Migraine Disability Assessment Total Score Research Articles

Treatment of hemiplegic migraine with anti‐calcitonin gene‐related peptide monoclonal antibodies: A case series in a tertiary‐care headache center

AbstractHemiplegic migraine (HM) is a subtype of migraine with aura that includes motor weakness; such headaches can be excruciating. The presence of not only headache but also aura symptoms of HM increase the burden on patients, and the treatment of HM is sometimes challenging. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) pathway are novel migraine preventive treatments that have shown promising efficacy in patients with migraine; however, there have been no reports regarding their efficacy in HM to date. Six patients with HM were treated with galcanezumab in a tertiary‐care headache center. After 3 months of treatment, the number of monthly days with headache of at least moderate severity was reduced in three patients. The number of days each month with weakness was also reduced in four patients. Furthermore, the Patient's Global Impression of Change and change in Migraine Disability Assessment total score, were improved in five of the six patients after the treatment; however, the change from baseline in days with bothersome symptoms did not show any specific trends in our patients. Notably, no adverse events were reported during the treatments. The mechanism underlying the improvement in aura symptoms in our patients is not clear; however, we speculate that a small amount of CGRP mAbs have a direct mode of action in the central nervous system; alternatively, blocking the CGRP pathway in the periphery may secondarily inhibit cortical spreading depression. While prudence must be practiced, galcanezumab was still generally effective in HM and well tolerated. Further prospective clinical studies will more clearly elucidate the effects of CGRP mAbs in patients with HM.

Long-term reductions in disease impact in patients with chronic migraine following preventive treatment with eptinezumab

BackgroundEptinezumab is an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide humanized monoclonal antibody approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The PREVAIL study demonstrated a favorable safety profile with sustained reductions in overall migraine-related burden in patients with chronic migraine (CM). This post hoc analysis aimed to examine item-level changes in the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire over 2 years in participants with CM on eptinezumab treatment.MethodsPREVAIL was an open-label, phase 3 trial that included 96 weeks of treatment where 128 adults received intravenous eptinezumab administered over 30 min every 12 weeks (wks) for up to 8 doses of 300 mg. MIDAS was administered at baseline, Wk12, and every 12wks thereafter. Two supplementary MIDAS items not included in the total score calculation assessed number of headache days in the past 3 months (MIDAS headache) and average headache pain severity (from 0 [none] to 10 [worst]). MIDAS total scores were summed from 5 items, each quantifying the number of days in the past 3 months with migraine-related disability. Items 1, 3, and 5 assessed absenteeism, namely how many days the patient missed work/school (Q1), household work (Q3), or family/social/leisure activities (Q5). Items 2 and 4 were measures of presenteeism, namely how many days the patient had reduced productivity in work/school (Q2) or household work (Q4).ResultsMean MIDAS headache days decreased from 47.4 (baseline) to 17.1 (Wk12) and 16.3 (Wk104). The average headache pain severity score (0‒10) decreased from a mean of 7.3 (baseline) to 5.5 (Wk12) to 4.5 (Wk104). Mean MIDAS scores measuring absenteeism (Q1, 3, 5) changed from 9.7 days at baseline to 3.2 days (Wk12) and to 3.9 days (Wk104). Mean MIDAS scores measuring presenteeism (Q2, 4) at Wk12 decreased from 14.2 days at baseline to 5.2 days (Wk12, 104). Patients categorized with very severe MIDAS disability had a mean total MIDAS score of 84.8, with an average reduction of 56.7 days (Wk12), which was maintained at 32 days at Wk104.ConclusionsLong-term treatment with eptinezumab in patients with CM suggested sustained reductions in MIDAS-quantified disability, consistent with the sustained reductions in headache frequency and pain severity.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02985398.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on migraine in Japan: a multicentre cross-sectional study

