Treatment Of Migraine Attacks Research Articles

Real-world effectiveness and satisfaction with intravenous eptinezumab treatment in patients with chronic migraine: REVIEW, an observational, multi-site, US-based study

BackgroundDespite recent advancements in migraine treatment, some patients continue to endure significant disease burden. Due to the controlled nature of randomized trials in migraine prevention, many real-world patients with comorbidities or prior exposure to certain therapies are excluded. Capturing evidence of the effectiveness of treatment in real-world clinical settings can further shape treatment paradigms. The objective of this study was to develop a comprehensive understanding of both patients’ and physicians’ real-world experiences with eptinezumab for chronic migraine (CM).MethodsREVIEW (Real-world EVidence and Insights into Experiences With eptinezumab) is an observational, multi-site (n = 4), US-based study designed to evaluate real-world experiences of patients treated with eptinezumab and their treating physicians. Patients were ≥ 18 years of age, with a diagnosis of CM, who had completed ≥ 2 consecutive eptinezumab infusion cycles (≥ 6 months of exposure). The study included a retrospective chart review, a patient survey, and a semi-structured physician interview that assessed patient and/or physician satisfaction with elements of daily living / well-being, migraine symptomology, and perspectives of the eptinezumab infusion experience.ResultsOf the 94 patients enrolled, 83% (78/94) were female, the mean age was 49.2 years, and the mean time since migraine diagnosis was 15.4 years. Before eptinezumab treatment, patients experienced a mean of 8 self-reported “good” days/month, which increased to 18 after treatment. Most patients took, on average, ≥ 10 days/month of prescription and/or over-the-counter medication (81% [75/93] and 66% [61/93], respectively) to treat migraine attacks before eptinezumab treatment, which dropped to 26% (24/93) and 23% (21/93) following eptinezumab treatment. Prior to receiving eptinezumab, 62% (58/93) of patients indicated being at least slightly concerned about infusions; after eptinezumab infusion, this dropped to 14% (13/93). These patient survey findings were consistent with physician responses.ConclusionThis real-world evidence study demonstrated high overall satisfaction with the effectiveness of eptinezumab treatment for CM among most patients and their physicians.

Dipyrone for the acute treatment of migraine attacks in children and adults

Dipyrone for the acute treatment of migraine attacks in children and adults

Breastfeeding-Related Adverse Drug Reactions of Triptans: A Descriptive Analysis Using Four Pharmacovigilance Databases.

Objective: Migraine attacks are common in women of reproductive age. Although attacks are often less severe and less frequent during pregnancy, they regularly reoccur shortly after delivery. When first-line analgesic treatment is insufficient, triptans may be used for acute treatment of migraine attacks. Milk levels of occasional triptan use have shown to be low, and no adverse effects in breastfed infants have been reported. However, the available knowledge on the safety of triptans during breastfeeding is still limited. Methods: Four (inter)national pharmacovigilance databases were searched for breastfeeding related adverse drug reactions of triptans. These included the Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register and three databases of spontaneous reports (Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb, the European Medicines Agency [EudraVigilance], and the World Health Organization [VigiBase]). Results: A total of 26 reports on 27 breastfeeding related adverse drug reactions were identified (one report involved two separate adverse drug reactions). These involve three main complaints: painful breasts and/or nipples, painful milk ejection reflex, and a decrease in milk production. Discussion and Conclusion: The hypothesized pharmacological mechanism relates to the serotonin-receptor agonistic properties of triptans. These may lead to vasoconstriction in the breasts and nipples, including the vasculature surrounding the milk ducts and alveoli, and may also influence the hormonal function and levels of prolactin. The reported adverse drug reactions do not negatively impact the overall compatibility of triptans with breastfeeding. However, breastfeeding women may experience them as unsettling. Awareness of these potential adverse drug reactions is essential and should be weighed against the potential adverse effects of (untreated) symptoms of migraine attacks.

Medication "underuse" headache.

