Different routes of administration in chronic migraine prevention lead to different placebo responses: a meta-analysis

A scoping review of placebo and nocebo responses and effects: insights for clinical trials and practice

Placebo and nocebo responses and effects influence treatment outcomes across a variety of conditions. The current scoping review aims to synthesise evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses in both clinical and healthy populations, elucidating key determinants of placebo and nocebo responses and effects, including individual, clinical, psychological and contextual factors. Among the 306 publications identified, 83% were meta-analyses and 17% systematic reviews, with a predominance of research in medical specialties (81.7%) such as psychiatry and neurology. Placebo responses were significantly more studied than nocebo responses. Individual determinants (e.g., age), clinical determinants (e.g., baseline symptom severity) and psychological determinants (e.g., expectations) were found to influence placebo and nocebo outcomes. Contextual determinants, including trial design and the method of treatment administration, also played critical roles. Several key underinvestigated areas in the current body of systematic reviews and meta-analyses were also identified. This scoping review highlights valuable insights into the determinants of placebo and nocebo responses and effects on a group level, potentially offering practical implications for optimising clinical trial designs and enhancing patient care strategies in clinical practice. However, to fully leverage these benefits, it is crucial to address the underexplored topics through more rigorous investigations using a person-centred perspective.

Placebo nonresponders: An experimental investigation on their unreliability over time

In order to disentangle the effects of drugs from placebo responses, several approaches have been used, such as a placebo run-in phase in which only placebo nonresponders, or poor responders, are considered for further randomization to either placebo or active treatment. This study is aimed at investigating the variability of placebo nonresponders obtained through the classical placebo run-in paradigm (group RUN) and through mismatch conditioning (group MIS), as done in our previous study. To do this, we simulated a real clinical trial in the laboratory, in which the placebo responders of both groups were discarded and the remaining nonresponders of both groups RUN and MIS were randomized to either continuing on placebo (groups RUN-P and MIS-P, respectively) or receiving topical 0.5% lidocaine (groups RUN-L and MIS-L, respectively) applied to the skin. By measuring pain thresholds, we found that the placebo nonresponders selected on the first day of the experiment showed different responses on the following day in both group RUN and MIS. This led to no significant differences between placebo and lidocaine in both groups. Although this is an experimental laboratory situation far from the clinical trial setting, these findings show that placebo nonresponders are not necessarily constant over time, both when a placebo run-in protocol is used and when nonresponders are created in the laboratory. This questions the reliability of selecting placebo nonresponders as a methodological approach in clinical research. Therefore, we suggest reconsidering the validity and usefulness of placebo run-in protocols. PERSPECTIVE: Placebo nonresponders are sometime selected for further randomization to either placebo or active treatment. In this experimental study, which is a laboratory simulation of a clinical trial, we found that placebo nonresponders vary from day to day, thus questioning their validity as a methodological approach in clinical research.

The safety and efficacy of onabotulinumtoxinA injections for children and adolescents with chronic migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To qualitatively and quantitatively summarize the evidence for the use of onabotulinumtoxinA injections in children and adolescents with migraine.

BACKGROUND

There are limited evidence-based treatment options for youth with migraine, especially youth with chronic migraine (CM). OnabotulinumtoxinA injections are an established evidence-based treatment for adults with CM. While several studies have assessed their safety and efficacy among adolescents with CM, there are no published systematic reviews summarizing the pediatric evidence.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic review, reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, aiming to identify studies that included five or more children and adolescents aged ≤18 years with a diagnosis of migraine, who were treated with ≥50 units (U) of onabotulinumtoxinA and had outcomes assessed ≥4 weeks after one or more injection cycle. Both observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion. Two investigators independently carried out the first (titles and abstracts) and second (full text) screening stages, as well as data extraction and quality appraisal. The American Academy of Neurology risk of bias grading scheme was used to assess study risk of bias. Studies with adequate data were pooled using random effects meta-analyses, and Hedge's g standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were generated to estimate the effect sizes of the continuous outcomes included. Studies lacking data required for meta-analysis were summarized qualitatively.

