Predictors of adherence to triptans: factors of sustained vs lapsed users

Lifetime history of an anxiety or depression disorder and adherence to medications used for the acute treatment of migraine

OBJECTIVE

In this secondary analysis of mobile health headache diary data, we evaluated the relationship between adherence to medication used for the acute treatment of migraine and lifetime history of an anxiety or depression disorder.

BACKGROUND

Medication non-adherence can produce poor clinical efficacy and may be associated with medication overuse. Medication overuse was defined by taking a migraine-specific medication (MSM) for ≥10 days/month, an opioid or barbiturate for ≥10 days/month, or a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug for ≥15 days/month and having ≥15 headache days/month. Extant literature predominantly evaluates fixed-schedule medication adherence. Little is known about predictors of adherence to as-needed medication such as those used for the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

Adults with prior migraine diagnosis and at least 4 headache days/month completed baseline questionnaires assessing lifetime history of depression or anxiety disorder diagnoses and were asked to record 90 days of once-daily electronic headache diaries soliciting: Headache occurrence; symptoms; medication taken, if any, for the acute treatment of migraine; and their pain level (mild, moderate, severe) when the medication was taken. The 193 participants who completed ≥30 days of headache diary were included in this secondary analysis.

RESULTS

A MSM was used as the first medication taken on 45.7% (2825/6176) of headache days. Nearly a quarter of the sample (45/193, 23.3%) overused medications for acute treatment of migraine. Medication overuse was more common in patients with a history of an anxiety disorder, odds ratio (OR) 2.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-3.69), but this relationship was not significant when headache days were accounted for, OR 2.02 (95% CI 0.83-4.91). Neither a history of a depression disorder, OR 1.40 (95% CI 0.90-2.16), nor an anxiety disorder, OR 1.11 (95% CI 0.71-1.72), was associated with taking medications early; however, duration of self-monitoring was associated with taking MSM early, OR 1.006 (95% CI 1.004-1.009).

CONCLUSION

Lifetime history of depression and anxiety were not associated with taking a MSM early. Medication overuse may be more common in patients who have both migraine and anxiety. Taking a MSM early improved over time for all participants, even when adjusting for a history of an anxiety and or a depression disorder.

Unmet Needs in Japanese Patients Who Report Insufficient Efficacy with Triptans for Acute Treatment of Migraine: Retrospective Analysis of Real-World Data

INTRODUCTION

Migraine attacks notably impact people's daily lives, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and ability to work. Triptans are widely used as acute medication for a migraine attack but are ineffective, poorly tolerated, or contraindicated in some patients. HRQoL and work productivity are therefore likely to pose particular problems for patients whose migraine attacks do not respond sufficiently to triptan acute treatment. This real-world study aimed to determine whether migraine-related HRQoL, disability, and work productivity differed between triptan insufficient responders (TIRs) and sufficient responders (TSRs) receiving this acute treatment for migraine in Japan.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of 2017 Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme cross-sectional survey data collected from physicians and their consulting patients with migraine in Japan. Patients had to be receiving a triptan as their sole acute prescribed medication for migraine. TIRs were defined as patients who achieved headache pain freedom within 2 h of taking triptan acute treatment in no more than three of five migraine attacks. Differences in outcomes between TIRs and TSRs were examined in adjusted analyses using a multivariable general linear model.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients receiving a triptan as their sole prescribed acute treatment for migraine, 88 (44.0%) were classed as TIRs. Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire scores were significantly lower-indicating poorer HRQoL-among TIRs than TSRs, as were mean EuroQol 5-dimension utility and visual analog scale scores (p < 0.05 for comparisons). TIRs also reported significantly (p ≤ 0.003) greater impairment than TSRs across all Work Productivity and Activity Impairment domains, with the exception of work time missed. Migraine disability was higher among TIRs than TSRs.

CONCLUSION

Migraine attacks had a negative impact on the HRQoL, disability, and work productivity of people with migraine in Japan reporting insufficient efficacy with acute triptan treatment, highlighting the need for more effective acute treatment options.

A global real-world assessment of the impact on health-related quality of life and work productivity of migraine in patients with insufficient versus good response to triptan medication

Background

Migraine is a chronic, disabling neurological disease characterized by moderate-to-severe headache pain with other symptoms, including nausea, vomiting, and photophobia. Triptans, while generally effective, are insufficiently efficacious in 30–40% of patients and poorly tolerated by or contraindicated in others. We assessed the impact of insufficient response to triptans on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and work productivity in patients currently receiving any prescribed triptan formulation as their only acute migraine medication.

Methods

Data were from the 2017 Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme, a cross-sectional survey of primary care physicians, neurologists, and headache specialists and their consulting patients with migraine in the USA, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and UK. Triptan insufficient responders (TIRs) achieved freedom from headache pain within 2 h of acute treatment in ≤3/5 migraine attacks; triptan responders (TRs) achieved pain freedom within 2 h in ≥4/5 attacks. Multivariable general linear model examined differences between TIRs and TRs in HRQoL and work productivity. Logistic regression identified factors associated with insufficient response to triptans.

