumental variables obtained from large-scale Genome-Wide Association Studies public databases (IEU Open GWAS project, FinnGen).

Disclosures: The study did not disclose any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Wang Y, Hu X, Wang X, et al. Exploring the two-way link between migraines and venous thromboembolism: A bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Thromb Haemost. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1055/a-2313-0311 Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Presence of migraine poses a strong risk for incident venous thromboembolism (VTE), whereas VTE is modest risk factor for the onset of migraine.

Major finding: The risk of developing VTE was significantly higher in patients with vs without migraine (odds ratio [OR] 96.155; P = .004). Conversely, the risk for migraine was modestly higher in patients with vs without VTE (OR 1.002; P = .016).

Study details: This two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomization study evaluated the causal association between migraine and VTE using single-nucleotide polymorphisms as instrumental variables obtained from large-scale Genome-Wide Association Studies public databases (IEU Open GWAS project, FinnGen).

Disclosures: The study did not disclose any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Wang Y, Hu X, Wang X, et al. Exploring the two-way link between migraines and venous thromboembolism: A bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Thromb Haemost. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1055/a-2313-0311 Source

Key clinical point: Presence of migraine poses a strong risk for incident venous thromboembolism (VTE), whereas VTE is modest risk factor for the onset of migraine.

Major finding: The risk of developing VTE was significantly higher in patients with vs without migraine (odds ratio [OR] 96.155; P = .004). Conversely, the risk for migraine was modestly higher in patients with vs without VTE (OR 1.002; P = .016).

Study details: This two-sample bidirectional Mendelian randomization study evaluated the causal association between migraine and VTE using single-nucleotide polymorphisms as instrumental variables obtained from large-scale Genome-Wide Association Studies public databases (IEU Open GWAS project, FinnGen).

Disclosures: The study did not disclose any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Wang Y, Hu X, Wang X, et al. Exploring the two-way link between migraines and venous thromboembolism: A bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Thromb Haemost. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1055/a-2313-0311 Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Meta-analysis Shows Inverse Correlation Between PACAP and Migraine Duration

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: Very low-quality evidence showed that serum pituitary adenylates cyclase–activating polypeptide (PACAP) levels were lower in adults with a longer history of migraine.

Major finding: Serum levels of PACAP were inversely associated with history of migraine duration in adults with migraine (summary r −0.35; P < .01). It was also seen that serum PACAP levels were higher during the ictal vs interictal period in both adults and children with migraine (standardized mean difference 0.41; 95% CI 0.17-0.66).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of eight observational studies including 674 patients with migraine and 371 control individuals without migraine.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Zhu G, Wang M, Kong F. Blood serum levels of PACAP and migraine onset: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Headache. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1111/head.14711 Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Very low-quality evidence showed that serum pituitary adenylates cyclase–activating polypeptide (PACAP) levels were lower in adults with a longer history of migraine.

Major finding: Serum levels of PACAP were inversely associated with history of migraine duration in adults with migraine (summary r −0.35; P < .01). It was also seen that serum PACAP levels were higher during the ictal vs interictal period in both adults and children with migraine (standardized mean difference 0.41; 95% CI 0.17-0.66).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of eight observational studies including 674 patients with migraine and 371 control individuals without migraine.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Zhu G, Wang M, Kong F. Blood serum levels of PACAP and migraine onset: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Headache. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1111/head.14711 Source

Key clinical point: Very low-quality evidence showed that serum pituitary adenylates cyclase–activating polypeptide (PACAP) levels were lower in adults with a longer history of migraine.

Major finding: Serum levels of PACAP were inversely associated with history of migraine duration in adults with migraine (summary r −0.35; P < .01). It was also seen that serum PACAP levels were higher during the ictal vs interictal period in both adults and children with migraine (standardized mean difference 0.41; 95% CI 0.17-0.66).

Study details: Findings are from a meta-analysis of eight observational studies including 674 patients with migraine and 371 control individuals without migraine.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Zhu G, Wang M, Kong F. Blood serum levels of PACAP and migraine onset: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Headache. 2024 (Apr 24). doi: 10.1111/head.14711 Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Rimegepant Effective and Well Tolerated for Acute Migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) offers pain relief within 2 hours of treatment in adults with migraine, with a tolerable safety profile.

Major finding: At 2 hours post dose, rimegepant was more effective than placebo in providing freedom from pain (risk difference 7.6; P = .0004) and the most bothersome symptom (risk difference 16.2; P < .0001). The overall rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the rimegepant and placebo groups (15.2% and 16.4%, respectively).

Study details: This subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trial included 1075 patients with acute migraine with or without aura (age ≥ 18 years) who were randomly assigned to receive either 75 mg rimegepant ODT (n = 538) or placebo (n = 537).

Disclosures: This study was funded by BioShin, a wholly owned subsidiary of Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, which was acquired by Pfizer. Pfizer provided writing support. Five authors declared being employees or stock owners of Biohaven, BioShin, or Pfizer. The remaining authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Yu S, Guo A, Wang Z, et al. Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet 75 mg for acute treatment of migraine in adults from China: A subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial. J Headache Pain. 2024;25:57 (Apr 16). Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) offers pain relief within 2 hours of treatment in adults with migraine, with a tolerable safety profile.

Major finding: At 2 hours post dose, rimegepant was more effective than placebo in providing freedom from pain (risk difference 7.6; P = .0004) and the most bothersome symptom (risk difference 16.2; P < .0001). The overall rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the rimegepant and placebo groups (15.2% and 16.4%, respectively).

Study details: This subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trial included 1075 patients with acute migraine with or without aura (age ≥ 18 years) who were randomly assigned to receive either 75 mg rimegepant ODT (n = 538) or placebo (n = 537).

Disclosures: This study was funded by BioShin, a wholly owned subsidiary of Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, which was acquired by Pfizer. Pfizer provided writing support. Five authors declared being employees or stock owners of Biohaven, BioShin, or Pfizer. The remaining authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Yu S, Guo A, Wang Z, et al. Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet 75 mg for acute treatment of migraine in adults from China: A subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial. J Headache Pain. 2024;25:57 (Apr 16). Source

Key clinical point: Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) offers pain relief within 2 hours of treatment in adults with migraine, with a tolerable safety profile.