ObjectivesTo assess the impacts of social situation changes due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on headache-related disability and other symptoms in patients with migraine in Japan.MethodsWe conducted a multicentre, cross-sectional study including 659 outpatients with migraine diagnosed by headache specialists. The participants were asked about the impacts of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on headache-related disability, headache days, headache intensity, stress, physical activity, hospital access and their work and home lives. For headache-related disability, the total Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score and part A and B scores were analysed. Multivariate stepwise linear regression analysis was performed to identify the clinical predictors of changes in the total MIDAS score before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors related to new-onset headache during the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsFinally, 606 migraine patients (73 M/533 F; age, 45.2 ± 12.0 years) were included in the study, excluding those with incomplete data. Increased stress, substantial concern about COVID-19 and negative impacts of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on daily life were reported in 56.8 %, 55.1 and 45.0 % of the participants, respectively. The total MIDAS and A and B scores did not significantly change after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. New-onset headache, which was observed in 95 patients (15.7 %), was associated with younger age and worsened mood and sleep in the logistic regression analysis. The multivariate stepwise linear regression analysis of changes in the total MIDAS score before and during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic identified worsened sleep, increased acute medication use, increased stress, medication shortages, comorbidities, the absence of an aura and new-onset headache were determinants of an increased total MIDAS score during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsIn this multicentre study, clinical factors relevant to headache-related disability, such as new-onset headache, stress and sleep disturbances, were identified, highlighting the importance of symptom management in migraine patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Functional impairment and disability among patients with migraine: evaluation of galcanezumab in a long-term, open-label study

PurposeMigraine can negatively impact patient functioning and quality of life. Here, we report the effects of galcanezumab (GMB), a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide, on patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in migraine.MethodsCGAJ was a Phase III, randomized, open-label study (12-month open-label and 4-month post-treatment follow-up) in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. Patients aged 18–65 years with diagnosis of migraine (≥ 4 migraine headache days per month) as defined by International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD)-3 beta guidelines were included in the study. Patients were randomized 1:1 with subcutaneous GMB 120 mg (with a loading dose of 240 mg) or GMB 240 mg given once monthly for 12 months. Changes from baseline in PRO measures such as Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 (MSQ) and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) were assessed.ResultsA total of 135 patients were randomized to each galcanezumab dose group. Mean (SD) baseline MSQ total scores were 53.85 (20.34) [GMB 120 mg] and 53.69 (18.79) [GMB 240 mg]. For MIDAS, mean (SD) total scores were 45.77 (42.06) [GMB 120 mg] and 53.96 (61.24) [GMB 240 mg]. Within-group mean improvement from baseline on MSQ and MIDAS total scores and all individual item/domain scores were statistically significant for both GMB dose groups, at all-time points during the treatment phase (p < 0.001). For MSQ domain scores, greatest improvement was observed in the Role function-restrictive (RF-R) domain (overall least squares (LS) mean change ± SE: 31.55 ± 1.20 [GMB 120 mg] and 33.40 ± 1.16 [GMB 240 mg]). For MIDAS, the overall LS mean change ± SE from baseline across the entire 12-month treatment phase in total scores were: −33.58 ± 2.11 (GMB 120 mg) and −32.67 ± 2.04 (GMB 240 mg).ConclusionGalcanezumab was associated with statistically significant changes from baseline in the PRO measures across the entire 12-month treatment period. These results indicate improved health-related quality of life and decreased disability among patients treated with galcanezumab.

Changes in patient functioning and disability: results from a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating galcanezumab for chronic migraine prevention (REGAIN)

PurposeTo evaluate secondary outcomes including changes in functioning and disability associated with galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide, in patients with chronic migraine.MethodsPatients randomly received galcanezumab (120 mg n = 278, 240 mg n = 277) or placebo (n = 558) during 3 months of double-blind treatment, followed by a 9-month open-label extension. The Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire v2.1 (MSQv2.1) measured the impact of migraine on patient functioning. The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) quantified headache-related disability. Changes from baseline were analyzed with mixed model repeated measures or analysis of covariance.ResultsTotal MSQ score at baseline was 44.88 ± 18.02 (mean ± SD), indicating significant functional impairment. At Month 3, least squares (LS) mean change ± SE in total MSQ for galcanezumab-treated patients were 20.51 ± 1.49 (120 mg) and 20.49 ± 1.49 (240 mg), both statistically significantly greater vs placebo-treated patients (14.55 ± 1.21; both P < 0.001). Total MIDAS score at baseline was 67.24 ± 57.31 (mean ± SD). At Month 3, LS mean change ± SE from baseline in total MIDAS for galcanezumab-treated patients was statistically significantly greater than placebo for 120 mg group (placebo: − 11.53 ± 3.38 vs 120 mg: − 20.27 ± 4.07; P < 0.05) but not for 240 mg group (− 17.02 ± 4.05). At Month 12, within-group mean changes from baseline for total MSQ (28.56 ± 1.19 previous placebo; 29.53 ± 1.51 previous 120 mg; 25.83 ± 1.49 previous 240 mg) and MIDAS scores (− 28.47 ± 2.95 previous placebo; − 31.47 ± 3.69 previous 120 mg; − 31.13 ± 3.62 previous 240 mg) were statistically significant (P < 0.001) for the open-label treatment population regardless of previous double-blind treatment assignment.ConclusionsGalcanezumab-treated patients with chronic migraine reported statistically significant improvements in functioning and disability, representing a clinically significant change.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT02614261. Registered 25 November 2015.

