Headache Classification by History has Only Limited Predictive Value for Headache Episodes Treated in Controlled Trials With OTC Analgesics

Validity of self-reported migraine in adolescents and children

OBJECTIVE

To assess agreement for migraine day between self-report and diagnostic guidelines for children and adolescents using a headache diary.

BACKGROUND

Trial guidelines recommend prospective collection of headache features and adoption of migraine day as an outcome measure, but there is no clear consensus on the definition of migraine day.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of data from two projects-a prospective cohort study validating a pediatric scale of treatment expectancy and a clinical trial of occipital nerve blocks to treat status migrainosus. Participants completed a text message-based diary for 4 or 12 weeks (depending on treatment), and a detailed headache assessment on a random 20% of headache days. Using this assessment, we determined whether a headache day qualified for migraine or probable migraine, based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3).

RESULTS

Of 122 enrolled children and adolescents, 106 (86.9%) completed ≥1 detailed headache assessment (438 entries). We found moderate agreement between self-reported and ICHD-derived migraine day, with a Cohen's Kappa of 0.50 (positive predictive value [PPV]: 0.66; negative predictive value [NPV]: 0.85; correlation: 0.51). Allowing for ICHD-derived probable migraine significantly increased PPV (0.66 vs. 0.94; 95% CI: 0.57-0.74 vs. 0.90-0.97), but decreased NPV (0.85 vs. 0.293; CI: 0.77-0.90 vs. 0.199-0.40), Cohen's Kappa (0.50 vs. 0.237; CI: 0. 389-0.60 vs. 0.139-0.352), and correlation (r = 0.51 vs. 0.302; CI: 0.41-0.61 vs. 0.192-0.41). Pain severity (OR: 5.7; CI: 2.39-13.8), photophobia (OR: 4.1; CI: 1.02-16.6), and phonophobia (OR: 7.5; CI: 1.95-29.3) were significantly associated with participants' perception of migraine.

CONCLUSION

We found only moderate agreement between self-reported and ICHD-derived migraine day, suggesting both measures are not equal but may represent overlapping aspects of migraine as a disease. This highlights the difficulty of applying ICHD criteria to individual attacks. We recommend greater methodological transparency in future research to avoid readers conflating both measures.

Variability of clinical features in attacks of migraine with aura

Background

There is significant variability in the clinical presentation of migraine, both among patients, and between attacks in an individual patient. We examined clinical features of migraine with aura in a large group of patients enrolled in a clinical trial, and compared retrospective migraine attack characteristics reported upon enrollment in the trial with those recorded prospectively in the trial.

Methods

Patients with migraine ( n = 267) with typical visual aura in more than 30% of their attacks were enrolled from 16 centers for a clinical trial. Upon enrollment, patients provided a detailed retrospective description of the clinical features of their attacks of migraine. During the trial, clinical symptoms in migraine attacks starting with aura were recorded prospectively in 861 attacks.

Results

Retrospectively reported visual aura symptoms were variable and often overlapping; the most common symptoms were dots or flashing lights, wavy or jagged lines, blind spots, and tunnel vision. Multiple patients reported more than one visual phenomenon. Approximately half of the patients reported nonvisual aura symptoms, the most common were numbness and tingling, followed by difficulty in recalling or speaking words. A significant percentage of patients also reported a change in olfaction. There were several inconsistencies between the features of prospectively recorded and retrospectively reported attacks. Headache, nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia were all less common in prospectively recorded attacks as compared with retrospective reporting. Nausea was prospectively recorded in only 51% of attacks and mostly with mild intensity. The occurrence and severity of nausea was reduced with advancing patient age. Phonophobia was not consistently recorded in conjunction with photophobia.

Conclusion

These findings are consistent with variable involvement of different brain regions during a migraine attack. The variable occurrence of nausea, and phonophobia in conjunction with photophobia, both defining features of migraine, may be an important consideration in designing clinical studies of migraine in which prospectively recorded attacks are diagnosed based on these clinical features.