RESULTS

We screened 634 studies and included 14 studies comprising 491 participants, of whom 489 had CM. Two studies were RCTs, 12 were observational uncontrolled studies, and all but one study included only youth with CM. Five Class IV observational uncontrolled studies were amenable to pooling in meta-analyses. After a mean of 2-2.6 injection cycles, headache frequency was shown to decrease significantly after treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA (Hedge's g = 0.97, 95% CI 0.58-1.35; p < 0.0001), as did severity (Hedge's g = 1.24, 95% CI 0.55-1.94; p = 0.0005), with both estimates having a large effect size magnitude. A Class I parallel-group RCT of one injection series (155 U, 74 U, or placebo), powered to detect a change in 4 headache days per month, did not find outcome differences between the active and placebo treatment arms. A Class IV crossover RCT showed superiority of active (155 U) versus placebo injections. The remaining Class IV observational studies that were excluded from the meta-analyses all showed improved outcomes with onabotulinumtoxinA injections over time. No serious adverse events related to treatment occurred.

CONCLUSION

OnabotulinumtoxinA injections have established safety for use in children and adolescents with CM and are likely effective in reducing headache frequency and severity over time. However, in the absence of an adequately powered parallel-group RCT assessing the efficacy of multiple injection cycles, it remains unclear if this intervention is superior to placebo.

Efficacy of eptinezumab in non-responders to subcutaneous monoclonal antibodies against CGRP and the CGRP receptor: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Migraine patients unresponsive to calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)(-receptor, -R) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) may benefit from switching between CGRP(-R) mAbs. However, some patients do not tolerate or respond to any subcutaneous mAbs. This study evaluates the efficacy of the intravenous CGRP mAb eptinezumab in these therapy-refractory patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients with migraine who previously failed erenumab and at least one CGRP mAb (fremanezumab and/or galcanezumab) received eptinezumab 100 mg, followed by a second dose of 100 mg or 300 mg after 12 weeks. Monthly headache days, monthly migraine days, acute medication days, and migraine pain intensity were recorded from standardized headache diaries during the four weeks before the first infusion (baseline), and during weeks 9-12 and 21-24 of treatment. Patient-reported outcomes were analyzed at baseline, weeks 12, and 24.

RESULTS

From January 2023 to February 2024, 41 patients received eptinezumab 100 mg. Of these, 38 (93%) received a second infusion after 12 weeks, with 29 (71%) increasing the dose to 300 mg. The percentage of patients with a ≥30% reduction rate in monthly migraine days was 23.1% at week 12 and 29.7% at week 24. Monthly migraine days decreased from 16.3 ± 8.0 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.1 days during weeks 9-12 and 14.4 ± 8.0 days during weeks 21-24 (p = 0.07). During weeks 21-24, 38.5% reported a clinically meaningful reduction in HIT-6 scores and 52.4% in MIDAS scores. No adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Eptinezumab may be an effective and well-tolerated option for some treatment-refractory migraine patients unresponsive to subcutaneous CGRP-(R) mAbs.

Uncovering the determinants of brain functioning, behavior and their interplay in the light of context

Notwithstanding the huge progress in molecular and cellular neuroscience, our ability to understand the brain and develop effective treatments promoting mental health is still limited. This can be partially ascribed to the reductionist, deterministic and mechanistic approaches in neuroscience that struggle with the complexity of the central nervous system. Here, I introduce the Context theory of constrained systems proposing a novel role of contextual factors and genetic, molecular and neural substrates in determining brain functioning and behavior. This theory entails key conceptual implications. First, context is the main driver of behavior and mental states. Second, substrates, from genes to brain areas, have no direct causal link to complex behavioral responses as they can be combined in multiple ways to produce the same response and different responses can impinge on the same substrates. Third, context and biological substrates play distinct roles in determining behavior: context drives behavior, substrates constrain the behavioral repertoire that can be implemented. Fourth, since behavior is the interface between the central nervous system and the environment, it is a privileged level of control and orchestration of brain functioning. Such implications are illustrated through the Kitchen metaphor of the brain. This theoretical framework calls for the revision of key concepts in neuroscience and psychiatry, including causality, specificity and individuality. Moreover, at the clinical level, it proposes treatments inducing behavioral changes through contextual interventions as having the highest impact to reorganize the complexity of the human mind and to achieve a long-lasting improvement in mental health.