Major finding: At 2 hours post dose, rimegepant was more effective than placebo in providing freedom from pain (risk difference 7.6; P = .0004) and the most bothersome symptom (risk difference 16.2; P < .0001). The overall rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the rimegepant and placebo groups (15.2% and 16.4%, respectively).

Study details: This subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trial included 1075 patients with acute migraine with or without aura (age ≥ 18 years) who were randomly assigned to receive either 75 mg rimegepant ODT (n = 538) or placebo (n = 537).

Disclosures: This study was funded by BioShin, a wholly owned subsidiary of Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, which was acquired by Pfizer. Pfizer provided writing support. Five authors declared being employees or stock owners of Biohaven, BioShin, or Pfizer. The remaining authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Yu S, Guo A, Wang Z, et al. Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet 75 mg for acute treatment of migraine in adults from China: A subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial. J Headache Pain. 2024;25:57 (Apr 16). Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Meta-analysis Compares Effectiveness of Parenteral Agents for Migraine Pain in ED

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: Combination therapy with two parenteral agents or monotherapy with either neuroleptics or metoclopramide can be considered as a first-line treatment option for the management of acute migraine pain in the emergency department (ED) settings.

Major finding: Combination therapy of two parenteral agents vs placebo was an effective treatment option in reducing pain intensity scores (mean difference −3.36; 95% CI −4.64 to −2.08) and increasing the rate of achievement of pain relief (risk ratio 2.83; 95% CI 1.74-4.61). Monotherapy with neuroleptics and metoclopramide also provided pain relief and helped patients achieve pain-free status prior to discharge from the ED but increased the risk for adverse events, especially akathisia.

Study details: This meta-analysis of 97 randomized controlled trials evaluated the effectiveness of various parenteral agents for pain relief in patients with acute migraine presenting to the ED.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Emergency Medicine Research Group, Canada. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kirkland SW, Visser L, Meyer J, et al. The effectiveness of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with migraine presenting to emergency settings: A systematic review and network analysis. Headache. 2024;64(4):424-447. doi: 10.1111/head.14704 Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Combination therapy with two parenteral agents or monotherapy with either neuroleptics or metoclopramide can be considered as a first-line treatment option for the management of acute migraine pain in the emergency department (ED) settings.

Major finding: Combination therapy of two parenteral agents vs placebo was an effective treatment option in reducing pain intensity scores (mean difference −3.36; 95% CI −4.64 to −2.08) and increasing the rate of achievement of pain relief (risk ratio 2.83; 95% CI 1.74-4.61). Monotherapy with neuroleptics and metoclopramide also provided pain relief and helped patients achieve pain-free status prior to discharge from the ED but increased the risk for adverse events, especially akathisia.

Study details: This meta-analysis of 97 randomized controlled trials evaluated the effectiveness of various parenteral agents for pain relief in patients with acute migraine presenting to the ED.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Emergency Medicine Research Group, Canada. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kirkland SW, Visser L, Meyer J, et al. The effectiveness of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with migraine presenting to emergency settings: A systematic review and network analysis. Headache. 2024;64(4):424-447. doi: 10.1111/head.14704 Source

Key clinical point: Combination therapy with two parenteral agents or monotherapy with either neuroleptics or metoclopramide can be considered as a first-line treatment option for the management of acute migraine pain in the emergency department (ED) settings.

Major finding: Combination therapy of two parenteral agents vs placebo was an effective treatment option in reducing pain intensity scores (mean difference −3.36; 95% CI −4.64 to −2.08) and increasing the rate of achievement of pain relief (risk ratio 2.83; 95% CI 1.74-4.61). Monotherapy with neuroleptics and metoclopramide also provided pain relief and helped patients achieve pain-free status prior to discharge from the ED but increased the risk for adverse events, especially akathisia.

Study details: This meta-analysis of 97 randomized controlled trials evaluated the effectiveness of various parenteral agents for pain relief in patients with acute migraine presenting to the ED.

Disclosures: This study was funded by the Emergency Medicine Research Group, Canada. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Kirkland SW, Visser L, Meyer J, et al. The effectiveness of parenteral agents for pain reduction in patients with migraine presenting to emergency settings: A systematic review and network analysis. Headache. 2024;64(4):424-447. doi: 10.1111/head.14704 Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Migraine Diagnosis Shortens Exclusive Breastfeeding Period in Women

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: Women with migraine tend to exclusively breastfeed their infants for a shorter duration than those without migraine.

Major finding: There was no significant difference between the proportions of women with and without migraine who did not breastfeed their infants (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.03; 95% CI 0.74-1.27), but the odds of exclusively breastfeeding infants for 6 months and more were 16% lower in women with vs without migraine (aOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99; P = .033).

Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 5282 women (age 20-49 years) who had given birth in the last 5 years, of whom 862 (16.3%) had migraine.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific funding. Christine Lay declared receiving research support from and serving on ad boards for various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Vyas MV, Lee N, Lay C. Association between migraine and exclusive breastfeeding: A cross-sectional study. Headache. 2024 (Apr 21). doi: 10.1111/head.14713 Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Women with migraine tend to exclusively breastfeed their infants for a shorter duration than those without migraine.

Major finding: There was no significant difference between the proportions of women with and without migraine who did not breastfeed their infants (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.03; 95% CI 0.74-1.27), but the odds of exclusively breastfeeding infants for 6 months and more were 16% lower in women with vs without migraine (aOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99; P = .033).

Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 5282 women (age 20-49 years) who had given birth in the last 5 years, of whom 862 (16.3%) had migraine.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific funding. Christine Lay declared receiving research support from and serving on ad boards for various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Vyas MV, Lee N, Lay C. Association between migraine and exclusive breastfeeding: A cross-sectional study. Headache. 2024 (Apr 21). doi: 10.1111/head.14713 Source

Key clinical point: Women with migraine tend to exclusively breastfeed their infants for a shorter duration than those without migraine.

Major finding: There was no significant difference between the proportions of women with and without migraine who did not breastfeed their infants (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.03; 95% CI 0.74-1.27), but the odds of exclusively breastfeeding infants for 6 months and more were 16% lower in women with vs without migraine (aOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99; P = .033).