Results

The study included 1413 triptan-treated patients (TIRs: n = 483, 34.2%; TRs: n = 930, 65.8%). TIRs were more likely to be female (76% vs. 70% for TIRs vs TRs, respectively; p = 0.011), older (mean age 42.6 vs. 40.5 years; p = 0.003), and had more headache days/month (7.0 vs. 4.4; p < 0.001). TIRs had significantly more disability, with higher Migraine Disability Scores (MIDAS; 13.2 vs. 7.7; p < 0.001), lower Migraine-specific Quality of Life scores, indicating greater impact (Role Function Restrictive: 62.4 vs. 74.5; Role Function Preventive: 70.0 vs. 82.2; Emotional Function: 67.7 vs. 82.1; all p < 0.001), and lower EQ5D utility scores (0.84 vs. 0.91; p = 0.001). Work productivity and activity were impaired (absenteeism, 8.6% vs. 5.1% for TIRs vs. TRs; presenteeism, 34.3% vs. 21.0%; work impairment, 37.1% vs. 23.3%; overall activity impairment, 39.8% vs. 25.3%; all p < 0.05).

Conclusion

HRQoL and work productivity were significantly impacted in TIRs versus TRs in this real-world analysis of patients with migraine acutely treated with triptans, highlighting the need for more effective treatments for patients with an insufficient triptan response. Further research is needed to establish causal relationships between insufficient response and these outcomes.

Characterization of Acute Prescription Migraine Medication Use: Results From the CaMEO Study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize self-reported use of acute prescription medication for migraine in a sample representing the US population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were obtained from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study. The CaMEO Study is an Internet-based cross-sectional longitudinal survey administered between September 17, 2012, and November 19, 2013. Demographic characteristics, migraine-related disability, symptom severity, quality of life, and psychiatric comorbidity profiles were evaluated.

RESULTS

Data from 13,624 respondents were analyzed, including 3121 (22.9%) self-reported current users of acute prescription medication for migraine, 1719 (12.6%) previous/discontinued users, and 8784 (64.5%) who had never used acute prescription medication for migraine. Mean ± SD monthly headache frequency was 7.3±7.1 days for current users, 5.6±6.6 days for those who discontinued, and 3.9±4.9 days for respondents who never used acute prescription medication for migraine. Current users experienced the highest degree of migraine-related disability based on Migraine Disability Assessment scores and the highest levels of migraine symptom severity based on Migraine Symptom Severity Scale scores. Current users also had the highest scores on the depression and anxiety questionnaires. The most commonly reported prescription medications used or "kept on hand" by current users were triptans (47.2%; 1474 of 3121), opioids (37.3%; 1164 of 3121), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (31.9%; 997 of 3121), and barbiturates (12.8%; 399 of 3121), with many people reporting more than 1 medication.

CONCLUSION

Despite reporting moderate to severe migraine-related disability and impairment, many people with migraine have never used acute prescription migraine medication. The burden related to migraine is great, especially among individuals currently using acute prescription medication for migraine.

Discontinuation of Acute Prescription Medication for Migraine: Results From the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study

Objective

This analysis assessed migraine‐related burden and treatment decisions in Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study survey respondents who stopped taking acute prescription medications for migraine.

Background

Migraine is a common yet underdiagnosed and undertreated neurological disease often associated with significant disability. Acute prescription medications are underused, in part because patients discontinue treatment. Rates and reasons for discontinuing acute prescription medications require exploration.

Methods

The CaMEO Study is a longitudinal, Internet‐based survey that identified and followed people who met modified ICHD‐3 migraine criteria. For this analysis, eligible respondents had used acute prescription medication for migraine in the past but no longer used or kept these treatments on hand (discontinued users). Respondents who reported discontinuing acute prescription treatment answered questions about length of time since last use and reasons for stopping. Reasons for discontinuing were thematically summarized. Monthly headache day frequency, Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Patient Health Questionnaire 9‐item depression screener, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7‐item screener, and the 12‐item Allodynia Symptom Checklist were also assessed.

Results

Of 13,624 respondents with migraine, 4840 (35.5%) had ever used acute prescription medications and 1719 (35.5%) of those were discontinued users. Discontinued users had a mean (SD) age of 42.1 (14) years, and 1348/1719 (78.4%) were female. Monthly headache frequency of 0‐4 days was reported by 1073/1719 (62.4%) of respondents, 5‐9 days by 322/1719 (18.7%), 10‐14 days by 135/1719 (7.9%), and ≥15 days by 189/1719 (11.0%). Two‐thirds (1160/1719 [67.5%]) of discontinued users reported a receiving migraine (or chronic migraine) diagnosis from a doctor or other health professional in the past. Although all had spoken to a doctor about their headaches, 1504/1719 (87.5%) had stopped having their headaches managed or treated by a doctor for at least 12 months. Only 1 in 5 discontinued users reported being able to work or function normally with a headache, and 717/1719 (41.7%) had moderate to severe disability (MIDAS). Among the most commonly reported reasons for prescription medication discontinuation were switching to non‐prescription pain medication (782/1719 [45.5%]), as well as concerns about prescription medication efficacy (484/1719 [28.2%]) and tolerability (428/1719 [24.9%]). Nearly half of respondents who reported either efficacy or tolerability concerns had moderate to severe disability.