Adding Additional Acute Medications to a Triptan Regimen for Migraine and Observed Changes in Headache-Related Disability: Results From the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study

BACKGROUND

Though triptans are the most widely used acute treatments for migraine, response to treatment is sometimes suboptimal. Triptan therapy is often augmented by the addition of other acute treatments. The benefits of this practice have not been examined in large-scale, real-world observational studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess changes in headache-related disability associated with adding additional acute treatments to a triptan regimen by category of added treatment including: a second triptan, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), opioids or barbiturates.

METHODS

Subjects were participants in the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study, a longitudinal, US population-based study of individuals with "severe" headache. Respondents who met International Classification of Headache Disorders 3 beta criteria for migraine were on triptan therapy per respondent self-report, used the same triptan, and provided headache-related disability data for at least 2 consecutive years. Subjects were divided based on headache days per month into 3 groups: low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM, 0-4), moderate-frequency episodic migraine (MFEM, 5-9), and high-frequency episodic migraine/chronic migraine (HFEM/CM, ≥ 10 headache days per month). HFEM and CM were combined into a single group for analyses because of sample size limitations. Patterns of acute treatment for migraine were monitored from one year to the next over the following couplets of years (2005-2006, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, and 2008-2009). The first eligible couplet was analyzed for each respondent. Medication regimens studied included: (1) maintaining current triptan use (consistent group); (2) adding a different triptan; (3) adding an NSAID; or (4) adding a combination analgesic containing opioids or barbiturates. We assessed change in Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score from the first to the second year of a couplet, contrasting scores of participants with consistent use with those who added an acute treatment to their triptan regimen.

RESULTS

The study sample (N = 2128) included 111 individuals who added another triptan, 118 who added an opioid or barbiturate, and 69 who added an NSAID, with referent groups of approximately 600 cases in each group who remained consistent. In general, MIDAS scores were higher among those who made changes from one year to the next compared with those who did not make changes in therapy. In fully adjusted models, adding triptans or NSAIDs was associated with increased disability for HFEM/CM cases at follow-up but decreased disability at follow-up for MFEM cases, resulting in significant interaction effects for both adding triptans and NSAIDs, respectively (15.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75, 31.01, 38.52, 95% CI 12.43, 64.61).

CONCLUSIONS

While the effects of adding vs staying consistent on the outcome of headache-related disability varied by medication type added and headache frequency strata, in general, these results suggest that for individuals with migraine, adding acute therapies to current triptan use is generally not associated with reductions in headache-related disability. The results were strongest among persons with HFEM and CM. These results identify important unmet medical needs in current migraine management, especially among patients with high-frequency migraine, and suggest that alternative treatment strategies are needed to improve patient outcomes.

Use of a fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen and caffeine compared with acetaminophen alone in episodic tension-type headache: meta-analysis of four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies

Background

Most patients with episodic tension-type headache treat headache episodes with over-the-counter medication. Combination analgesics containing caffeine may be more effective and as well tolerated as monotherapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen (paracetamol) and caffeine in episodic tension-type headache using recently recommended endpoints.

Methods

Four randomized, controlled trials of identical design in 1,900 patients with episodic tension-type headache comparing acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen and caffeine vs. acetaminophen or placebo were pooled. Analysis populations were ‘all headache episodes’ and those with ‘severe pain at baseline’. Post-hoc defined primary endpoint: headache episodes pain-free at 2 h. Secondary endpoints: headache episodes pain-free at 1 h, headache response at 2 h (mild or no pain), degree of interference with daily activities.

Results

6,861 headache episodes were treated, including 2,215 severe headache episodes. The proportion of headache episodes pain-free at 2 h was significantly higher with the triple combination (28.5%) vs. acetaminophen (21.0%) and placebo (18.0%) (p < 0.0001), and similarly for those severe at baseline (20.2% vs. 12.1% and 10.8%; p ≤ 0.0003). A similar pattern of superiority was observed for secondary endpoints. The triple combination was generally well tolerated.

Conclusions

The combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen and caffeine is effective and well tolerated in episodic tension-type headache, and significantly superior to acetaminophen with regard to being pain-free at 2 h, headache response at 2 h and ability to return to daily activities, even in those with pain rated severe at baseline.