Study details: Findings are from a cross-sectional study including 5282 women (age 20-49 years) who had given birth in the last 5 years, of whom 862 (16.3%) had migraine.

Disclosures: The study did not receive any specific funding. Christine Lay declared receiving research support from and serving on ad boards for various sources. The other authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Vyas MV, Lee N, Lay C. Association between migraine and exclusive breastfeeding: A cross-sectional study. Headache. 2024 (Apr 21). doi: 10.1111/head.14713 Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Photophobia Impairs Sleep Quality in Migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: In patients with migraine, greater severity of photophobia is significantly associated with worse sleep-related outcomes, such as sleep quality (SQ), sleep disturbance (SDi), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep-related impairment (SRI), and insomnia.

Major finding: Compared with patients with migraine and without photophobia, those with migraine and photophobia presented significantly poorer SQ (β 0.15; P < .001), longer SOL (β 0.10; P = .011), higher levels of SDi (β 0.12; P < .001) and SRI (β 0.08; P = .020), and a higher prevalence of insomnia (β 0.11; P = .005).

Study details: This cross-sectional observational study evaluated the association between photophobia and sleep-related outcomes in 852 patients with migraine using data from the American Registry for Migraine Research.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any specific funding. Some authors declared receiving compensation for consulting from, serving as consultants for, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Sharp N, Burish MJ, Digre KB, et al. Photophobia is associated with lower sleep quality in individuals with migraine: Results from the American Registry for Migraine Research (ARMR). J Headache Pain. 2024;25:55. doi: 10.1186/s10194-024-01756-9 Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: In patients with migraine, greater severity of photophobia is significantly associated with worse sleep-related outcomes, such as sleep quality (SQ), sleep disturbance (SDi), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep-related impairment (SRI), and insomnia.

Major finding: Compared with patients with migraine and without photophobia, those with migraine and photophobia presented significantly poorer SQ (β 0.15; P < .001), longer SOL (β 0.10; P = .011), higher levels of SDi (β 0.12; P < .001) and SRI (β 0.08; P = .020), and a higher prevalence of insomnia (β 0.11; P = .005).

Study details: This cross-sectional observational study evaluated the association between photophobia and sleep-related outcomes in 852 patients with migraine using data from the American Registry for Migraine Research.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any specific funding. Some authors declared receiving compensation for consulting from, serving as consultants for, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Sharp N, Burish MJ, Digre KB, et al. Photophobia is associated with lower sleep quality in individuals with migraine: Results from the American Registry for Migraine Research (ARMR). J Headache Pain. 2024;25:55. doi: 10.1186/s10194-024-01756-9 Source

Key clinical point: In patients with migraine, greater severity of photophobia is significantly associated with worse sleep-related outcomes, such as sleep quality (SQ), sleep disturbance (SDi), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep-related impairment (SRI), and insomnia.

Major finding: Compared with patients with migraine and without photophobia, those with migraine and photophobia presented significantly poorer SQ (β 0.15; P < .001), longer SOL (β 0.10; P = .011), higher levels of SDi (β 0.12; P < .001) and SRI (β 0.08; P = .020), and a higher prevalence of insomnia (β 0.11; P = .005).

Study details: This cross-sectional observational study evaluated the association between photophobia and sleep-related outcomes in 852 patients with migraine using data from the American Registry for Migraine Research.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any specific funding. Some authors declared receiving compensation for consulting from, serving as consultants for, or having other ties with various sources.

Source: Sharp N, Burish MJ, Digre KB, et al. Photophobia is associated with lower sleep quality in individuals with migraine: Results from the American Registry for Migraine Research (ARMR). J Headache Pain. 2024;25:55. doi: 10.1186/s10194-024-01756-9 Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Migraine Tied to Higher Vascular Dementia Risk

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 09/11/2024 - 03:21

Key clinical point: Patients with migraine had an increased risk for vascular dementia (VaD), with the risk being significantly higher in those with chronic vs episodic migraine.

Major finding: Compared with individuals without migraine, patients with migraine had a 1.21-fold higher risk for VaD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.21; 95% CI 1.17-1.25), with the cumulative incidence of migraine being significantly higher in patients with chronic vs episodic migraine (log-rank P < .001).

Study details: This 10-year retrospective population-based cohort study included 212,836 patients with migraine and 5,863,348 participants without migraine, of whom 3914 (1.8%) and 60,259 (1.0%), respectively, were diagnosed with VaD during the follow-up period.

Disclosures: This study was funded by a grant from the National Research Foundation, Republic of Korea, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Shin H, Ha WS, Kim J, et al. Association between migraine and the risk of vascular dementia: A nationwide longitudinal study in South Korea. PLoS One. 2024;19:e0300379. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300379 Source

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Patients with migraine had an increased risk for vascular dementia (VaD), with the risk being significantly higher in those with chronic vs episodic migraine.

Major finding: Compared with individuals without migraine, patients with migraine had a 1.21-fold higher risk for VaD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.21; 95% CI 1.17-1.25), with the cumulative incidence of migraine being significantly higher in patients with chronic vs episodic migraine (log-rank P < .001).

Study details: This 10-year retrospective population-based cohort study included 212,836 patients with migraine and 5,863,348 participants without migraine, of whom 3914 (1.8%) and 60,259 (1.0%), respectively, were diagnosed with VaD during the follow-up period.

Disclosures: This study was funded by a grant from the National Research Foundation, Republic of Korea, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Shin H, Ha WS, Kim J, et al. Association between migraine and the risk of vascular dementia: A nationwide longitudinal study in South Korea. PLoS One. 2024;19:e0300379. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300379 Source

Key clinical point: Patients with migraine had an increased risk for vascular dementia (VaD), with the risk being significantly higher in those with chronic vs episodic migraine.

Major finding: Compared with individuals without migraine, patients with migraine had a 1.21-fold higher risk for VaD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.21; 95% CI 1.17-1.25), with the cumulative incidence of migraine being significantly higher in patients with chronic vs episodic migraine (log-rank P < .001).