Conclusions

People with migraine who discontinue acute prescription medication have a high level of unmet treatment need. The majority cannot work or function normally with headaches, with 646/1719 (37.6%) of discontinued users reporting 5 or more headache days per month.

A real-world study on unmet medical needs in triptan-treated migraine: prevalence, preventive therapies and triptan use modification from a large Italian population along two years

Background

Although migraine is a disabling neurological condition that causes important disability, it remains an area of underdiagnosis and undertreatment worldwide. The aim of this study was to depict the burden of the unmet medical needs in migraine treated with triptans in a large Italian population.

Methods

A 2-year longitudinal analysis of migraineurs with unmet medical needs on treatment with triptans was performed. The studied cohort consisted of subjects with ≥4 triptan dose units per month, selected from the general population These patients were stratified into: possible Low-Frequency Episodic Migraine (pLF-EM: 4–9 triptan dose units per month), possible High-Frequency Episodic Migraine (pHF-EM: 10–14 triptan dose units per month) and possible Chronic Migraine (pCM:> 14 triptan dose units per month). The first follow-up year was analysed to describe the use of preventive therapies, the second year to describe the ≥50% reduction in triptan use.

Results

Of 10,270,683 adults, 8.0 per 1000 were triptan users and, of these, 38.2% were migraineurs with unmet medical needs, corresponding to 3.1 per 1000 adults. By stratifying for the number of triptan dose units per month, 72.3% were affected by pLF-EM, 17.4% by pHF-EM, and 10.3% by pCM. In this cohort, 19.1% of individuals used oral preventive drugs and 0.1% botulinum toxin. Triptan use reduction was found in 22.3% individuals of the cohort, decreasing with the intensification of need levels (25.8% pLF-EM, 13.6% pHF-EM, 12.0% pCM).

Conclusions

This real-life analysis underlined that the unmet medical needs concern a large part of patients treated with triptans and there is an undertreatment with preventive therapies whose benefit is insufficient, which may be due to the lack of effective preventive strategies, probably still reserved to severe patients. This study allows forecasting the actual impact of newest therapeutic strategies aimed to fill this gap.

Efficacy and safety of DFN-11 (sumatriptan injection, 3 mg) in adults with episodic migraine: an 8-week open-label extension study

BACKGROUND

DFN-11, a 3 mg sumatriptan subcutaneous (SC) autoinjector for acute treatment of migraine, has not been assessed previously in multiple attacks. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of DFN-11 in the acute treatment of multiple migraine attacks.

METHODS

This was an 8-week open-label extension of multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled US study. Subjects averaging 2 to 6 episodic migraine attacks per month were randomized to DFN-11 or placebo to treat a single attack of moderate-to-severe intensity and then entered the extension study to assess the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of DFN-11 in multiple attacks of any pain intensity.

RESULTS

Overall, 234 subjects enrolled in the open-label period, and 29 (12.4%) discontinued early. A total of 848 migraine episodes were treated with 1042 doses of open-label DFN-11 and subjects treated a mean (SD) of 3.9 (2.3) attacks. At 2 h postdose in attacks 1 (N = 216), 2 (N = 186), 3 (N = 142) and 4 (N = 110), respectively, pain freedom rates were 57.6%, 64.6%, 61.6%, and 66.3%; pain relief rates were 83.4%, 88.4%, 84.1%, and 81.7%; most bothersome symptom (MBS)-free rates were 69.0%, 76.5%, 77.7%, and 74.7%; nausea-free rates were 78.1%, 84.6%, 86.5%, and 85.7%; photophobia-free rates were 75.3%, 76.4%, 72.3%, and 77.5%; and phonophobia-free rates were 75.2%, 77.5%, 73.6%, and 76.0%. Overall, 40.6% (89/219) of subjects reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), the most common of which were associated with the injection site: swelling (12.8%), pain (11.4%), irritation (6.4%), and bruising (6.4%). Most subjects (65.2%, 58/89) had mild TEAEs; severe TEAEs were reported by 1 subject (treatment-related jaw tightness). Five subjects (2.1%) discontinued due to adverse events, which included mild throat tightness (n = 2), moderate hernia pain (n = 1), moderate hypersensitivity (n = 1), and 1 subject with mild nausea and moderate injection site swelling. There were no serious TEAEs and no new or unexpected safety findings.

CONCLUSION

DFN-11 was effective, tolerable, and safe in the acute treatment of 4 migraine attacks over 8 weeks, with consistent responses on pain and associated symptoms. Most TEAEs were mild, with a very low incidence of triptan-related TEAEs. DFN-11 is potentially an effective and safe alternative for the acute treatment of migraine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02569853 . Registered 07 October 2015.