Thai-version Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire: concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and factors predictive for migraine-related disability.

A Thai-version of the Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ 2.1) is available, but a qualified questionnaire used specifically for disability assessment was not available. The most relevant practical disability assessment tested during this study was the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire. To test the concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency of a Thai-version MIDAS questionnaire, and factors to predict disability in people with migraine. We conducted the present prospective study at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Bangkok. The original English MIDAS Questionnaire was translated into Thai with back-translation into English and the language equivalence was assessed. The Thai-version MIDAS Questionnaire was tested for concurrent validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency, and factors including duration of migraine history, migraine characteristics, and comorbidity were assessed for the ability to predict migraine-related disability of migraineurs. Of the 58 participants, 31 were eligible to be included. The validity of the Thai-version questionnaire between the MIDAS total score and the mean headache severity (question B), the mean pain duration per attack, and the mean pain numerical rating scale (NRS) score were moderately correlated with a Spearman correlation coefficient range 0.42-0.58. The test-retest reliability of MIDAS grade had a weighted κ of 0.66, and for individual questions of the MIDAS total score, questions A and B assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients ranged 0.89-0.98. The internal consistency had a Cronbach α of 0.98. The mean pain NRS score in the past 3 months was an independent predictive factor for migraine-related disability. The Thai-version MIDAS Questionnaire has moderate concurrent validity, acceptable internal consistency, and excellent test-retest reliability. It would be helpful to assess clinical outcomes. Future study with a standardized translation process for the Thai-version questionnaire and a larger sample size is warranted to confirm internal consistency and determine all probable predictive factors for migraine-related disability.

Factors associated with insufficient response to acute treatment of migraine in Japan: analysis of real-world data from the Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme

BackgroundReal-world data on sufficient/insufficient response, and predictors of insufficient response, to acute treatments for migraine are limited in Japan. This study aimed to identify factors associated with insufficient response to acute treatment of migraine by exploring significant differences between people with migraine who sufficiently/insufficiently respond to prescribed acute treatment in Japan.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of 2014 Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme cross-sectional survey data collected from physicians and their consulting adult patients with migraine in Japan. Insufficient responders to prescribed acute treatment were patients who achieved headache pain freedom within 2 h of acute treatment in no more than three of their last five migraine attacks. Factors associated with insufficient response to prescribed acute migraine treatment were identified using backward logistic regression.ResultsOverall, 227/538 (42.2%) patients were classified as insufficient responders to prescribed acute migraine treatment. Significantly more insufficient responders than sufficient responders had consulted a neurologist or a migraine/headache specialist, and had chronic migraine or medication-overuse or tension-type headaches (p < 0.05). More insufficient responders than sufficient responders reported taking acute treatment when/after the pain started (77.0 vs. 68.9%) than at first sign of migraine (p < 0.05). Compared with sufficient responders, insufficient responders reported a significantly higher mean ± standard deviation (SD) Migraine Disability Assessment total score (12.7 ± 23.3 vs. 5.8 ± 10.4, p < 0.001) and lower quality of life (EuroQol-5 Dimensions utility score 0.847 ± 0.19 vs. 0.883 ± 0.16, p = 0.024). Factors significantly associated with insufficient response to acute treatment included seeing a neurologist versus an internist (odds ratio [OR] 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29–2.88; p = 0.002), taking acute medication when/after pain started versus at first sign of migraine (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.05–2.60; p = 0.030), a higher MIDAS total score (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.02–1.06; p < 0.001), and presence of comorbid cardiovascular disease (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.28–0.98; p = 0.044).ConclusionsMany people with migraine in Japan struggle to adequately treat migraine attacks with prescribed acute medication and exhibit high levels of unmet need for acute treatment. Optimized management strategies utilizing existing therapeutic options as well as additional effective therapeutic options for migraine are required to improve symptoms and quality of life.