Study details: This 10-year retrospective population-based cohort study included 212,836 patients with migraine and 5,863,348 participants without migraine, of whom 3914 (1.8%) and 60,259 (1.0%), respectively, were diagnosed with VaD during the follow-up period.

Disclosures: This study was funded by a grant from the National Research Foundation, Republic of Korea, and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Shin H, Ha WS, Kim J, et al. Association between migraine and the risk of vascular dementia: A nationwide longitudinal study in South Korea. PLoS One. 2024;19:e0300379. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300379 Source

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, June 2024
Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Un-Gate On Date
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Tue, 01/11/2022 - 20:45
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Migraine Treatment Outcomes

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/22/2024 - 15:02
Display Headline
Migraine Treatment Outcomes
Sex-Based Therapy and Prednisolone for Medication Overuse Headache

Alan Rapoport, MD

Outcomes of Acute and Preventive Migraine Therapy Based on Patient Sex

I previously have addressed myths about migraine as they pertain to men and women. When I found an interesting study recently published in Cephalalgia investigating the effectiveness of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP-R) antagonists (gepants) for acute care and prevention of episodic migraine and CGRP monoclonal antibodies for preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine in men and women, I thought I would discuss it here.

The study’s aim was to discern if patient sex contributed to outcomes in each specific treatment arm. Female sex hormones have been recognized as factors in promoting migraine, and women show increased severity, persistence, and comorbidity in migraine profiles, and increased prevalence of migraine relative to men.

Gepants used for acute therapy (ubrogepant, rimegepant, zavegepant) and preventive therapy (atogepant, rimegepant) were studied in this trial. Erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab are monoclonal antibodies that either sit on the CGRP receptor (erenumab) or inactivate the CGRP ligand (fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab) and are used for migraine prevention. CGRP-based therapies are not effective in all patients and understanding which patient groups respond preferentially could reduce trial and error in treatment selection. The effectiveness of treatments targeting CGRP or the CGRP receptor may not be uniform in men and women, highlighting the need for further research and understanding of CGRP neurobiology in both sexes.

Key findings:

  • In the trial by Porreca et al: In women, the 3 gepants approved by the FDA for the acute care of migraine (ubrogepant, rimegepant, zavegepant) produced a statistically significant drug effect for the 2-hour pain freedom (2h-PF) endpoint, with an average drug effect of 9.5% (CI: 7.4 to 11.6) and an average number needed to treat (NNT) of 11.
  • Men did not show statistically significant effects with the acute use of gepants. The average drug effect was 2.8%, and the average NNT was 36.
  • For both men and women, CGRP-targeting therapies for prevention of migraine (the 4 monoclonal antibodies) were equally effective; however, possible sex differences remain uncertain and need further study.
  • In patients with chronic migraine, CGRP/CGRP-R antibodies were similarly effective in both men and women.
  • For the 2-hour freedom from most bothersome symptom (2h-MBS) endpoint when gepants were given acutely, the effects were much better in women than men, with an average drug effect of 10.2% and an average NNT of 10.
  • In men, these medications produced observed treatment effects on 2h-MBS with an average drug effect of 3.2% and an average NNT of 32.
  • In men, 5 out of 12 estimates favored placebo over the active treatment, suggesting a treatment with little to no effect.
  • The pooled treatment effects for women were 3 times as large, at 9.2% and 10.2%, respectively.
  • The placebo response rates for 2 of the 3 ubrogepant studies and one of 2 zavegepant studies were higher in men than in women.

The study concludes that, while small molecule CGRP-R antagonists are dramatically effective for acute therapy of migraine in women, available data do not demonstrate effectiveness in men. The treatment effect was found to always favor active treatment numerically for both men and women for prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. The data highlight possible differential effects of CGRP-targeted therapies in different patient populations and the need for increased understanding of CGRP neurobiology in men and women. The study also emphasizes the need to understand which patient groups preferentially respond to CGRP-based therapies to reduce trial and error in treatment. Note that rimegepant data on prevention were not available for analysis at the time of the writing.

It would be interesting to perform a meta-analysis of multiple well-done, large, real-world studies to see if the same differences and similarities are found in men versus women for acute care of migraine and prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. I suspect that we would find that acute care results favor women but that some men do well.

 

The Effectiveness of Prednisolone for Treating Medication Overuse Headache

I often discuss medication overuse headache (MOH), as it is difficult to diagnose and treat, so I wanted to comment on another pertinent study. It is a post hoc analysis of the Registry for Load and Management of Medication Overuse Headache (RELEASE). The RELEASE trial is an ongoing, multicenter, observational, cohort study of MOH that has been conducted in Korea since April 2020. Findings were recently published in Headache by Lee et al.

 

MOH is a secondary headache disorder that develops in patients with a preexisting primary headache when they overuse acute care headache medications of any type except gepants. This includes prescription medications such as triptans, ergots, butalbital-containing medications; opioids; aspirin; acetaminophen; any type of combination medication often containing caffeine; or a combination of medications. This condition significantly impacts patients’ quality of life and productivity, usually increasing the frequency of headaches per month and leading to higher healthcare-related costs.

 

Treating MOH is challenging due to the lack of high-quality drug trials specifically designed for MOH and doctor inexperience. Current evidence is based largely on subgroup analyses of drug trials for the treatment of chronic migraine that contain these patient types.

Withdrawal of acute care headache medications that are being overused has traditionally been considered an important aspect of MOH treatment, although this may be changing. Withdrawal symptoms, such as increased intensity of headache pain, frequency of headaches, and other symptoms like agitation and sleep disturbance, can prevent patients from discontinuing overused medications. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used to reduce these withdrawal headaches, but clinical trials are sparse and have failed to meet proper endpoints. Despite this, corticosteroids have shown potential benefits, such as decreasing withdrawal headaches, reducing the use of rescue medications, and lowering headache intensity at certain time points after treatment.

Given these findings, this published study hypothesized that prednisolone may play a role in converting MOH to non-MOH at 3 months after treatment. The objective was to evaluate the outcome of prednisolone therapy in reversing medication overuse at 3 months posttreatment in patients with MOH using prospective multicenter registry data. Prednisolone was prescribed to 59 out of 309 patients (19.1%) enrolled during this observational study period, with doses ranging from 10 to 40 mg/day for 5-14 days. Of these patients, 228 (73.8%) completed the 3-month follow-up period.