A review of clinical safety data for sumatriptan nasal powder administered by a breath powered exhalation delivery system in the acute treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

AVP-825 (sumatriptan nasal powder) is an FDA-approved intranasal medication delivery system containing low-dose sumatriptan powder for acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults. AVP-825 utilizes unique nasal anatomy features to avoid limitations of other intranasal delivery methods. Areas covered: Literature search terms: 'AVP-825', 'sumatriptan nasal powder', 'intranasal sumatriptan', 'sumatriptan safety', 'sumatriptan acute migraine'. Pharmacokinetic, Phase 2/3 studies, reviews (AVP-825) and metanalyses/reviews (sumatriptan) were evaluated. Expert opinion: AVP-825 provides a more efficient sumatriptan delivery method versus other formulations. Pharmacokinetics showed that a single dose of AVP-825 (22 mg) delivers 15-16 mg sumatriptan and produces significantly lower exposure than oral or injectable formulations, which may translate into a better safety/tolerability profile. AVP-825 was well tolerated in controlled trials, with the most common adverse events localized at the administration-site (abnormal taste, nasal discomfort); these were mostly mild, leading to only one discontinuation. Compared to 100 mg oral sumatriptan, AVP-825 had a significantly lower rate of atypical sensations across multiple attacks. AVP-825 has the advantage of early efficacy onset associated with faster absorption at a lower delivered dose than liquid nasal spray or oral formulations. AVP-825 provided earlier efficacy (within 30 min) vs. 100 mg oral sumatriptan and similar sustained efficacy. AVP-825 offers the benefits of a non-oral, low-dose, tolerable acute migraine medication.

The pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of AVP-825: a potential advancement for acute treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

Oral triptans have dominated the prescription market for acute treatment of migraine for nearly 25 years. Today, patients often express dissatisfaction with prescribed acute treatment in part because they do not have confidence that the therapy will provide consistent efficacy over time. Major limitations to sustained successful use of oral triptans are their relatively slow onset of meaningful clinical benefit and variable absorption/efficacy due to impaired gastrointestinal function during migraine. AVP-825, a new intranasal delivery system for sumatriptan , may be an effective alternative to oral triptans.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews AVP-825, which deposits low-dose sumatriptan powder deep into the vascular mucosa of the posterior nose, allowing rapid absorption of drug into the systemic circulation. Studies suggest that AVP-825 is a highly effective, well-tolerated acute treatment for episodic migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

Oral triptans are limited in providing effective patient-centered outcomes to migraine patients. Failed or suboptimal abortive treatment of migraine is a major driver of migraine chronification and increases in healthcare costs. AVP-825 is an easy to use, novel, breath-powered intranasal delivery system that provides early onset of efficacy with low systemic drug exposure and few triptan-associated adverse events. AVP-825 will be a welcomed therapeutic tool for the acute treatment of migraine.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions for migraine in four low- and middle-income countries

BACKGROUND

Evidence of the cost and effects of interventions for reducing the global burden of migraine remains scarce. Our objective was to estimate the population-level cost-effectiveness of evidence-based migraine interventions and their contributions towards reducing current burden in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS

Using a standard WHO approach to cost-effectiveness analysis (CHOICE), we modelled core set intervention strategies for migraine, taking account of coverage and efficacy as well as non-adherence. The setting was primary health care including pharmacies. We modelled 26 intervention strategies implemented during 10 years. These included first-line acute and prophylactic drugs, and the expected consequences of adding consumer-education and provider-training. Total population-level costs and effectiveness (healthy life years [HLY] gained) were combined to form average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. We executed runs of the model for the general populations of China, India, Russia and Zambia.

RESULTS

Of the strategies considered, acute treatment of attacks with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) was by far the most cost-effective and generated a HLY for less than US$ 100. Adding educational actions increased annual costs by 1-2 US cents per capita of the population. Cost-effectiveness ratios then became slightly less favourable but still less than US$ 100 per HLY gained for ASA. An incremental cost of > US$ 10,000 would have to be paid per extra HLY by adding a triptan in a stepped-care treatment paradigm. For prophylaxis, amitriptyline was more cost-effective than propranolol or topiramate.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-management with simple analgesics was by far the most cost-effective strategy for migraine treatment in low- and middle-income countries and represents a highly efficient use of health resources. Consumer education and provider training are expected to accelerate progress towards desired levels of coverage and adherence, cost relatively little to implement, and can therefore be considered also economically attractive. Evidence-based interventions for migraine should have as much a claim on scarce health resources as those for other chronic, non-communicable conditions that impose a significant burden on societies.

Treatment adherence among new triptan users: a 2-year cohort study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

The persistence of triptan use among newly prescribed users is low in the United States and European countries. However, triptan refill patterns in Asian primary care practices have not been well described.