Self-medication of migraine and tension-type headache: summary of the evidence-based recommendations of the Deutsche Migräne und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft (DMKG), the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurologie (DGN), the Österreichische Kopfschmerzgesellschaft (ÖKSG) and the Schweizerische Kopfwehgesellschaft (SKG)

The current evidence-based guideline on self-medication in migraine and tension-type headache of the German, Austrian and Swiss headache societies and the German Society of Neurology is addressed to physicians engaged in primary care as well as pharmacists and patients. The guideline is especially concerned with the description of the methodology used, the selection process of the literature used and which evidence the recommendations are based upon. The following recommendations about self-medication in migraine attacks can be made: The efficacy of the fixed-dose combination of acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid and caffeine and the monotherapies with ibuprofen or naratriptan or acetaminophen or phenazone are scientifically proven and recommended as first-line therapy. None of the substances used in self-medication in migraine prophylaxis can be seen as effective. Concerning the self-medication in tension-type headache, the following therapies can be recommended as first-line therapy: the fixed-dose combination of acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid and caffeine as well as the fixed combination of acetaminophen and caffeine as well as the monotherapies with ibuprofen or acetylsalicylic acid or diclofenac. The four scientific societies hope that this guideline will help to improve the treatment of headaches which largely is initiated by the patients themselves without any consultation with their physicians.

OTC analgesics in headache treatment: open-label phase vs randomized double-blind phase of a large clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the superior efficacy of the fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine over the single substances, which was observed in the randomized, double-blind phase of the clinical trial, with the efficacy of the respective usual nonprescription medication taken by the patients in the open-label pre-phase of the same study.

BACKGROUND

The "Thomapyrin Study" showed significant superiority of the fixed combination containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine over the combination without caffeine, the single preparations, and placebo in the treatment of headache.

METHODS

Prior to the randomized treatment phase, a headache episode treated with the patient's usual nonprescription medication was recorded (open-label pre-phase). Patients assessed their pain intensity on a 100-mm visual analog scale. For the 1734 patients included in the efficacy analysis, we compared the time course of the pain intensity difference (PID) to baseline after the patients took their usual medication with the time course of the PID after intake of the randomized study medication.

RESULTS

Time course of PID after intake of the patient's usual medication was very similar to the time course of PID after intake of the randomized study medication. After 2 hours, pain reduction was on average 43.0, 38.2, 38.1, and 37.7 mm as assessed on the visual analog scale in the group of patients who took their usual triple combination containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine, the single agents acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and ibuprofen, respectively, in the open-label phase. The corresponding mean pain reduction was 44.7, 40.7, and 39.5 mm in patients allocated to the triple combination containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine, the single agents acetylsalicylic acid, and paracetamol, respectively, in the randomized, double-blind phase.

Chronic tension-type headache: what is new?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses current data on nosological boundaries related to diagnosis, pathophysiology and therapeutic strategies in chronic tension-type headache (CTTH).

RECENT FINDINGS

Diagnostic criteria of CTTH should be adapted to improve its sensitivity against migraine. It seems that mechanical pain sensitivity is a consequence and not a causative factor of CTTH. Recent evidence is modifying previous knowledge about relationships between muscle tissues and CTTH, suggesting a potential role of muscle trigger points in the genesis of pain. An updated pain model suggests that headache perception can be explained by referred pain from trigger points in the craniocervical muscles, mediated through the spinal cord and the trigeminal nucleus caudalis rather than only tenderness of the muscles themselves. Different therapeutic strategies, pharmacological, physical therapy, psychological and acupuncture, are generally used. The therapeutic efficacy of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs remains incomplete. The tricyclic antidepressants are the most used first-line therapeutic agents for CTTH. Surprisingly, few controlled studies have been performed and not all of them have found an efficacy superior to placebo. Further, there is insufficient evidence to support/refute the efficacy of physical therapy in CTTH.

SUMMARY

Although there is an increasing scientific interest in CTTH, future studies incorporating subgroups of patients who will likely to benefit from a specific treatment (clinical prediction rules) should be conducted.