Key findings:

  • The MOH reversal rates at 3 months postbaseline were 76% (31/41) in the prednisolone group and 57.8% (108/187) in the no prednisolone group (p = 0.034).
  • The steroid effect remained significant (adjusted odds ratio, 2.78; 95% confidence interval 1.27-6.1, p = 0.010) after adjusting for the number of monthly headache days at baseline, mode of discontinuation of overused medication, use of early preventive medications, and the number of combined preventive medications.

The study had several strengths, including the multicenter collection of data, prospective follow-ups, and comprehensiveness of data acquisition. However, it also had significant limitations, such as the noninterventional, observational nature of the study, potential bias in steroid prescription (every doctor prescribed what they wanted), and heterogeneity in the patient population. Also, there were a variety of treatments, and they were not standardized. Further external validation may be necessary before generalizing the study results.

Despite these limitations, the results do suggest that prednisolone may be one part of a valid treatment option for patients with MOH. I suspect, if the proper studies are done, we will see that using a good preventive medication, with few adverse events, and with careful education of the patient, formal detoxification will not be necessary when treating many patients with MOH. This has been my experience with MOH treatment utilizing the newer anti-CGRP preventive medications, including the older monoclonal antibodies and the newer gepants.

 

 

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Alan Rapoport Professor, Department of Neurology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Coluntary Faculty, Department of Neurology, Alan M. Rapoport, MD, Professional Corporation, Beverly Hills, California
Alan M. Rapoport, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as an advisor for: AbbVie; Biohaven; Cala Health; Pfizer; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries; Theranica; Xoc
Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: AbbVie; Amgen; Biohaven; Pfizer; Impel; Lundbeck; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
Editor-in-Chief of Neurology Reviews

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Alan Rapoport Professor, Department of Neurology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Coluntary Faculty, Department of Neurology, Alan M. Rapoport, MD, Professional Corporation, Beverly Hills, California
Alan M. Rapoport, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as an advisor for: AbbVie; Biohaven; Cala Health; Pfizer; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries; Theranica; Xoc
Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: AbbVie; Amgen; Biohaven; Pfizer; Impel; Lundbeck; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
Editor-in-Chief of Neurology Reviews

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Alan Rapoport Professor, Department of Neurology, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California; Coluntary Faculty, Department of Neurology, Alan M. Rapoport, MD, Professional Corporation, Beverly Hills, California
Alan M. Rapoport, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as an advisor for: AbbVie; Biohaven; Cala Health; Pfizer; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries; Theranica; Xoc
Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: AbbVie; Amgen; Biohaven; Pfizer; Impel; Lundbeck; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
Editor-in-Chief of Neurology Reviews

Sex-Based Therapy and Prednisolone for Medication Overuse Headache
Sex-Based Therapy and Prednisolone for Medication Overuse Headache

Alan Rapoport, MD

Outcomes of Acute and Preventive Migraine Therapy Based on Patient Sex

I previously have addressed myths about migraine as they pertain to men and women. When I found an interesting study recently published in Cephalalgia investigating the effectiveness of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP-R) antagonists (gepants) for acute care and prevention of episodic migraine and CGRP monoclonal antibodies for preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine in men and women, I thought I would discuss it here.

The study’s aim was to discern if patient sex contributed to outcomes in each specific treatment arm. Female sex hormones have been recognized as factors in promoting migraine, and women show increased severity, persistence, and comorbidity in migraine profiles, and increased prevalence of migraine relative to men.

Gepants used for acute therapy (ubrogepant, rimegepant, zavegepant) and preventive therapy (atogepant, rimegepant) were studied in this trial. Erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab are monoclonal antibodies that either sit on the CGRP receptor (erenumab) or inactivate the CGRP ligand (fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab) and are used for migraine prevention. CGRP-based therapies are not effective in all patients and understanding which patient groups respond preferentially could reduce trial and error in treatment selection. The effectiveness of treatments targeting CGRP or the CGRP receptor may not be uniform in men and women, highlighting the need for further research and understanding of CGRP neurobiology in both sexes.

Key findings:

  • In the trial by Porreca et al: In women, the 3 gepants approved by the FDA for the acute care of migraine (ubrogepant, rimegepant, zavegepant) produced a statistically significant drug effect for the 2-hour pain freedom (2h-PF) endpoint, with an average drug effect of 9.5% (CI: 7.4 to 11.6) and an average number needed to treat (NNT) of 11.
  • Men did not show statistically significant effects with the acute use of gepants. The average drug effect was 2.8%, and the average NNT was 36.
  • For both men and women, CGRP-targeting therapies for prevention of migraine (the 4 monoclonal antibodies) were equally effective; however, possible sex differences remain uncertain and need further study.
  • In patients with chronic migraine, CGRP/CGRP-R antibodies were similarly effective in both men and women.
  • For the 2-hour freedom from most bothersome symptom (2h-MBS) endpoint when gepants were given acutely, the effects were much better in women than men, with an average drug effect of 10.2% and an average NNT of 10.
  • In men, these medications produced observed treatment effects on 2h-MBS with an average drug effect of 3.2% and an average NNT of 32.
  • In men, 5 out of 12 estimates favored placebo over the active treatment, suggesting a treatment with little to no effect.
  • The pooled treatment effects for women were 3 times as large, at 9.2% and 10.2%, respectively.
  • The placebo response rates for 2 of the 3 ubrogepant studies and one of 2 zavegepant studies were higher in men than in women.

The study concludes that, while small molecule CGRP-R antagonists are dramatically effective for acute therapy of migraine in women, available data do not demonstrate effectiveness in men. The treatment effect was found to always favor active treatment numerically for both men and women for prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. The data highlight possible differential effects of CGRP-targeted therapies in different patient populations and the need for increased understanding of CGRP neurobiology in men and women. The study also emphasizes the need to understand which patient groups preferentially respond to CGRP-based therapies to reduce trial and error in treatment. Note that rimegepant data on prevention were not available for analysis at the time of the writing.