METHODS

Data from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan were used to conduct a retrospective cohort analysis from 2005 to 2008. All participants were followed for 2 years after receiving a new triptan prescription. Refill and 2-year retention rates of newly prescribed triptans were calculated, and predictors of the first triptan refill and 2-year retention were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 13,951 participants with a new triptan prescription (99.9% sumatriptan), 67.4% were prescribed by a neurologist, 67.4% were prescribed at least one prophylactic agent for migraine. Of them, 34.3% adhered to the newly prescribed triptan at the first refill, 0.01% switched to another triptan, and 40.9% switched to a non-triptan acute migraine medication. The 2-year retention rate was 4.0%. The frequency of headache-related neurologic visits for 1 year before the index date, first prescription of triptan or other acute medications, first triptan prescription by a neurologist, and prophylactic use were associated with higher first refill rates. The frequency of headache-related neurologic visits 1 year before the index date and first triptan prescription by a neurologist were related to higher 2-year retention rates. Diabetes mellitus and first triptan prescription at a local medical clinic were associated with reduced probability of continued triptan use at the first refill and 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to Western societies, the refill and 2-year retention rates were low in new users of triptans. Frequency of neurologic visits and triptan prescription by a neurologist were significant predictors of adherence.

Treatment adherence in patients with headache: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review and critically evaluate the extant research literature pertaining to adherence in youth and adults with headache and to provide recommendations for future research.

BACKGROUND

This article provides the first systematic review of pediatric headache adherence and updates a previous review of treatment adherence in adults with headache.

DESIGN

Systematic review of empirical literature.

METHODS

A literature search with no date restriction was conducted using PubMed and PsycINFO electronic databases and bibliographies of relevant articles.

RESULTS

Adherence rates in adults with headache range considerably from 25% to 94% across treatment, assessment method, and definition of adherence utilized. Methods to assess adherence included retrospective prescription claims data, paper or electronic diaries, follow-up appointment attendance, written and verbal self-report of general adherence, verbal self-report of adherence over a specific amount of time via in person interview or telephone, validated adherence measures, adherence questionnaires without validation, and counselor ratings of homework. Each methodology and assessment tool demonstrated strengths and weaknesses. No studies have systematically examined medication adherence in children with headache, and the few available studies examining adherence to behavioral treatment have documented adherence rates ranging from 52% to 86%.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence research in adults with headache is growing, but studies demonstrate a number of methodological shortcomings. Adherence research in children with headache, and adherence intervention research in both adults and children, is scant. Future research should use objective measures of adherence, consider over-the-counter medications and medication overuse, examine demographic, psychological, and behavioral correlates of adherence, assess adherence to botulinum toxin type A, and examine the efficacy of adherence interventions in individuals with headache.

Triptan education and improving knowledge for optimal migraine treatment: an observational study

BACKGROUND

It is generally felt that patient education and patient knowledge regarding triptan use for acute migraine management are important for successful and safe treatment. It is unclear how knowledgeable triptan users are regarding their triptan, how much education occurs when triptans are prescribed, and the impact patient education has on actual patient knowledge regarding triptan use.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to compare triptan users' self-perceived knowledge and actual knowledge about triptans in patients who report having received triptan education vs patients who report not having received triptan education.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective observational study of 207 migraine patients who were using triptans for abortive therapy and who were being evaluated as new patients at academic headache specialty clinics in the United States. Patients completed standardized questionnaires regarding their self-perceived knowledge about triptans, their actual knowledge regarding triptans, and the perceived education about the triptan that they had received at the time of prescription.

RESULTS

Although greater than 80% of the subjects reported receiving education about when to take the triptan and the number of doses they could take for headache, only 71.5% reported receiving education about triptan side effects, 64% for the number of triptan doses they could take each week/month, 64% for taking other medications with the triptan, and 49% for medical contraindications to triptan use. Compared with subjects who did not recall receiving education about when to take their triptan, subjects who recalled such education had a statistically significant greater actual knowledge for taking the triptan immediately after a headache begins (91% vs 77%, P = .049; confidence interval [CI]: 0.00-0.33), treating when pain is mild (75% vs 50%, P = .009; CI: 0.04-0.45), understanding that they do not need to fail treatment with over-the-counter medications before taking a triptan (74% vs 42%, P = .001; CI: 0.11-0.51), and recognizing that coronary artery disease is a contraindication to triptan use (40% vs 19%, P = .001; CI: 0.09-0.34).

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence that patients who recall having received education at the time of triptan prescribing have greater knowledge regarding optimal triptan use. Triptan users who recalled having received this education had greater recognition of the importance of taking the triptan immediately at the onset of a headache, treating when pain is mild, not needing to fail treatment with over-the-counter medications before taking a triptan, and understanding that coronary artery disease is a contraindication to triptan use.