A Real-World Analysis of Patient Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Level of Impairment in Patients With Migraine Who are Insufficient Responders vs Responders to Acute Treatment.

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine if patients with migraine who responded sufficiently to acute treatment were significantly different from those who did not in terms of patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and patient level of impairment, and to identify characteristics associated with insufficient response.BackgroundMigraine is highly prevalent and impacts functional ability substantially. Current treatment approaches are not sufficiently meeting the needs of patients, and inadequate response to acute treatment is reported by at least 56% of patients with migraine in the United States.MethodsData were obtained from the 2014 Adelphi Migraine Disease‐Specific Program, a cross‐sectional survey. Using logistic regression, we assessed the association between patient factors and insufficient response. Responders were defined as patients with migraine who achieved pain freedom within 2 hours of acute treatment in ≥4 of 5 attacks, while insufficient responders achieved it in ≤3 of 5 attacks.ResultsOf 583 patients included, insufficient responders to acute treatment constituted 34.3% (200/583) of the study population. A statistically significantly larger proportion of insufficient responders vs responders had ≥4 migraine headache days/month (46.3% [88/190] vs 31% [114/368]), had ever been prescribed ≥3 unique preventive treatment regimens (11.7% [21/179] vs 6.3% [22/347]), and had chronic migraine, medication‐overuse headaches, and comorbid depression (all P values ≤.05). Patient level of impairment was statistically significantly greater among insufficient responders vs responders. Factors associated with insufficient response after adjusting for covariates included Migraine Disability Assessment total score (odds ratio [OR] = 1.04, 95% CI [1.02, 1.05]), time of administration of acute treatment (OR = 1.83, 95% CI [1.15, 2.92]), depression (OR = 1.98, 95% CI [1.21, 3.23]), sensitivity to light not listed as current most troublesome symptom (OR = 2.30, 95% CI [1.21, 4.37]), and change in the average headache days per month before being prescribed an acute treatment vs now (OR = 1.75, 95% CI [1.05, 2.90]).ConclusionsClinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and health‐related quality of life measures are statistically significantly different between insufficient responders and responders to acute treatment in patients with migraine.

Trajectory of migraine-related disability following long-term treatment with lasmiditan: results of the GLADIATOR study

BackgroundMigraine is recognized as the second leading cause of disability globally. Lasmiditan is a novel, selective serotonin 5-HT1F receptor agonist developed for acute treatment of migraine. Here we analyzed effects of lasmiditan on migraine disability assessed with the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scale for interim data from a long-term safety study.MethodsCompleters of two single-attack parent studies were offered participation in the 1 year GLADIATOR study, that randomized participants to treatment with lasmiditan 100 mg or 200 mg taken as needed for migraine attacks of at least moderate severity. Changes in MIDAS were modeled using a mixed model repeated measures analysis.ResultsThe sample included 1978 patients who received ≥1 lasmiditan dose and were followed for a median of 288 days. Baseline mean MIDAS scores for the lasmiditan 100-mg and 200-mg groups were 29.4 and 28.9, respectively, indicating severe migraine-related disability. Relative to baseline, MIDAS total scores were significantly lower at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months for both dose groups. At 12 months, changes in MIDAS scores were − 12.5 and − 12.2 for lasmiditan 100 mg and 200 mg, respectively, with 49% and 53% of patients, respectively, achieving at least a 50% decrease in MIDAS total score. Statistically significant improvements were also seen for work and/or school absenteeism and presenteeism, monthly headache days, and mean headache pain intensity at all time points up to 1 year. Findings for patients who completed all visits versus those dropping out early were similar. Responses were generally similar for the lasmiditan 100 mg or 200 mg doses, between subgroups defined based on the number of baseline monthly migraine attacks (≤5 vs. >5), and also between subgroups defined by pain-free response (yes/no) during initial attacks.ConclusionsLong-term treatment with lasmiditan was associated with significant reductions in migraine-related disability, including both work or school absenteeism and presenteeism. The similarity of responses in completers and those who dropped out suggests that selective attrition does not account for the improvements. Benefits were significant at 3 months and maintained through 12 months.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.govNCT02565186; first posted October 1, 2015.