It would be interesting to perform a meta-analysis of multiple well-done, large, real-world studies to see if the same differences and similarities are found in men versus women for acute care of migraine and prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. I suspect that we would find that acute care results favor women but that some men do well.

 

The Effectiveness of Prednisolone for Treating Medication Overuse Headache

I often discuss medication overuse headache (MOH), as it is difficult to diagnose and treat, so I wanted to comment on another pertinent study. It is a post hoc analysis of the Registry for Load and Management of Medication Overuse Headache (RELEASE). The RELEASE trial is an ongoing, multicenter, observational, cohort study of MOH that has been conducted in Korea since April 2020. Findings were recently published in Headache by Lee et al.

 

MOH is a secondary headache disorder that develops in patients with a preexisting primary headache when they overuse acute care headache medications of any type except gepants. This includes prescription medications such as triptans, ergots, butalbital-containing medications; opioids; aspirin; acetaminophen; any type of combination medication often containing caffeine; or a combination of medications. This condition significantly impacts patients’ quality of life and productivity, usually increasing the frequency of headaches per month and leading to higher healthcare-related costs.

 

Treating MOH is challenging due to the lack of high-quality drug trials specifically designed for MOH and doctor inexperience. Current evidence is based largely on subgroup analyses of drug trials for the treatment of chronic migraine that contain these patient types.

Withdrawal of acute care headache medications that are being overused has traditionally been considered an important aspect of MOH treatment, although this may be changing. Withdrawal symptoms, such as increased intensity of headache pain, frequency of headaches, and other symptoms like agitation and sleep disturbance, can prevent patients from discontinuing overused medications. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used to reduce these withdrawal headaches, but clinical trials are sparse and have failed to meet proper endpoints. Despite this, corticosteroids have shown potential benefits, such as decreasing withdrawal headaches, reducing the use of rescue medications, and lowering headache intensity at certain time points after treatment.

Given these findings, this published study hypothesized that prednisolone may play a role in converting MOH to non-MOH at 3 months after treatment. The objective was to evaluate the outcome of prednisolone therapy in reversing medication overuse at 3 months posttreatment in patients with MOH using prospective multicenter registry data. Prednisolone was prescribed to 59 out of 309 patients (19.1%) enrolled during this observational study period, with doses ranging from 10 to 40 mg/day for 5-14 days. Of these patients, 228 (73.8%) completed the 3-month follow-up period.

Key findings:

  • The MOH reversal rates at 3 months postbaseline were 76% (31/41) in the prednisolone group and 57.8% (108/187) in the no prednisolone group (p = 0.034).
  • The steroid effect remained significant (adjusted odds ratio, 2.78; 95% confidence interval 1.27-6.1, p = 0.010) after adjusting for the number of monthly headache days at baseline, mode of discontinuation of overused medication, use of early preventive medications, and the number of combined preventive medications.

The study had several strengths, including the multicenter collection of data, prospective follow-ups, and comprehensiveness of data acquisition. However, it also had significant limitations, such as the noninterventional, observational nature of the study, potential bias in steroid prescription (every doctor prescribed what they wanted), and heterogeneity in the patient population. Also, there were a variety of treatments, and they were not standardized. Further external validation may be necessary before generalizing the study results.

Despite these limitations, the results do suggest that prednisolone may be one part of a valid treatment option for patients with MOH. I suspect, if the proper studies are done, we will see that using a good preventive medication, with few adverse events, and with careful education of the patient, formal detoxification will not be necessary when treating many patients with MOH. This has been my experience with MOH treatment utilizing the newer anti-CGRP preventive medications, including the older monoclonal antibodies and the newer gepants.

 

 

Alan Rapoport, MD

Outcomes of Acute and Preventive Migraine Therapy Based on Patient Sex

I previously have addressed myths about migraine as they pertain to men and women. When I found an interesting study recently published in Cephalalgia investigating the effectiveness of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP-R) antagonists (gepants) for acute care and prevention of episodic migraine and CGRP monoclonal antibodies for preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine in men and women, I thought I would discuss it here.

The study’s aim was to discern if patient sex contributed to outcomes in each specific treatment arm. Female sex hormones have been recognized as factors in promoting migraine, and women show increased severity, persistence, and comorbidity in migraine profiles, and increased prevalence of migraine relative to men.

Gepants used for acute therapy (ubrogepant, rimegepant, zavegepant) and preventive therapy (atogepant, rimegepant) were studied in this trial. Erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab are monoclonal antibodies that either sit on the CGRP receptor (erenumab) or inactivate the CGRP ligand (fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab) and are used for migraine prevention. CGRP-based therapies are not effective in all patients and understanding which patient groups respond preferentially could reduce trial and error in treatment selection. The effectiveness of treatments targeting CGRP or the CGRP receptor may not be uniform in men and women, highlighting the need for further research and understanding of CGRP neurobiology in both sexes.

Key findings:

  • In the trial by Porreca et al: In women, the 3 gepants approved by the FDA for the acute care of migraine (ubrogepant, rimegepant, zavegepant) produced a statistically significant drug effect for the 2-hour pain freedom (2h-PF) endpoint, with an average drug effect of 9.5% (CI: 7.4 to 11.6) and an average number needed to treat (NNT) of 11.
  • Men did not show statistically significant effects with the acute use of gepants. The average drug effect was 2.8%, and the average NNT was 36.
  • For both men and women, CGRP-targeting therapies for prevention of migraine (the 4 monoclonal antibodies) were equally effective; however, possible sex differences remain uncertain and need further study.
  • In patients with chronic migraine, CGRP/CGRP-R antibodies were similarly effective in both men and women.
  • For the 2-hour freedom from most bothersome symptom (2h-MBS) endpoint when gepants were given acutely, the effects were much better in women than men, with an average drug effect of 10.2% and an average NNT of 10.
  • In men, these medications produced observed treatment effects on 2h-MBS with an average drug effect of 3.2% and an average NNT of 32.
  • In men, 5 out of 12 estimates favored placebo over the active treatment, suggesting a treatment with little to no effect.
  • The pooled treatment effects for women were 3 times as large, at 9.2% and 10.2%, respectively.
  • The placebo response rates for 2 of the 3 ubrogepant studies and one of 2 zavegepant studies were higher in men than in women.