Education and decision making at the time of triptan prescribing: patient expectations vs actual practice

BACKGROUND

Optimizing patient satisfaction with their medical care and maximizing patient adherence with treatment plans requires an understanding of patient preferences regarding education and their role in decision making when treatments are prescribed.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the congruence between patient expectations and actual practice regarding education and decision making at the time a triptan is prescribed.

METHODS

This multicenter cross-sectional survey was performed by headache fellow members of the American Headache Society Headache Fellows Research Consortium at their respective tertiary care headache clinics. Migraine patients who were new patients to the headache clinic and who were current triptan users (use within prior 3 months and for ≥1 year) or past triptan users (no use within 6 months; prior use within 2 years) completed questionnaires that assessed the education they received and their role in decision making at the time a triptan was first prescribed as well as their desire for education and participation in decision making when a triptan is prescribed.

RESULTS

Consistent with patient preference, most participants received the majority of their education about the triptan from the prescriber's office (70.2%). In descending rank order, participants most desired to be informed about how to decide if a triptan should be taken, when during the course of migraine a triptan should be taken, possible side effects, cost, and how to obtain refills. Regarding side effects, most participants preferred to receive education about the most common side effects of a triptan rather than addressing all possible side effects. Regarding triptan dosing, participants desired to be informed in descending order of importance about taking other medications with triptans, how many doses can be taken for each migraine, how many doses can be taken each week/month, what to do if the triptan does not work, and the triptan mechanism of action. The vast majority of participants (92%) preferred that the decision to prescribe a triptan be a joint decision between the patient and the provider. In actual practice, participants were not as involved in decision making as they would like to be, with patients reporting that the prescriber was the sole decision maker 55.1% of the time. Participants had confidence in their providers (87.7%) and generally felt they did a good job educating them about the triptan (71.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this study, it is clear that patients prefer the shared model approach to medical decision making in regards to the prescription of triptans. The majority of patients received education that was generally consistent with their desires. Patients preferred that the prescribing provider be the primary source of information. The most desired educational topics included when/if a triptan should be taken, the number of times a triptan can be taken for a single migraine, co-administration with other acute medications, and the most common side effects. Focusing on these topics should enhance patient satisfaction and may improve compliance.

Why triptan treatment can fail: focus on gastrointestinal manifestations of migraine

BACKGROUND

Results of randomized, double-blind, controlled studies establish the efficacy of triptans in the acute treatment of migraine, but triptan benefits demonstrated in clinical trials have not consistently been realized in clinical practice. This paper explores the contribution of gastrointestinal manifestations of migraine--namely nausea (with or without vomiting) and gastroparesis--to triptan treatment failure.

SYNTHESIS

Migraine-related nausea and vomiting and migraine-associated gastroparesis appear to be prevalent and highly impactful and have been characterized as being among the greatest challenges affecting migraine care today. These gastrointestinal signs and symptoms have not been satisfactorily taken into account in the management of migraine, which is dominated by the use of oral therapies. Oral triptans are not the optimal therapy in the presence of migraine-related nausea because nausea predicts poor response to oral triptans and because nausea can cause patients to delay oral treatment, which can further compromise therapeutic efficacy. Oral triptans are not the optimal therapy in the presence of migraine-associated gastroparesis because these agents rely on gastric motility and gastrointestinal absorption and may be ineffective or slowly or inconsistently effective in the presence of gastroparesis. Health care providers need to work with their patients to address the still-all-too-frequent problem of treatment failure in migraine. First, health care providers need to have greater appreciation of the importance of nausea, vomiting, and gastroparesis as factors affecting migraine prognosis and treatment success. Second, health care providers need to systematically assess migraine patients for gastrointestinal signs and symptoms. Finally, patients and health care providers need to be willing to practice customized migraine care, in which patients tailor the treatment and formulation to the characteristics and context of the individual migraine episode.

Identifying the factors underlying discontinuation of triptans

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with triptan discontinuation among migraine patients.

BACKGROUND

It is unclear why many migraine patients who are prescribed triptans discontinue this treatment. This study investigated correlates of triptan discontinuation with a focus on potentially modifiable factors to improve compliance.

METHODS

This multicenter cross-sectional survey (n = 276) was performed at US tertiary care headache clinics. Headache fellows who were members of the American Headache Society Headache Fellows Research Consortium recruited episodic and chronic migraine patients who were current triptan users (use within prior 3 months and for ≥1 year) or past triptan users (no use within 6 months; prior use within 2 years). Univariate analyses were first completed to compare current triptan users to past users for: migraine characteristics, other migraine treatments, triptan education, triptan efficacy, triptan side effects, type of prescribing provider, Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scores and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores. Then, a multivariable logistic regression model was selected from all possible combinations of predictor variables to determine the factors that best correlated with triptan discontinuation.