Galcanezumab in episodic migraine: subgroup analyses of efficacy by high versus low frequency of migraine headaches in phase 3 studies (EVOLVE-1 & EVOLVE-2)

BackgroundPatients with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) have a greater disease burden than those with low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM). Acute treatment overuse increases the risk of migraine chronification in patients with HFEM. Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody binding calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is effective for migraine prevention with a favorable safety profile. Here, we investigate whether there are differences in galcanezumab efficacy in patients with LFEM or with HFEM.MethodsData were pooled from two double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials; EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2. Patients were 18–65 years old, experienced 4–14 monthly migraine headache days (MHDs) for ≥1 year prior, with onset at < 50 years of age. Migraine headaches were tracked via electronic patient-reported outcome system and randomization was stratified by low (LFEM; 4–7 monthly MHDs) or high (HFEM; 8–14 monthly MHDs) frequency. Subgroup analysis compared the HFEM and LFEM subgroups with a linear or generalized linear mixed model repeated measures approach.ResultsThe intent-to-treat patients (N = 1773) had a mean age of 41.3 years, were mostly white (75%), female (85%), and 66% of patients had HFEM. In both the LFEM and HFEM subgroups, the overall (Months 1–6) and monthly changes from baseline in monthly MHDs and monthly MHDs with acute medication use compared with placebo were statistically significantly reduced for galcanezumab 120-mg and 240-mg. Galcanezumab (120-mg and 240-mg) significantly decreased the overall and monthly MHDs with nausea and/or vomiting, and with photophobia and phonophobia versus placebo in patients with LFEM or HFEM. In both subgroups, the mean overall (Months 1–6) and monthly percentages of patients with ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% reduction in monthly MHDs from baseline were statistically significantly greater in patients receiving either dose of galcanezumab versus placebo. Galcanezumab (120-mg and 240-mg) significantly improved the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire role function-restrictive domain score as well as the Migraine Disability Assessment total score versus placebo for patients with LFEM or HFEM. There were no significant subgroup-by-treatment interactions.ConclusionsGalcanezumab was as effective in patients with HFEM as in those with LFEM. Associated symptoms, quality of life, and disability were similarly improved in patients with HFEM or LFEM.Trial registrationNCT02614183, NCT02614196.

Real-world treatment patterns and patient-reported outcomes in episodic and chronic migraine in Japan: analysis of data from the Adelphi migraine disease specific programme

BackgroundIn Japan, detailed information on the characteristics, disease burden, and treatment patterns of people living with migraine is limited. The aim of this study was to compare clinical characteristics, disease burden, and treatment patterns in people with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) using real-world data from clinical practice in Japan.MethodsThis was an analysis of data collected in 2014 by the Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme, a cross-sectional survey of physicians and their consulting adult patients in Japan, using physician and patient questionnaires. We report patient demographics, prescribed treatment, work productivity, and quality-of-life data for people with CM (≥15 headache days/month) or EM (not fulfilling CM criteria). In descriptive analyses, continuous and categorical measures were assessed using t-tests and Chi-squared tests, respectively.ResultsPhysicians provided data for 977 patients (mean age 44.5 years; 77.2% female; 94.5% with EM, 5.5% with CM). A total of 634/977 (64.9%) invited patients (600 with EM; 34 with CM) also provided data. Acute therapy was currently being prescribed in 93.7% and 100% of patients with EM and CM, respectively (p = 0.069); corresponding percentages for current preventive therapy prescriptions were 40.5% and 68.5% (p < 0.001). According to physicians who provided data, preventive therapy was used at least once by significantly fewer patients with EM than with CM (42.3% vs. 68.5%, respectively; p < 0.001). Among patients who provided physicians with information on issues with their current therapy (acute therapy: n = 668 with EM, n = 38 with CM; preventive therapy: n = 295 with EM, n = 21 with CM), lack of efficacy was the most frequently identified problem (acute therapy: EM 35.3%, CM 39.5% [p = 0.833]; preventive therapy: EM 35.3%, CM 52.4% [p = 0.131]). Moderate-to-severe headache-related disability (Migraine Disability Assessment total score ≥ 11) was reported by significantly fewer patients with EM than with CM (21.0% vs. 60.0%, respectively; p < 0.001) among patients who provided data.ConclusionsPreventive treatment patterns in people with EM versus CM differ in Japan, with both types of migraine posing notable disease burdens. Our findings demonstrate that more effective migraine therapies are required to reduce the burden of the disease.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability of the German version of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire

BackgroundThe Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) is a brief questionnaire and measures headache-related disability. This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the original English version of the MIDAS to German and to test its reliability.MethodsThe standardized translation process followed international guidelines. The pre-final version was tested for clarity and comprehensibility by 34 headache sufferers. Test-retest reliability of the final version was quantified by 36 headache patients completing the MIDAS twice with an interval of 48 h. Reliability was determined by intraclass correlation coefficients and internal consistency by Cronbach’s α.ResultsAll steps of the translation process were followed, documented and approved by the developer of the MIDAS. The expert committee discussed in detail the complex phrasing of the questions that refer to one to another, especially exclusion of headache-days from one item to the next. The German version contains more active verb sentences and prefers the perfect to the imperfect tense. The MIDAS scales intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.884 to 0.994 and was 0.991 (95% CI: 0.982–0.995) for the MIDAS total score. Cronbach’s α for the MIDAS as a whole was 0.69 at test and 0.67 at retest.ConclusionsThe translation process was challenged by the comprehensibility of the questionnaire. The German version of the MIDAS is a highly reliable instrument for assessing headache related disability with moderate internal consistency. Provided validity testing of the German MIDAS is successful, it can be recommended for use in clinical practice as well as in research.

A Real-World Analysis of Migraine: A Cross-Sectional Study of Disease Burden and Treatment Patterns.

The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to assess the sociodemographics, disease burden, and treatment patterns of patients with episodic and chronic migraine in the United States. Migraine is a disabling neurological disease that places an enormous burden on patients. Data were drawn from the Adelphi Migraine United States Disease Specific Programme (index period: January to March 2014). Physicians (N = 150) completed a patient report form on 10 consulting patients with migraine. Episodic migraineurs had ≤14 headache days per month (HDM) and those with chronic migraine had ≥15. Headache-related disability was assessed with the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Disability was also compared across subgroups based on the number of HDM (≤3, 4-7, 8-14, and ≥15). A total of 1487 patient report forms were completed. Over 70% of the patients were female, 90.8% (n = 1350) were episodic migraineurs, and 9.2% (n = 137) were chronic migraineurs. Acute treatment was prescribed for >90% of the patients, and >50% had a current prescription for preventive treatment. Despite taking acute and/or preventive treatment, 29.2% of episodic migraineurs (including some patients with ≤3 headache days/month) and 73.2% of chronic migraineurs had moderate-to-severe headache-related disability (MIDAS total score ≥11). Preventive treatment was discontinued/switched at least once by 26.4% of episodic migraineurs and by 53.3% of chronic migraineurs. Of those patients (n = 382) who gave collective reasons for discontinuation/switching preventive treatment, over 70% selected lack of efficacy and tolerability/safety. This real-world analysis provides additional support for the unmet medical need for efficacious therapies that reduce migraine frequency and severity, headache-related disability, and have better tolerability for patients with migraine. In addition, further research is needed to better understand the burden of illness among patients with lower migraine frequency, and to implement treatment strategies to prevent progression of the disease.

Validity and reliability of the Bahasa Melayu version of the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire.

Background. The study was designed to determine the validity and reliability of the Bahasa Melayu version (MIDAS-M) of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Methods. Patients having migraine for more than six months attending the Neurology Clinic, Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kelantan, Malaysia, were recruited. Standard forward and back translation procedures were used to translate and adapt the MIDAS questionnaire to produce the Bahasa Melayu version. The translated Malay version was tested for face and content validity. Validity and reliability testing were further conducted with 100 migraine patients (1st administration) followed by a retesting session 21 days later (2nd administration). Results. A total of 100 patients between 15 and 60 years of age were recruited. The majority of the patients were single (66%) and students (46%). Cronbach's alpha values were 0.84 (1st administration) and 0.80 (2nd administration). The test-retest reliability for the total MIDAS score was 0.73, indicating that the MIDAS-M questionnaire is stable; for the five disability questions, the test-retest values ranged from 0.77 to 0.87. Conclusion. The MIDAS-M questionnaire is comparable with the original English version in terms of validity and reliability and may be used for the assessment of migraine in clinical settings.