Many risk factors have been associated with migraine progression, including insufficient and ineffective utilization of migraine medications; however, they have been inadequately explored. This has resulted in suboptimal usage of medications without effective altering of prescribing recommendations for patients, posing a risk for migraine chronification. Our aim is to conduct a comprehensive review of the available evidence regarding the underuse of migraine medications, both acute and preventive. The term "underuse" includes, but is not limited to: (1) ineffective use of appropriate and inappropriate medication; (2) underutilization; (3) inappropriate timing of usage; and (4) patient dissatisfaction with medication. The underuse of both acute and preventive medications has been shown to contribute to the progression of migraine. In terms of acute medication, chronification occurs as a result of insufficient drug use, including failure of the prescriber to select the appropriate type based on pain intensity and disability, patients taking medication too late (more than 60 minutes after the onset or after central sensitization has occurred as evidenced by allodynia), and discontinuation because of lack of effect or intolerable side effects. The underlying cause of inadequate effectiveness of acute medication lies in its inability to halt the propagation of peripheral activation to central sensitization in a timely manner. For oral and injectable preventive migraine medications, insufficient efficacy and intolerable side effects have led to poor adherence and discontinuation with subsequent progression of migraine. The underlying pathophysiology here is rooted in the repetitive stimulation of afferent sensory pain fibers, followed by ascending brainstem pain pathways plus dysfunction of the endogenous descending brainstem pain inhibitory pathway. Although anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) medications partially address pain caused by the above factors, including decreased efficacy and tolerability from conventional therapy, some patients do not respond well to this treatment. Research suggests that initiating preventive anti-CGRP treatment at an early stage (during low frequency episodic migraine attacks) is more beneficial than commencing it during high frequency episodic attacks or when chronic migraine has begun. The term "medication underuse" is underrecognized, but it holds significant importance. Optimal usage of acute care and preventive migraine medications could potentially prevent migraine chronification and improve the treatment of migraine attacks.

How early can we treat migraine attacks? A perspective based on prodrome

Treating migraine attacks early at the onset of a headache is a common proven strategy. But does this strategy work before headache onset? In the PRODROME trial, Dodick etal. showed that ubrogepant taken during the prodrome can prevent headache attacks and reduce functional disability.1.

Exploration of Lasmiditan 200 mg Versus 100 mg for the Treatment of Migraine: A Meta-analysis Based on Aggregate Data.

Lasmiditan holds important potential in treating migraine, but its ideal dose remains elusive. This meta-analysis is conducted based on aggregate data and aims to compare the efficacy of lasmiditan 200 mg versus 100 mg for acute treatment of migraine attack. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched, and we included the randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of lasmiditan 200 mg versus 100 mg for migraine patients. This meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effect model or fixed-effect model based on the heterogeneity. The primary outcome was pain free at 2 hours. Secondary outcomes included pain relief at 2 hours, pain free at 24 hours, most bothersome symptom free at 2 hours, and adverse events. Seven randomized controlled trials and 6515 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with lasmiditan 100 mg for migraine patients, lasmiditan 200 mg was able to significantly improve pain free at 2 hours (odd ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.44; P < 0.0001) and pain free at 24 hours (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14-1.60; P = 0.0005), but showed no effect on pain relief at 2 hours (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.90-1.12; P = 0.98) or most bothersome symptom free at 2 hours (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.03; P = 0.17). Lasmiditan 200 mg was associated with the increase in adverse events compared with lasmiditan 100 mg (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.15-1.43; P < 0.0001). Lasmiditan 200 mg is more effective to improve pain free at 2 hours and 24 hours than lasmiditan 100 mg for the acute treatment of migraine patients.

New migraine drugs: A critical appraisal of the reason why the majority of migraine patients do not receive an adequate medication.

The last three decades have produced several novel and efficient medications to treat migraine attacks and reduce attack frequency. Additionally, promising approaches for the development of acute therapy and migraine prophylaxis continue to be pursued. At the same time as we witness the development of better and more efficient medications with continuously fewer side effects, we also realise that the high cost of such therapies means that only a minority of migraine patients who could benefit from these medications can afford them. Furthermore, information on cost-effectiveness is still lacking. Here, we compare availiable data, highlight open questions and suggest trials to close knowledge gaps. With good reason, our medicine is evidence-based. However, if this evidence is not collected, our decisions will continue to be based on marketing and assumptions. At the moment, we are not doing justice to our patients.

Pharmacology of erenumab in human isolated coronary and meningeal arteries: Additional effect of gepants on top of a maximum effect of erenumab.