RESULTS

Compared with those still using triptans (n = 207), those who had discontinued use (n = 69) had higher rates of medication overuse (30 vs. 18%, P = .04) and were more likely to have ever used opioids for migraine treatment (57 vs. 38%, P = .006) as well as higher MIDAS (mean 63 vs. 37, P = .001) and BDI scores (mean 10.4 vs. 7.4, P = .009). Compared with discontinued users, current triptan users were more likely to have had their triptan prescribed by a specialist (neurologist, headache specialist, or pain specialist) (74 vs. 54%, P = .002) and were more likely to report headache resolution (53 vs. 14%, P < .001) or a reduction in pain intensity (71 vs. 28%, P < .001) most of the time from their triptan. On a 1-5 scale (1 = disagree, 5 = agree), triptan users felt they had more: control over their migraine attacks (2.9 vs. 2.1), confidence in their prescribing provider (4.5 vs. 4.0), and were more educated about triptan use (4.2 vs. 3.7) compared with triptan discontinuers (P < .001 for all comparisons). Although both current and prior users reported similar rates of side effects (48 vs. 43%, P = .44), of those who discontinued use, the main reasons were for lack of effect (44%) and side effects (29%). Our multivariable modeling revealed that the strongest correlate of triptan discontinuation was lack of efficacy (odds ratio = 17, 95% confidence interval [8.8, 33.0]). Other factors associated with discontinuation included MIDAS > 24 (2.6, [1.5, 4.6]), BDI >4 (2.5, [1.4, 4.5]), and a history of ever using opioids for migraine therapy (2.2, [1.3, 3.8]). Having a triptan prescribed by a specialist and using at least 1 other abortive medication with the triptan were associated with a decreased likelihood of triptan discontinuation (0.41, [0.2-0.7] and 0.44 [0.3, 0.8], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

As expected, discontinuation was most correlated with lack of efficacy, but other important factors associated with those who had discontinued use included greater migraine-related disability, depression, and the use of opioids for migraine attacks. Compared with patients who had discontinued triptans, current triptan users felt more: educated about their triptan, control over their migraine attacks, and confidence in their prescribing provider. Current triptan users had their triptan prescribed by a specialist and used other abortive medications with their triptan more often compared with patients who had discontinued triptans. Given the cross-sectional nature of this study, we cannot determine if these factors contributed to triptan discontinuation or reflect the impact of such discontinuation. Interventions that address modifiable risk factors for triptan discontinuation may decrease the likelihood of triptan discontinuation and thus improve overall migraine control. Because lack of efficacy was most strongly associated with triptan discontinuation, future research should determine why triptans are effective for some patients but not others.

Comparison between two generic questionnaires to assess satisfaction with medication in chronic diseases

Objective

The objective of this work was to compare two generic questionnaires assessing patients’ satisfaction with medication. In addition we tested whether satisfaction can predict adherence to medication regimens in patients with chronic diseases, and which dimensions of satisfaction are most involved.

Methods

This prospective, observational study was conducted over one year in a heterogeneous population of patients with various chronic diseases. Satisfaction with medication was assessed by using the TSQM® vII and the SatMed-Q® questionnaires, and adherence to treatment was assessed with the Morisky-Green questionnaire. Clinical pharmacists interviewed patients to collect clinical, demographic and therapeutic data.

Results

190 patients were enrolled. Both questionnaires showed excellent reliability and correlation was high (R = 0.70; p<0.001). Adherence was correlated with satisfaction with medication whether assessed with the SatMed-Q® (R = 0.23; p = 0.002) or the TSQM® (R = 0.17; p = 0.02). Among different dimensions of satisfaction, convenience of use and side effects are prominent predictors of adherence.

Conclusion

Adherence is related to the patient’s satisfaction with medication whether assessed with the TSQM® vII or the SatMed-Q®. Therefore, these simple questionnaires could be used as predictive tools to identify patients whos’ adherence needs to be improved.

The development of a survey to measure completeness of response to migraine therapy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the psychometric properties of a new patient-reported migraine instrument, the Completeness of Response Survey (CORS), which measures a comprehensive set of factors important to patients' decisions regarding the initiation and continuation of treatment.

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, migraine treatments and the instruments used to demonstrate their efficacy have focused on the relief of headache pain. As new treatments emerge with the potential for more complete and consistent migraine relief, more comprehensive tools are needed to demonstrate these benefits. The CORS includes 2 modules, the static CORS, which comprehensively evaluates one treatment at one time point, and the comparative CORS, which provides a more global comparison between 2 treatments at one time point. Together, the 2 modules can measure unmet treatment needs and improvements over the course of a clinical study.

METHODS

Data from an 8-site study comparing 147 patients' recent experiences with their current triptan therapy and 2 months of study treatment with a single-tablet formulation of sumatriptan/naproxen sodium were used to conduct a preliminary psychometric evaluation of the CORS. The study included both modules of the CORS, the Headache Impact Test, the revised Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire, and a migraine diary.

RESULTS

The CORS response categories in both the static and comparative modules demonstrated limited floor or ceiling effects and few missing values (<3%). Inter-item correlations, principal components analysis (component loading range: 0.62 to 0.95), and high estimates of internal consistency (alpha range: 0.88 to 0.94) for each composite score supported the structure and proposed scoring algorithm for the static module. The pattern of correlations between the CORS static and comparative items and composites with the revised Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire items and subscales, as well as the relationships between responses to selected static CORS items and the migraine diary, supported the construct validity of the CORS.