Reliability and validity of Hindi translation of the migraine disability assessment and headache impact test-6 questionnaires

Objective:The objective of the study was to assess the reliability and validity of the Hindi translation of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) questionnaires.Materials and Methods:The study was conducted on the migraine patients. For test–retest reliability, the respondents filled the MIDAS and HIT-6 questionnaires twice, at an interval of three weeks. For validity, the same population of patients filled the headache diary for three months. After three months they filled the MIDAS and HIT-6 questionnaires again. The patients were subgrouped according to their occupation and level of education. The test–retest reliability and validity were calculated by the Pearson correlation coefficient. Internal consistency was calculated using the Cronbach alpha.Results:A total of 236 migraine patients were screened. Seventy-nine patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A total of 69 patients completed the study. The HIT-6 questionnaire was applicable to all the subgroups of patients and had better comprehensibility than the MIDAS. Housewives missed out on the first two questions of the MIDAS and had lower mean MIDAS scores than HIT-6. The test–retest correlation coefficients for the total MIDAS and HIT-6 scores were 0.94 and 0.81, respectively. The correlation coefficients between the total score in the headache diary equivalent and the MIDAS and HIT-6 total score were 0.91 and 0.77, respectively. Cronbach alpha, a measure of internal consistency for the MIDAS questionnaire was > 0.90 at all the compilations. For the HIT-6 questionnaire, it ranged from 0.67 to 0.79.Conclusion:The Hindi versions of MIDAS and HIT-6 questionnaires were reliable and valid, but could not be interchanged. HIT-6 had better comprehensibility.

Disability in chronic migraine with medication overuse: Treatment effects through 5 years

Chronic migraine accompanied by medication overuse is particularly difficult to treat. The number of treatment investigations is limited, few have included follow-up beyond 6 months and almost none has examined whether treatment leads to concurrent improvements in disability and functional impairment. This open-label study addresses these limitations. We have been prospectively following an initial cohort of 84 chronic migraine patients with medication overuse, who at the time of this evaluation had been reduced to 58, for an extended period to assess longer-term maintenance of effects, using measurement procedures identical to those in the original investigation. Thus, the specific aim was to determine the clinical status, with respect to pain indices and disability level, of chronic migraine patients with medication overuse who were treated and followed prospectively for 5 years. All patients completed a brief inpatient treatment programme, in which they were withdrawn from their offending medications and subsequently placed on more appropriate preventive antimigraine medications. Both end-point, wherein missing data points were estimated, and continuer analyses, wherein data analysis was limited to the 58 individuals with complete datasets, revealed significant improvement on all measures studied-headache days per month, analgesic consumption and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) total score. The percentage reduction from baseline to 5 years for the MIDAS total score was 76.0%, while the percentage of individuals revealing improvements of clinically significant magnitude (≥ 50%) on the MIDAS was 91.9%. MIDAS total scores were lower at 5 years than at some of the intervening follow-up intervals. Comparisons of those who completed the 5-year follow-up (n = 58) with those who did not revealed no differences at baseline. This finding, coupled with the nearly identical results for the end-point and continuers analyses, suggests that attrition did not have a bearing on outcome. None of the patients completing the 5-year follow-up had relapsed since the prior 3-year follow-up assessment. High levels of maintenance were revealed at 5 years, with disability scores showing some continued improvement over time. The implications of these findings and the limitations of the study are discussed.