The study concludes that, while small molecule CGRP-R antagonists are dramatically effective for acute therapy of migraine in women, available data do not demonstrate effectiveness in men. The treatment effect was found to always favor active treatment numerically for both men and women for prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. The data highlight possible differential effects of CGRP-targeted therapies in different patient populations and the need for increased understanding of CGRP neurobiology in men and women. The study also emphasizes the need to understand which patient groups preferentially respond to CGRP-based therapies to reduce trial and error in treatment. Note that rimegepant data on prevention were not available for analysis at the time of the writing.

It would be interesting to perform a meta-analysis of multiple well-done, large, real-world studies to see if the same differences and similarities are found in men versus women for acute care of migraine and prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. I suspect that we would find that acute care results favor women but that some men do well.

 

The Effectiveness of Prednisolone for Treating Medication Overuse Headache

I often discuss medication overuse headache (MOH), as it is difficult to diagnose and treat, so I wanted to comment on another pertinent study. It is a post hoc analysis of the Registry for Load and Management of Medication Overuse Headache (RELEASE). The RELEASE trial is an ongoing, multicenter, observational, cohort study of MOH that has been conducted in Korea since April 2020. Findings were recently published in Headache by Lee et al.

 

MOH is a secondary headache disorder that develops in patients with a preexisting primary headache when they overuse acute care headache medications of any type except gepants. This includes prescription medications such as triptans, ergots, butalbital-containing medications; opioids; aspirin; acetaminophen; any type of combination medication often containing caffeine; or a combination of medications. This condition significantly impacts patients’ quality of life and productivity, usually increasing the frequency of headaches per month and leading to higher healthcare-related costs.

 

Treating MOH is challenging due to the lack of high-quality drug trials specifically designed for MOH and doctor inexperience. Current evidence is based largely on subgroup analyses of drug trials for the treatment of chronic migraine that contain these patient types.

Withdrawal of acute care headache medications that are being overused has traditionally been considered an important aspect of MOH treatment, although this may be changing. Withdrawal symptoms, such as increased intensity of headache pain, frequency of headaches, and other symptoms like agitation and sleep disturbance, can prevent patients from discontinuing overused medications. Systemic corticosteroids are widely used to reduce these withdrawal headaches, but clinical trials are sparse and have failed to meet proper endpoints. Despite this, corticosteroids have shown potential benefits, such as decreasing withdrawal headaches, reducing the use of rescue medications, and lowering headache intensity at certain time points after treatment.

Given these findings, this published study hypothesized that prednisolone may play a role in converting MOH to non-MOH at 3 months after treatment. The objective was to evaluate the outcome of prednisolone therapy in reversing medication overuse at 3 months posttreatment in patients with MOH using prospective multicenter registry data. Prednisolone was prescribed to 59 out of 309 patients (19.1%) enrolled during this observational study period, with doses ranging from 10 to 40 mg/day for 5-14 days. Of these patients, 228 (73.8%) completed the 3-month follow-up period.

Key findings:

  • The MOH reversal rates at 3 months postbaseline were 76% (31/41) in the prednisolone group and 57.8% (108/187) in the no prednisolone group (p = 0.034).
  • The steroid effect remained significant (adjusted odds ratio, 2.78; 95% confidence interval 1.27-6.1, p = 0.010) after adjusting for the number of monthly headache days at baseline, mode of discontinuation of overused medication, use of early preventive medications, and the number of combined preventive medications.

The study had several strengths, including the multicenter collection of data, prospective follow-ups, and comprehensiveness of data acquisition. However, it also had significant limitations, such as the noninterventional, observational nature of the study, potential bias in steroid prescription (every doctor prescribed what they wanted), and heterogeneity in the patient population. Also, there were a variety of treatments, and they were not standardized. Further external validation may be necessary before generalizing the study results.

Despite these limitations, the results do suggest that prednisolone may be one part of a valid treatment option for patients with MOH. I suspect, if the proper studies are done, we will see that using a good preventive medication, with few adverse events, and with careful education of the patient, formal detoxification will not be necessary when treating many patients with MOH. This has been my experience with MOH treatment utilizing the newer anti-CGRP preventive medications, including the older monoclonal antibodies and the newer gepants.

 

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Migraine Treatment Outcomes
Display Headline
Migraine Treatment Outcomes
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Fri, 05/10/2024 - 13:00
Un-Gate On Date
Fri, 05/10/2024 - 13:00
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Fri, 05/10/2024 - 13:00
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Proton Pump Inhibitors Tied to Migraine, Other Severe Headache Types

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/07/2024 - 13:37

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which are used to control acid reflux, are associated with an increased risk for migraine and other severe headache types, new research showed. 

Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), investigators conducted a cross-sectional analysis and found all types of acid-suppression therapy were associated with an increased risk for severe headache including migraine but that PPIs conferred the greatest risk.

“It’s important to note that many people do need acid-reducing medications to manage acid reflux or other conditions, and people with migraine or severe headache who are taking these drugs or supplements should talk with their doctors about whether they should continue,” lead author Margaret Slavin, PhD, of the University of Maryland in College Park, said in a press release

The findings were published online  in Neurology Clinical Practice
 

New Look at Old Data

Previous research has shown that headache is listed among the most common adverse reactions in adults taking PPIs and histamine receptor agonists (H2RAs), which include cimetidine, famotidine, and nizatidine.

Other large studies of health databases have shown increased headache risk within a week of PPI exposure.

To compare the risk from PPIs versus H2RAs and other generics, researchers analyzed data from the NHANES for those who used PPIs, H2RAs, and generic antacids to learn more about the potential link between acid-suppression therapy and headache.

They used survey data from 1999 to 2004, the only years the NHANES included a question about migraine and other headache during the past 3 months. 

Investigators analyzed data for 11,800 participants aged 20 years or older who used prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, and nutritional supplements during the past month. 