Multiple drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor have been developed for migraine treatment. Here, the effect of the monoclonal antibody erenumab on CGRP-induced vasorelaxation was investigated in human isolated blood vessels, as well as the effect of combining erenumab with the small molecule drugs, namely rimegepant, olcegepant, or sumatriptan. Concentration-response curves to CGRP, adrenomedullin or pramlintide were constructed in human coronary artery (HCA) and human middle meningeal artery (HMMA) segments, incubated with or without erenumab and/or olcegepant. pA2 or pKb values were calculated to determine the potency of erenumab in both tissues. To study whether acutely acting antimigraine drugs exerted additional CGRP-blocking effects on top of erenumab, HCA segments were incubated with a maximally effective concentration of erenumab (3μM), precontracted with KCl and exposed to CGRP, followed by rimegepant, olcegepant, or sumatriptan in increasing concentrations. Erenumab shifted the concentration-response curve to CGRP in both vascular tissues. However, in HCA, the Schild plot slope was significantly smaller than unity, whereas this was not the case in HMMA, indicating different CGRP receptor mechanisms in these tissues. In HCA, rimegepant, olcegepant and sumatriptan exerted additional effects on CGRP on top of a maximal effect of erenumab. Gepants have additional effects on top of erenumab for CGRP-induced relaxation and could be effective in treating migraine attacks in patients already using erenumab as prophylaxis.

New therapeutic era for migraine attacks with recently approved monoclonal antibodies, ditans and gepants

Treatment of migraine attacks is advised in all patients, using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when the pain is mild and triptans when the pain intensity is moderate-severe. However, the effectiveness of these drugs is moderate, a high percentage of patients have side effects, and triptans are contraindicated in people with a history of stroke, ischaemic heart disease or poorly controlled hypertension. Hence, there is an urgent need for new therapeutic alternatives. In recent years, new drugs for migraine attacks have become available, most notably ditans (lasmiditan) and gepants (ubrogepant and rimegepant). Furthermore, eptinezumab, which has been approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults, has also been used for migraine attacks. This manuscript reviews the efficacy and safety results of the new drugs for migraines that will soon be on the market.

Modern strategies for the treatment of migraine attacks and the possibility of a differentiated approach

Treatment strategies for migraine attacks include the use of nonspecific drugs (simple and combined analgesics, antiemetics) and specific drugs (triptans, ergotamine derivatives, gepants, ditans), as well as neuromodulation methods. Despite the expansion of the range of specific drugs, the effectiveness of relieving headache attacks during migraine remains unsatisfactory. The choice of drug for the treatment of migraine attacks is based on their stratification according to the degree of impairment of the functional activity of patients and involves the prescription of specific anti-migraine drugs for moderate and severe disability. The stratified approach has a number of advantages in terms of the main parameters of analgesic effectiveness, is associated with lower treatment costs and carries a lower risk of analgesic abuse. Migraine attacks are characterized by high polymorphism and the presence of many clinical manifestations, which largely determine the severity of the patient’s disability and sometimes require independent treatment. Specific drugs for the treatment of migraine attacks (triptans) can relieve not only headaches, but also symptoms of nausea, vomiting, photo- and phonophobia. The choice of drug is based on the individual characteristics of the patient, the profile of migraine attacks and involves taking into account the pharmacological properties of the drug. Features of migraine such as a high rate of increase in pain during an attack, the presence of rapidly developing nausea, and the need to provide long-term pain relief require the use of fast-acting forms of medications. The benefits of choosing these forms are supported by patient preference studies. Clinical trial data and research results from actual clinical practice allow us to formulate some approaches to differentiated drug selection.

Ubrogepant for the treatment of migraine attacks during the prodrome: a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial in the USA

Ubrogepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist that is approved for acute treatment of migraine. The prodrome is the earliest phase of a migraine attack and is characterised by non-aura symptoms that precede headache onset. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant 100 mg compared with placebo for the acute treatment of migraine when administered during the prodrome. This PRODROME trial was a phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial of ubrogepant 100 mg conducted at 75 research centres and headache clinics in the USA. Eligible participants were adults aged 18-75 years who had at least a 1-year history of migraine with or without aura and a history of two to eight migraine attacks per month with moderate to severe headache in each of the 3 months before screening. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either receive placebo to treat the first qualifying prodrome event and ubrogepant 100 mg to treat the second qualifying prodrome event or to receive ubrogepant 100 mg to treat the first qualifying prodrome event and placebo to treat the second qualifying prodrome event. An automated interactive web-response system used permuted blocks of four to manage randomisation. All people giving interventions and assessing outcomes were masked to group assignment during the study. People doing data analysis, which occurred after study completion, were not masked to group assignment. During the double-blind treatment period, each participant was instructed to orally take two tablets of the study drug at the onset of each qualifying prodrome event. The primary endpoint was absence of moderate or severe intensity headache within 24 h after study-drug dose; efficacy analyses were conducted with the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, defined as all randomly assigned participants with at least one headache assessment within 24 h after taking the study drug during the treatment period. The safety population included all treated participants who took at least one administration of study drug. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04492020). Between Aug 21, 2020, and April 19, 2022, 518 participants were randomly assigned to double-blind crossover treatment. The safety population included 480 participants and the mITT population included 477 participants; 421 (88%) of 480 participants were female and 59 (12%) were male. Absence of moderate or severe headache within 24 h after a dose occurred after 190 (46%) of 418 qualifying prodrome events that had been treated with ubrogepant and after 121 (29%) of 423 qualifying prodrome events that had been treated with placebo (odds ratio 2·09, 95% CI 1·63-2·69; p<0·0001). Adverse events that occurred within 48 h after study-drug administration were reported after 77 (17%) of 456 qualifying prodrome events that had been treated with ubrogepant and after 55 (12%) of 462 events that had been treated with placebo. Ubrogepant was effective and well tolerated for the treatment of migraine attacks when taken during the prodrome. AbbVie.

Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) wearable device for adolescents with migraine: a real-world study of high-frequency abortive treatment suggests preventive effects.

Migraine is a chronic neurological disease manifesting as attacks of disabling head pain and associated symptoms. Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) is a non-pharmacological, prescribed, wearable device (Nerivio®). This device has been certified by the FDA for the acute and/or preventive treatment of migraine with or without aura in patients 12 years of age or older. The device is affixed to the user's arm during 45-min treatment sessions and is operated using a smartphone app. This study (NCT05769322) aims to evaluate whether frequent use of REN for the acute treatment of migraine in adolescents resulted in a reduction in monthly migraine treatment days (MMTD), as previously demonstrated in adults through a dedicated prevention clinical trial (NCT04828707). The study included real-world prospective data from adolescent patients who used REN on at least 10 days every 28-day month, following the REN migraine prevention guideline of an every-other-day pattern. Additional requirements were at least three REN treatment days in each of the two subsequent months. The number of MMTD was used as a proxy measure for the number of monthly migraine days (MMD). The change in MMTD from the first month, taken as a "baseline," to each of the following months was used to evaluate the presence and size of potential migraine preventive benefits of REN in adolescents. A total of 83 adolescents were eligible for analysis. The users were 15.9 ± 1.3 years of age (mean ± SD), and 89% of them were female. The results demonstrated a substantial month-to-month reduction in the mean (±SD) number of REN treatment days from 12.6 (±3.2) MMTD in the first month to 9.0 (±4.8) MMTD in the second month (p < 0.001), and a further decrease to 7.4 (±4.2) MMTD in the third month (p < 0.001). This indicates an accumulative reduction of 5.2 (±4.8) mean REN MMTD from the first month to the third month of consecutive REN treatment. The users also reported consistent 2-h acute pain responses in at least 50% of their treated attacks, with 61.9% of the users reported experiencing pain relief, 24.5% reported pain freedom, 67.4% indicated relief in functional disability, and 41.3% reported complete freedom from functional disability. The frequent use of REN among adolescents as an acute treatment for migraine attacks resulted in a decrease in the mean number of monthly treatment days in the subsequent months, suggesting that REN may have potential preventive benefits for migraine in this subpopulation.