Botulinum Toxin Type A as Migraine Preventive Treatment in Patients Previously Failing Oral Prophylactic Treatment Due To Compliance Issues

Botulinum Toxin Type A as Migraine Preventive Treatment in Patients Previously Failing Oral Prophylactic Treatment Due To Compliance Issues

Chronic migraine with medication overuse: treatment outcome and disability at 3 years follow-up

Patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse are particularly difficult to treat. No clear consensus exists about treatment strategies to be used and little data exists about the functional impact of headache in these patients. The purpose of the study was to determine (1) the clinical course of a sample of chronic migraine patients with medication overuse 36 months following treatment intervention and (2) whether functional impairment, assessed by the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire, improved upon treatment. Of 106 patients meeting the criteria for chronic migraine with medication overuse (according to Silberstein and Lipton), 71 went on to complete a structured inpatient treatment, consisting of medication withdrawal and then prophylactic treatment. As a group, the patients were significantly improved at 36-month follow-up, with respect to 2 headache parameters (days of headache per month and number of used medications per month assessed by the diary card) and 2 measures of functional impact extracted from the MIDAS questionnaire (MIDAS total score and frequency of headache). Chronic migraine accompanied with medication overuse led to considerable disability prior to treatment. However, notable improvement both in headache parameters and in disability measures occurred concurrently with treatment. This suggests that successful treatment has more wide-ranging positive benefits beyond mere symptom reduction. To our knowledge, this is the first investigation where the MIDAS questionnaire has been used as an outcome measure in patients with chronic headache to assess disability during such a long follow-up period.

Pharmacological behavioural treatment for children and adolescents with tension-type headache: preliminary data

Recurrent headaches are a significant health problem for young patients. Most current investigations have employed limited modalities (either medication or behavioural) and few have included treatment comparisons. The purpose of this study was to compare relaxation training (provided in a limited contact format) and amitriptyline in the treatment of young tension-type headache (TTH) sufferers. Follow-up is planned for 3, 6 and 12 months, at which time patients complete headache logs and an Italian version of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire that has been adapted for this age group. Two groups of TTH sufferers of similar age and characteristics were studied. Clinical results, MIDAS total score, and individual values for items A and B were collected at the first follow-up (3 months). The clinical improvement is significant for both groups. Although the clinical results are similar in both groups, relaxation therapy seems to be more accepted than pharmacological therapy. These data, however, are preliminary and the sample sizes are small, so these conclusions are tentative. We will continue our data collection for 12 months.

Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire

The aim of this study is to assess the comprehensibility, internal consistency, patient-physician reliability, test-retest reliability, and validity of Turkish version of Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire in patients with headache. MIDAS questionnaire has been developed by Stewart et al and shown to be reliable and valid to determine the degree of disability caused by migraine. This study was designed as a national multicenter study to demonstrate the reliability and validity of Turkish version of MIDAS questionnaire. Patients applying to 17 Neurology Clinics in Turkey were evaluated at the baseline (visit 1), week 4 (visit 2), and week 12 (visit 3) visits in terms of disease severity and comprehensibility, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and validity of MIDAS. Since the severity of the disease has been found to change significantly at visit 2 compared to visit 1, test-retest reliability was assessed using the MIDAS scores of a subgroup of patients whose disease severity remained unchanged (up to +/-3 days difference in the number of days with headache between visits 1 and 2). A total of 306 patients (86.2% female, mean age: 35.0 +/- 9.8 years) were enrolled into the study. A total of 65.7%, 77.5%, 82.0% of patients reported that "they had fully understood the MIDAS questionnaire" in visits 1, 2, and 3, respectively. A highly positive correlation was found between physician and patient and the applied total MIDAS scores in all three visits (Spearman correlation coefficients were R= 0.87, 0.83, and 0.90, respectively, P <.001). Internal consistency of MIDAS was assessed using Cronbach's alpha and was found at acceptable (>0.7) or excellent (>0.8) levels in both patient and physician applied MIDAS scores, respectively. Total MIDAS score showed good test-retest reliability (R= 0.68). Both the number of days with headache and the total MIDAS scores were positively correlated at all visits with correlation coefficients between 0.47 and 0.63. There was also a moderate degree of correlation (R= 0.54) between the total MIDAS score at week 12 and the number of days with headache at visit 2 + visit 3, which quantify headache-related disability over a 3-month period similar to MIDAS questionnaire. These findings demonstrated that the Turkish translation is equivalent to the English version of MIDAS in terms of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and validity. Physicians can reliably use the Turkish translation of the MIDAS questionnaire in defining the severity of illness and its treatment strategy when applied as a self-administered report by migraine patients themselves.