Effectiveness and tolerability of eptinezumab in treating patients with migraine resistant to conventional preventive medications and CGRP (receptor) antibodies: a multicentre retrospective real-world analysis from Germany

BACKGROUND

Eptinezumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP mAb) and is used for migraine prophylaxis. Efficacy data are mainly from clinical trials, real-world data are hardly available yet. Reimbursement policy in Germany leads to eptinezumab mainly being used in patients having failed pre-treatment with other CGRP mAb. To date, it is unclear whether eptinezumab is efficacious and well tolerated in this population and how the treatment response differs from patients who are naive to CGRP mAbs.

METHODS

We analysed clinical routine data of 79 patients (episodic migraine (EM): n = 19; chronic migraine (CM): n = 60) from four different centres in Germany. All patients were treated with eptinezumab (100mg). Differences in monthly headache (MHD), migraine (MMD) and acute medication days (AMD) after three months were analysed. The correlation of response with the number of CGRP mAb failures was evaluated. Significance level has been corrected (alpha = 0.017).

RESULTS

After three months MHD, MMD and AMD were significantly reduced. In EM, the median reduction for MHD was 4.0 days (IQR: -6.5 to -1.0; p = 0.001), for MMD 3.0 days (IQR: -5.5 to -1.5; p < 0.001) and for AMD 2.0 days (IQR: -5.0 to -0.5; p = 0.006). In CM, median reduction of MHD was 4 days (IQR: -8.0 to 0.0; p < 0.001), 3.0 days (IQR: -6.0 to-1.0; p < 0.001) for MMD and 1.0 day (IQR: -5.0 to 0.0; p < 0.001) for AMD. All patients were resistant to conventional preventive therapies and most to CGRP mAbs. Fourteen patients had never received a CGRP mAb and 65 patients had received at least one mAb without sufficient effectiveness and/or intolerability (one: n = 20, two: n = 28, three: n = 17). There was a significant association between the number of prior therapies and the 30% MHD responder rate (none: 78.6%, one: 45.0%, two: 32.1%, three: 23.5%, p = 0.010). Regarding tolerability, 10.4% (8/77) reported mild side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of eptinezumab is significantly reduced in patients who have not previously responded to other CGRP mAbs. However, limitations such as the retrospective nature of the analysis, the small sample size and the short treatment period with only the lower dose of eptinezumab must be considered when interpreting the results.

Eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: a narrative review

Eptinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), was recently approved in Europe for the prophylactic treatment of migraine in adults who have at least four migraine days a month. Eptinezumab is administered by intravenous infusion every 12 weeks. During recent months, a considerable amount of evidence from eptinezumab trials has been published. The aim of this review is to describe the existing evidence on the tolerability, safety and efficacy of eptinezumab in patients with migraine. Data from randomized (PROMISE-1, PROMISE-2, RELIEF and DELIVER) and open-label (PREVAIL) phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated the favorable effect of eptinezumab in migraine symptoms from first day of treatment. These studies showed that eptinezumab results in an overall reduction in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs), increases in the ≥50% and ≥ 75% migraine responder rates (MRRs) and improvements in patient-reported outcome measures in both patients with episodic migraine (EM) and with chronic migraine (CM), including patients who failed previous preventive treatments. The RELIEF trial also showed that eptinezumab, within 2 h of administration, reduced headache pain, migraine-associated symptoms and acute medication use when administered during a migraine attack. Eptinezumab benefits manifested as early as day 1 after dosing and with the subsequent doses lasted up to at least 2 years. Treatment-emergent adverse events reported by ≥2% of patients included upper respiratory tract infection and fatigue. Current evidence demonstrates that eptinezumab has a potent, fast-acting, sustained migraine preventive effect in patients with EM and CM. Eptinezumab has also shown to be well tolerated, supporting its use in the treatment of patients with migraine and inclusion in the current migraine therapeutic options.

Placebo and nocebo in the treatment of migraine: How much does real world effectiveness depend on contextual effects?