DESIGN, CHARACTERIZATION AND EVALUATION OF NOVEL MUCOADHESIVE NASAL INSERTS FOR THE TREATMENT OF MIGRAINE

Recently, nasal administration has gained more attention as a safe way for delivering the active ingredients used to treat migraines. Strategies can be implemented by changing aspects like the medicines, delivery vehicle, and other components to get around the obstacles associated with conventional therapies. This research work aimed to explore the potential of lyophilized nasal inserts of eletriptan hydrobromide for the treatment of migraine attack. Here, the lyophilization technique is used for the nasal inserts preparation. The developed inserts were tested for various characterization studies,such as mucoadhesive examinations, water uptake, in vitro drug release, in vitro cytotoxicity, ex vivo investigations and stability. The inserts showed acceptable pH values, satisfactory mucoadhesion potential and excellent water uptake activity. In vitro release data for the formulations followed first-order kinetics. The cytotoxicity studies showed that there was a reduction in cell toxicity of drug embedded in the inserts when compared to the pure drug. When the prepared nasal inserts were used for treatment, there was no significant impact on the epithelium of nasal mucosa. The novel lyophilized nasal inserts of eletriptan hydrobromide could be a better alternative for the treatment of migraine

Burden of Medication Overuse in Migraine: A Cross-sectional, Population-Based Study in Five European Countries Using the 2020 National Health and Wellness Survey (NHWS).

Overuse of medication to treat migraine attacks can lead to development of a new type of headache or significant worsening of pre-existing headache, known as medication overuse headache. However, data concerning the burden of medication overuse (MO) in migraine are limited. This study aimed to assess the humanistic burden of MO in individuals with migraine from five European countries. Data are from the 2020 National Health and Wellness Survey-a cross-sectional, population-based survey conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Data were included from adults (≥ 18years) with a self-reported diagnosis of migraine and at least one migraine attack and one headache in the past 30days. MO was defined as (i) use of simple analgesics/over-the-counter medications on ≥ 15days/month; or (ii) use of migraine medication, including combination analgesics, on ≥ 10days/month. Humanistic burden of MO was assessed using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12v2), EuroQol 5-Dimensions 5-Levels (EQ-5D), Short-Form 6-Dimensions (SF-6D), and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS). The association of MO with humanistic burden was evaluated using generalized linear models adjusted for potential confounders in the full migraine population and in subgroups defined by headache frequency (monthly headache days [MHDs] 1-3, 4-7, 8-14, or ≥ 15). Among individuals with migraine, humanistic burden (SF-12v2, SF-6D, EQ-5D, and MIDAS) was higher in individuals who reported MO (n = 431) versus no MO (n = 3554), even after adjustment for confounding variables (p < 0.001 for all measures). MIDAS and EQ-5D scores were higher in individuals with MO than without, at all levels of headache frequency. For SF-12v2 and SF-6D, differences between groups with/without MO were seen only at lower levels of headache frequency (MHD 1-3 and 4-7). Among people with migraine, those who report MO face a greater humanistic burden than those without MO, irrespective of headache frequency.

Efficacy of zolmitriptan nasal spray in adult patients with migraine

Introduction. Migraine is a common disabling condition. Migraine patients require fast-acting drugs with high efficacy. Prior studies have demonstrated that zolmitriptan oral dosage forms (oral tablets) are highly effective in the treatment of migraine attacks.Aim. To evaluate the efficacy, timing of onset of therapeutic effect and tolerability of zolmitriptan nasal spray (Xsenza®) in the treatment of migraine.Materials and methods. A total of 39 patients aged 20 to 58 years with migraine were enrolled in a prospective, multicentre, observational study. Patients were included in a group to treat three consecutive migraine attacks with zolmitriptan nasal spray at a dose of 2.5 mg according to their habitual behaviour model that most closely reflects clinical practice. Efficacy endpoint (positive attack treatment outcome) was the generally accepted measure of reduction in cephalalgia intensity and concomitant autonomic symptoms (reduction in pain and autonomic symptoms from severe/moderate to mild/absence severity according to VAS) 2 hours after zolmitriptan inhalation.Results. The absence or mild intensity of headache was reported in 25% of patients 10 minutes (earliest assessment in that study) and in 28% of patients 30 minutes after administration of the drug. The proportion of patients with positive treatment outcomes in all three consecutive migraine attacks two hours after administration of zolmitriptan nasal spray 2.5 mg was 69.2%, 75% and 75%, respectively. Zolmitriptan nasal spray was well tolerated, while most adverse events were mild in severity and transient in nature.Conclusions. Zolmitriptan nasal spray (Xsenza®) is highly effective in the treatment of migraine attacks and has a rapid onset of action. The drug combines high efficacy and good tolerability.