Participants who used acid-suppressing medications had an increased risk for migraine or severe headache versus those who did not use these agents. Investigators found PPIs were tied to a 70% increased risk, while H2RAs and antacids were associated with 40% and 30% higher risks, respectively. Use of any type of acid-suppression therapy was tied to a 47% increased risk for severe headache.
 

Magnesium a Risk Factor?

While magnesium supplements are sometimes prescribed as a “natural” headache prevention therapy to prevent migraine and other headache types, the investigators noted they were surprised to find individuals taking H2RAs who met the dietary reference intake for magnesium had a nearly threefold increased risk for migraine or severe headache (odds ratio, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.02-1.45; P = .025).

However, there was no association between magnesium and the other acid-reducing medications. 

The study’s limitations included the use of a single question to identify migraine or severe headache, which may have resulted in some misclassification of the outcome. The authors also pointed out that dietary and drug-intake data may be subject to recall bias. 

“These results suggest that there is a need for more intentionally designed prospective work to inform the extent to which associations between migraine and acid-suppression therapy are merely detecting comorbidities or to what extent migraine is an adverse event associated with the medications,” the authors wrote. 

There was no targeted funding. Disclosures are noted in the original article.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Topics
Sections

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which are used to control acid reflux, are associated with an increased risk for migraine and other severe headache types, new research showed. 

Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), investigators conducted a cross-sectional analysis and found all types of acid-suppression therapy were associated with an increased risk for severe headache including migraine but that PPIs conferred the greatest risk.

“It’s important to note that many people do need acid-reducing medications to manage acid reflux or other conditions, and people with migraine or severe headache who are taking these drugs or supplements should talk with their doctors about whether they should continue,” lead author Margaret Slavin, PhD, of the University of Maryland in College Park, said in a press release

The findings were published online  in Neurology Clinical Practice
 

New Look at Old Data

Previous research has shown that headache is listed among the most common adverse reactions in adults taking PPIs and histamine receptor agonists (H2RAs), which include cimetidine, famotidine, and nizatidine.

Other large studies of health databases have shown increased headache risk within a week of PPI exposure.

To compare the risk from PPIs versus H2RAs and other generics, researchers analyzed data from the NHANES for those who used PPIs, H2RAs, and generic antacids to learn more about the potential link between acid-suppression therapy and headache.

They used survey data from 1999 to 2004, the only years the NHANES included a question about migraine and other headache during the past 3 months. 

Investigators analyzed data for 11,800 participants aged 20 years or older who used prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, and nutritional supplements during the past month. 

Participants who used acid-suppressing medications had an increased risk for migraine or severe headache versus those who did not use these agents. Investigators found PPIs were tied to a 70% increased risk, while H2RAs and antacids were associated with 40% and 30% higher risks, respectively. Use of any type of acid-suppression therapy was tied to a 47% increased risk for severe headache.
 

Magnesium a Risk Factor?

While magnesium supplements are sometimes prescribed as a “natural” headache prevention therapy to prevent migraine and other headache types, the investigators noted they were surprised to find individuals taking H2RAs who met the dietary reference intake for magnesium had a nearly threefold increased risk for migraine or severe headache (odds ratio, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.02-1.45; P = .025).

However, there was no association between magnesium and the other acid-reducing medications. 

The study’s limitations included the use of a single question to identify migraine or severe headache, which may have resulted in some misclassification of the outcome. The authors also pointed out that dietary and drug-intake data may be subject to recall bias. 

“These results suggest that there is a need for more intentionally designed prospective work to inform the extent to which associations between migraine and acid-suppression therapy are merely detecting comorbidities or to what extent migraine is an adverse event associated with the medications,” the authors wrote. 

There was no targeted funding. Disclosures are noted in the original article.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which are used to control acid reflux, are associated with an increased risk for migraine and other severe headache types, new research showed. 

Using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), investigators conducted a cross-sectional analysis and found all types of acid-suppression therapy were associated with an increased risk for severe headache including migraine but that PPIs conferred the greatest risk.

“It’s important to note that many people do need acid-reducing medications to manage acid reflux or other conditions, and people with migraine or severe headache who are taking these drugs or supplements should talk with their doctors about whether they should continue,” lead author Margaret Slavin, PhD, of the University of Maryland in College Park, said in a press release

The findings were published online  in Neurology Clinical Practice
 

New Look at Old Data

Previous research has shown that headache is listed among the most common adverse reactions in adults taking PPIs and histamine receptor agonists (H2RAs), which include cimetidine, famotidine, and nizatidine.

Other large studies of health databases have shown increased headache risk within a week of PPI exposure.

To compare the risk from PPIs versus H2RAs and other generics, researchers analyzed data from the NHANES for those who used PPIs, H2RAs, and generic antacids to learn more about the potential link between acid-suppression therapy and headache.

They used survey data from 1999 to 2004, the only years the NHANES included a question about migraine and other headache during the past 3 months. 

Investigators analyzed data for 11,800 participants aged 20 years or older who used prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, and nutritional supplements during the past month. 

Participants who used acid-suppressing medications had an increased risk for migraine or severe headache versus those who did not use these agents. Investigators found PPIs were tied to a 70% increased risk, while H2RAs and antacids were associated with 40% and 30% higher risks, respectively. Use of any type of acid-suppression therapy was tied to a 47% increased risk for severe headache.
 

Magnesium a Risk Factor?

While magnesium supplements are sometimes prescribed as a “natural” headache prevention therapy to prevent migraine and other headache types, the investigators noted they were surprised to find individuals taking H2RAs who met the dietary reference intake for magnesium had a nearly threefold increased risk for migraine or severe headache (odds ratio, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.02-1.45; P = .025).

However, there was no association between magnesium and the other acid-reducing medications. 

The study’s limitations included the use of a single question to identify migraine or severe headache, which may have resulted in some misclassification of the outcome. The authors also pointed out that dietary and drug-intake data may be subject to recall bias. 

“These results suggest that there is a need for more intentionally designed prospective work to inform the extent to which associations between migraine and acid-suppression therapy are merely detecting comorbidities or to what extent migraine is an adverse event associated with the medications,” the authors wrote. 

There was no targeted funding. Disclosures are noted in the original article.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM NEUROLOGY CLINICAL PRACTICE

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article