PURPOSE

Treatments in medicine impact individuals beyond their intended effects, due to phenomena such as the placebo and nocebo effects. The placebo effect arises from the positive expectation of a treatment being beneficial, while the nocebo effect stems from the negative expectation of a treatment causing harm. Both in real-world practice and clinical trials, treatments can lead to outcomes unrelated to their intended mechanism of action, which we categorize as placebo and nocebo responses. These responses, combined with the inherent fluctuation in a condition's natural progression, regression to the mean, and random comorbidities, make up a significant part of the therapeutic experience. Particularly in pain management, placebo and nocebo effects play a substantial role. By addressing modifiable contextual factors such as patient expectations, lifestyle choices, and the therapeutic relationship, healthcare providers can enhance the effectiveness of migraine treatments, paving the way for a more comprehensive, individualized approach to patient care. We must also consider non-modifiable factors like personal experiences, beliefs, and information from social media and the internet.

CONCLUSION

This review offers a summary of our current understanding of the placebo and nocebo effects in migraine management.

Placebo response in sham-acupuncture-controlled trials for migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To understand the placebo response of acupuncture and its effect on migraine and optimize the design of future acupuncture clinical trials on migraine treatment.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials with sham acupuncture as a control in migraine treatment were searched in four English databases from inception to September 1, 2022. The primary outcome was placebo response rate. Secondary outcomes were migraine symptoms, emotional condition, and quality of life. Factors associated with placebo response were also explored. Results were combined using risk difference (RD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) with a random effects model.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 21 studies involving 1177 patients. The pooled response rate of sham acupuncture was 0.34 (RD, 95% CI 0.23-0.45, I2 89.8%). The results (SMD [95% CI]) showed significant improvements in migraine symptoms (pain intensity -0.56 [-0.73 to -0.38], and episode conditions -0.55 [-0.75 to -0.35]); emotional condition (anxiety scale -0.49 [-0.90 to -0.08] and depression scale -0.21 [-0.40 to -0.03]); and quality of life on the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (restrictive 0.78 [0.61-0.95]; preventive 0.52 [0.35-0.68]; and emotional 0.45 [0.28-0.62]) and on the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form (physical 0.48 [0.34-0.62] and mental 0.21 [0.02-0.41]). Only acupuncture treatment frequency had a significant impact on the placebo response rate (RD 0.49 vs. 0.14; p = 0.00).

CONCLUSIONS

The effect sizes for placebo response of sham acupuncture varied across migraine treatment trials. Further studies should routinely consider adjusting for a more complete set of treatment factors.

How Do Expectations Modulate Pain? A Motivational Perspective

Expectations can profoundly modulate pain experience, during which the periaqueductal gray (PAG) plays a pivotal role. In this article, we focus on motivationally evoked neural activations in cortical and brainstem regions both before and during stimulus administration, as has been demonstrated by experimental studies on pain-modulatory effects of expectations, in the hope of unraveling how the PAG is involved in descending and ascending nociceptive processes. This motivational perspective on expectancy effects on the perception of noxious stimuli sheds new light on psychological and neuronal substrates of pain and its modulation, thus having important research and clinical implications.

Placebo and nocebo effects and mechanisms associated with pharmacological interventions: an umbrella review

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to summarise the existing knowledge about placebo and nocebo effects associated with pharmacological interventions and their mechanisms.

DESIGN

Umbrella review, adopting the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 tool for critical appraisal.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial were searched in September 2022, without any time restriction, for systematic reviews, narrative reviews, original articles. Results were summarised through narrative synthesis, tables, 95% CI.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Mechanisms underlying placebo/nocebo effects and/or their effect sizes.

RESULTS

The databases search identified 372 studies, for a total of 158 312 participants, comprising 41 systematic reviews, 312 narrative reviews and 19 original articles. Seventy-three per cent of the examined systematic reviews were of high quality.Our findings revealed that mechanisms underlying placebo and/or nocebo effects have been characterised, at least in part, for: pain, non-noxious somatic sensation, Parkinson's disease, migraine, sleep disorders, intellectual disability, depression, anxiety, dementia, addiction, gynaecological disorders, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, immune and endocrine systems, cardiovascular and respiratory systems, gastrointestinal disorders, skin diseases, influenza and related vaccines, oncology, obesity, physical and cognitive performance. Their magnitude ranged from 0.08 to 2.01 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.89) for placebo effects and from 0.32 to 0.90 (95% CI 0.24 to 1.00) for nocebo effects.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a valuable tool for clinicians and researchers, identifying both results ready for clinical practice and gaps to address in the near future.