Migraine headaches as a complication of the atrial fibrillation ablation procedure: case report

The balloon cryoablation (CA) procedure is an established method for the permanent treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Like other surgical interventions, it is associated with the potential development of early and late complications, including neurological ones such as migraine. We report a case of migraine headaches after the CA procedure. 25-year-old man with paroxysmal AF, without comorbidities, underwent balloon CA. On the second day after the procedure, the patient developed visual symptoms typical of migraine aura. After 30 minutes, these symptoms disappeared and appeared classic migraine headache attack. Similar episodes occurred over the following days. A focal central nervous system lesion was ruled out and a diagnosis of migraine with aura was made. The patient received a typical migraine attack treatment. The attacks ceased within two weeks. 3 months later during the follow-up visit at the neurology clinic no abnormalities were detected. We decided to check if the migraine is a rare complication of AF ablation surgery. Many studies do not include migraine headaches at all in the neurological complications of ablation. However, based on some studies, it may seem that the incidence of migraine as a complication of ablation is underestimated.

Preclinical effects of cannabidiol in an experimental model of migraine.

Migraine is a disabling disorder characterized by recurrent headaches, accompanied by abnormal sensory sensitivity and anxiety. Despite extensive historical use of cannabis in headache disorders, there is limited research on the nonpsychoactive cannabidiol (CBD) for migraine and there is no scientific evidence to prove that CBD is an effective treatment. The effects of CBD are examined here using a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-induced migraine model that provides measures of cephalic allodynia, spontaneous pain, altered light sensitivity (photophobia), and anxiety-like behavior in C57BL/6J mice. A single administration of CGRP induced facial hypersensitivity in both female and male mice. Repeated CGRP treatment produced progressively decreased levels in basal thresholds of allodynia in females, but not in males. A single CBD administration protected both females and males from periorbital allodynia induced by a single CGRP injection. Repeated CBD administration prevented increased levels of basal allodynia induced by repeated CGRP treatment in female mice and did not lead to responses consistent with migraine headache as occurs with triptans. Cannabidiol, injected after CGRP, reversed CGRP-evoked allodynia. Cannabidiol also reduced spontaneous pain traits induced by CGRP administration in female mice. Finally, CBD blocked CGRP-induced anxiety in male mice, but failed in providing protection from CGRP-induced photophobia in females. These results demonstrate the efficacy of CBD in preventing episodic and chronic migraine-like states with reduced risk of causing medication overuse headache. Cannabidiol also shows potential as an abortive agent for treating migraine attacks and headache-related conditions such as spontaneous pain and anxiety.

Characterizing opioid use in a Dutch cohort with migraine.

There is lack of data on opioid (over)use for migraine in Europe. We performed a cross-sectional study in a large Dutch cohort using a web-based questionnaire to assess opioid use in individuals with migraine. Primary outcome was to assess opioid use for the treatment of migraine attacks. As secondary outcomes we specified use of opioids (duration of use, type of opioids, prescriber) and compared between persons with episodic migraine versus chronic migraine. Descriptive statistics, unpaired T-tests, Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests were used. In total n = 3712 patients participated, 13% ever used opioids for headache. In opioid users, 27% did this for >1 month, and 11% for >1 year, and 2% without prescription. The majority of prescribing physicians were general practitioners (46%), followed by neurologists (35%), other specialists (9%), or emergency room doctors (8%). Opioids were used as acute treatment in 63%, in 16% as preventive treatment, and in 21% for both indications. Chronic migraine patients reported more opioid use compared with episodic migraine (22% versus 12%, p < 0.001), with also more prolonged use (>1 month: 34% chronic migraine versus 24% episodic migraine, p < 0.003). Opioid use is more frequent and prolonged in chronic migraine patients. Further education for both doctors and migraine subjects and providing multimodal pain management strategies are needed to reduce opioid use in persons with migraine.

Interim Analysis of Long-Term Safety and Tolerability Data of STS101 From the Phase 3 Open-Label ASCEND Study (P13-12.004)

Interim Analysis of Long-Term Safety and Tolerability Data of STS101 From the Phase 3 Open-Label ASCEND Study (P13-12.004)

Efficacy of Celecoxib Oral Solution in Adults With and Without Baseline Nausea: Post Hoc Analysis of Results From Two Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trials in the Acute Treatment of Migraine (P14-12.009)

Efficacy of Celecoxib Oral Solution in Adults With and Without Baseline Nausea: Post Hoc Analysis of Results From Two Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trials in the Acute Treatment of Migraine (P14-12.009)