FUNDING

Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy with the 'Finanziamento Ponte 2022' grant.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023392281.

Comparison of indirect treatment methods in migraine prevention to address differences in mode of administration

Aim: Indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) are anchored on a placebo comparator, and the placebo response may vary according to drug administration route. Migraine preventive treatment studies were used to evaluate ITCs and determine whether mode of administration influences placebo response and the overall study findings. Materials & methods: Change from baseline in monthly migraine days produced by monoclonal antibody treatments (subcutaneous, intravenous) was compared using fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), network meta-regression (NMR), and unanchored simulated treatment comparison (STC). Results: NMA and NMR provide mixed, rarely differentiated results between treatments, whereas unanchored STC strongly favors eptinezumab over other preventive treatments. Conclusion: Further investigations are needed to determine which ITC best reflects the impact of mode of administration on placebo.

The temporal trend of placebo response in migraine prevention from 1990 to 2021: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis with regression

BACKGROUND

Migraine affects 1.1 billion people globally and is the second leading cause of disability worldwide. In clinical trials, treatment efficacy is evaluated by comparing the differential responses in the treatment and placebo arms. Although placebo response in preventive migraine trials has been studied, there is limited research examining temporal trends. This study evaluates the trend of placebo response over thirty years in migraine prevention trials and investigates the association of potential confounders, such as patient, treatment, and study characteristics on placebo response using meta-analysis with regression.

METHODS

We conducted literature searches from January 1990 to August 2021 in bibliographical databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE). Studies were selected according to PICOS criteria and included randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating preventive migraine treatments in adult patients diagnosed with episodic or chronic migraine, with or without aura. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021271732). Migraine efficacy outcomes included were either continuous (e.g., monthly migraine days) or dichotomous (e.g., ≥ 50% responder rate (yes/no)). We assessed the correlation of the change in outcome from baseline in the placebo arm, with the year of publication. The relationship between placebo response and year of publication was also assessed after accounting to confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 907 studies were identified, and 83 were found eligible. For the continuous outcomes, the change from baseline in mean placebo response showed an increase over the years (rho = 0.32, p = 0.006). The multivariable regression analysis also showed an overall increase in placebo response over the years. The correlation analysis of dichotomous responses showed no significant linear trend between publication year and mean placebo response (rho = 0.08, p = 0.596). Placebo response also varied by route of administration.

CONCLUSION

Placebo response increased over the past 30 years in migraine preventive trials. This phenomenon should be considered when designing clinical trials and conducting meta-analyses.

Intranasal Fentanyl for Acute Pain Management in Children, Adults and Elderly Patients in the Prehospital Emergency Service and in the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review

This systematic review examined the efficacy and safety of intranasal fentanyl (INF) for acute pain treatment in children, adults, and the elderly in prehospital emergency services (PHES) and emergency departments (ED). ClinicalTrials.gov, LILACS, PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Cochrane databases were consulted until 31 December 2022. A total of 23 studies were included: 18 in children (1 PHES, 17 ED), 5 in adults (1 PHES, 4 ED) and 1 in older people (1 PHES subgroup analysis). In children, INF was effective in both settings and as effective as the comparator drugs, with no differences in adverse events (AEs); one randomised controlled trial (RCT) showed that INF was more effective than the comparator drugs. In adults, one study demonstrated the efficacy of INF in the PHES setting, one study demonstrated the efficacy of INF in the ED setting, two RCTs showed INF to be less effective than the comparator drugs and one RCT showed INF to be as effective as the comparator, with no difference in AEs reported. In older people, one study showed effective pain relief and no AEs. In summary, INF appears to be effective and safe in children and adults in PHES and ED. More high-quality studies are needed, especially in PHES and older people.

Alternative medicine therapies in neurological disorders: Prevalence, reasons and associated factors. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to identify the prevalence of CAM use in patients with neurological disorders, and also to know most frequent types of CAM used.

METHODS

Five databases: PubMed, Science Direct, EBSCO, Latindex and Scielo (in English and Spanish) were searched from January 2010 to May 2021. Only original cross-sectional, retrospective and cohort studies were included, whose primary objective was to describe the frequency of CAM use in neurological disorders and/or the related factors to its use in adults. Based on the data, a descriptive analysis was performed, covering the characteristics of studies, measuring methods, prevalence, types and related factors. To control the risk of bias, a quality assessment of each study was performed using STROBE checklist.

RESULTS

For the final analysis, 40 studies were included. Most common pathologies observed in the studies were multiple sclerosis, headache, stroke, Parkinson and epilepsy. The STROBE score of studies ranged from 13 to 22 points, with an average of 18.2. Prevalence of CAM use was highly variable from one study to another (16% in stroke patients, to 100% in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or spinal cord injury patients). Biological therapies (dietary supplements and herbal medicine) were the most commonly CAM types used. The associated factors identified were female sex, an age between 40 and 50 years, and higher socioeconomic level. Not all studies investigated about the results of CAMs but these ranged from 35% to more than 80% of reporting positive effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of CAM use in neurological diseases is highly variable (16%-100%); the most used type of CAM was biological therapies and the associated factors were female sex, age between 40 and 50 years old and high socioeconomic level.

Meta-regression to explain the placebo effects in clinical trials of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention

Background: Commonly used methods of comparison (e.g. network meta-analyses) require common comparator(s) across trials, such as placebo in placebo-controlled trials. Recent literature indicates that route of administration differences across placebo arms of clinical trials in pain disorders may contribute to differences in placebo effect.Methods: We conducted a meta-regression on placebo data from pivotal clinical trials of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention to quantify the impact of route of administration, migraine type (episodic/chronic), and number of prior treatment failures on placebo reduction in monthly migraine days (MMDs) across weeks 1-12 of treatment. A systematic literature review of Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and grey literature conducted in June 2021 identified 14 relevant, randomized placebo-controlled trials for analysis.Results: After testing models with different covariates, a meta-regression was fitted to the extracted placebo data with the covariates of route of administration, migraine type, and proportion of patients with ≥2 prior preventive treatment failures. An intravenous route of administration for the placebo arm was a predictor for higher MMD reduction. Predictors of lower MMD reduction were migraine type (episodic migraine) and a higher proportion of patients having ≥2 failed preventive treatments.Conclusions: The efficacy of intravenous anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies are likely underestimated, and differences in the route of administration of placebo may necessitate use of alternative methods that do not assume the presence of a common comparator when comparing anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prevention. Further research into the contextual effects of the placebo effect is warranted.

Quantity changes in acute headache medication use among patients with chronic migraine treated with eptinezumab: subanalysis of the PROMISE-2 study

Background

Patients with chronic migraine (CM) treated with eptinezumab in the PROMISE-2 trial achieved greater reductions in migraine and headache frequency, impact, and acute headache medication (AHM) use than did patients who received placebo. This post hoc analysis examines relationships between headache frequency reductions and changes in AHM use in patients in PROMISE-2.

Methods

PROMISE-2 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in adults with CM. Patients were randomized to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo, administered intravenously once every 12 weeks for up to two doses. Patients recorded headache/AHM information daily and for each event in an electronic diary; data from all days with daily reports were included. Shifts in headache frequency and AHM use were assessed in the three populations: total CM population, patients with CM and medication-overuse headache (MOH), and patients with CM and MOH who were ≥ 50% responders during treatment (response over weeks 1–24).

Results

A total of 1072 adults with CM received treatment (eptinezumab, n = 706; placebo, n = 366). Mean baseline headache frequency was 20.5 days; mean baseline AHM days was 13.4; 431 patients had MOH, of which 225 (52.2%) experienced ≥50% response over weeks 1–24. Relative to baseline, the proportion of days with both headache and AHM use decreased 25.1% (eptinezumab) versus 17.0% (placebo) in the total population (N = 1072), 29.2% versus 18.4% in the MOH subpopulation (n = 431), and 38.3% versus 31.5% in the CM with MOH population with ≥50% response subgroup (n = 225) during weeks 1–24. The proportion of days with headache and triptan use decreased 9.1% (eptinezumab) versus 5.8% (placebo), 11.8% versus 7.2%, and 14.5% versus 12.6%, respectively. Reductions in other AHM types were smaller.

Conclusions

In this post hoc analysis, eptinezumab use in patients with CM was associated with greater decreases in days with headache with AHM overall and with triptans in particular. The magnitude of effect was greater in the subgroup of CM patients with MOH and ≥ 50% response.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02974153.

Graphical abstract

Eptinezumab reduces headache frequency and acute medication use in patients with chronic migraine.

Pain and the Triple Network Model

Acute pain is a physiological response that causes an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience in the presence of actual or potential tissue injury. Anatomically and symptomatically, chronic pathological pain can be divided into three distinct but interconnected pathways, a lateral “painfulness” pathway, a medial “suffering” pathway and a descending pain inhibitory circuit. Pain (fullness) can exist without suffering and suffering can exist without pain (fullness). The triple network model is offering a generic unifying framework that may be used to understand a variety of neuropsychiatric illnesses. It claims that brain disorders are caused by aberrant interactions within and between three cardinal brain networks: the self-representational default mode network, the behavioral relevance encoding salience network and the goal oriented central executive network. A painful stimulus usually leads to a negative cognitive, emotional, and autonomic response, phenomenologically expressed as pain related suffering, processed by the medial pathway. This anatomically overlaps with the salience network, which encodes behavioral relevance of the painful stimuli and the central sympathetic control network. When pain lasts longer than the healing time and becomes chronic, the pain- associated somatosensory cortex activity may become functionally connected to the self-representational default mode network, i.e., it becomes an intrinsic part of the self-percept. This is most likely an evolutionary adaptation to save energy, by separating pain from sympathetic energy-consuming action. By interacting with the frontoparietal central executive network, this can eventually lead to functional impairment. In conclusion, the three well-known pain pathways can be combined into the triple network model explaining the whole range of pain related co-morbidities. This paves the path for the creation of new customized and personalized treatment methods.

Placebo response with subcutaneous injections in calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor monoclonal antibody migraine preventative trials – A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

The majority of CGRP monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention are administered subcutaneously. Therefore, we attempted to calculate the pooled placebo response with subcutaneous placebo injections in this systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods:

We identified 16 randomized controlled trials that met our inclusion and exclusion criteria through a comprehensive search in five electronic databases (PubMed Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane library and clinicaltrials.gov ). The risk of bias was assessed for all included studies. Random effects model was used to calculate pooled mean monthly migraine days and 50% response rates.

Results:

A total of 4240 subjects were included from 16 studies in this meta-analysis. The pooled mean monthly migraine day reduction with subcutaneous placebo injections was 2.15 (95% CI: 1.60–2.69). The pooled proportion of patients achieving a 50% reduction in mean monthly headache days was 26% (95% CI: 20%–31%). Placebo response accounted for more than 50% of therapeutic gain in our study.

Conclusion:

A substantial placebo response was noted with subcutaneous injections in migraine CGRP monoclonal antibody clinical trials. This meta-analysis may serve as a reference point to calculate sample size in clinical trials using subcutaneous interventions for migraine prevention. We registered our study at PROSPERO (CRD42020185300).

Beyond chronic migraine: a systematic review and expert opinion on the off-label use of botulinum neurotoxin type-A in other primary headache disorders

Introduction: Botulinum neurotoxin type-A (BoNTA) is licensed for the treatment of chronic migraine (CM), but it has been tested off-label as a therapeutic choice in other primary headaches (PHs). We aimed to provide a systematic review and expert opinion on BoNTA use in PHs, beyond CM.Areas covered: After providing an overview on PHs and mechanism of BoNTA action, we report the results of a systematic review, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of BoNTA therapeutic trials in PHs beyond CM. Studies and results were reviewed and discussed, and levels of evidence were graded. We also collected data on relevant ongoing trials.Expert opinion: Although there are contradictory findings on PHs other than CM, BoNTA may represent a therapeutic option for patients who do not respond to conventional prophylactic treatments. Based on limited available evidence, BoNTA may be considered in refractory tension-type headache, trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, primary stabbing headache, nummular headache, hypnic headache, and new daily persistent headache, after the primary nature of cephalalgia has been documented and other drugs have failed. Experienced physicians in BoNTA treatment are required to guide the therapeutic protocol for each patient to optimize good and safe outcomes.