CONCLUSIONS

The CORS is capable of demonstrating advantages of more comprehensive migraine therapies over traditional therapies, which are primarily focused on the resolution of headache pain, by addressing the frequency and speed with which the most common migraine symptoms are resolved and patients' return to normal functioning. This research shows evidence for the value and utility for the CORS static and comparative items and components, and further evaluation is underway.

Therapeutic applications for subcutaneous triptans in the acute treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

The features of migraine attacks and the contexts in which migraine attacks occur vary from attack to attack and from patient to patient. Current treatment strategies, which are dominated by the use of oral forms of migraine medication, do not address this patient-to-patient and attack-to-attack heterogeneity. While current therapies, and, in particular, oral triptan tablets can be effective for many types of migraine attacks that a patient can experience, they may not be the optimum treatment for every migraine in every patient.

SCOPE

This clinical review of subcutaneous sumatriptan discusses its characteristics, efficacy, and tolerability and considers its place in clinical practice. The review focuses particularly on several specific clinical settings in which subcutaneous sumatriptan might be a more appropriate therapeutic choice than the oral triptan tablet.

FINDINGS

Of the triptan formulations, subcutaneous sumatriptan is the most rapidly absorbed and demonstrates a favorable pharmacokinetic profile. Data from randomized, double-blind, clinical trials and studies of patients' perceptions and preferences suggest that subcutaneous sumatriptan can be particularly useful to help restore normal work functioning, for migraine attacks that cannot be treated early in their course, for migraine attacks associated with gastrointestinal symptoms, such as nausea or vomiting, and for difficult-to-treat migraines, including early-morning migraine and menstrual migraine. The majority of patients (9 in 10) trying subcutaneous sumatriptan indicated that they will use it again. Patients not fully satisfied with previous triptan therapy reported enhanced satisfaction with, and confidence in, treatment after trying subcutaneous sumatriptan.

CONCLUSIONS

By virtue of their availability as multiple compounds and in multiple formulations including oral, intranasal, and injectable forms, triptans can be used to customize migraine therapy to the individual patient and the individual migraine attack. Due to its route of delivery and favorable pharmacokinetic profile, subcutaneous triptans may represent an attractive alternative for specific clinical settings. Subcutaneous sumatriptan can play a key role in maximizing likelihood of pain-free response and rapid return to normal daily activities and, as such, should be considered an important part of the treatment armamentarium for migraine.

A literature review to explore the link between treatment satisfaction and adherence, compliance, and persistence

PURPOSE

To explore the published evidence on the link between treatment satisfaction and patients' compliance, adherence, and/or persistence.

METHODS

Articles published from January 2005 to November 2010 assessing compliance, adherence, or persistence and treatment satisfaction were identified through literature searches in Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo. Abstracts were reviewed by two independent researchers who selected articles for inclusion. The main attributes of each study examining the link between satisfaction and adherence, compliance, or persistence were summarized.

RESULTS

The database searches yielded 1278 references. Of the 281 abstracts that met the inclusion criteria, 20 articles were retained. In the articles, adherence and compliance were often used interchangeably and various methods were used to measure these concepts. All showed a positive association between treatment satisfaction and adherence, compliance, or persistence. Sixteen studies demonstrated a statistically significant link between satisfaction and compliance or persistence. Of these, ten demonstrated a significant link between satisfaction and compliance, two showed a significant link between satisfaction and persistence, and eight demonstrated a link between either a related aspect or a component of satisfaction (eg, treatment convenience) or adherence (eg, intention to persist). An equal number of studies aimed at explaining compliance or persistence according to treatment satisfaction (n = 8) and treatment satisfaction explained by compliance or persistence (n = 8). Four studies only reported correlation coefficients, with no hypothesis about the direction of the link. The methods used to evaluate the link were varied: two studies reported the link using descriptive statistics, such as percentages, and 18 used statistical tests, such as Spearman's correlation or logistic regressions.

CONCLUSION

This review identified few studies that evaluate the statistical association between satisfaction and adherence, compliance, or persistence. The available data suggested that greater treatment satisfaction was associated with better compliance and improved persistence, and with lower regimen complexity or treatment burden.

Pharmacoepidemiology of triptans in a headache centre

AIMS

The aims of this survey were: (i) to examine the pharmacoepidemiology of triptans in a headache centre; (ii) to compare the characteristics of patients who continued to take triptans with those of patients who had discontinued them.

METHODS

We enrolled all migraine patients according to ICHD-II criteria, ensuring they were over 18 years of age, consecutively examined during a follow-up visit at the Headache Centre of the University Hospital of Modena from October 2008 to March 2009. Only patients who had used or were using a triptan were included. A specific questionnaire about the use and tolerability of triptans was created for the study and administered to every patient.

RESULTS

On the whole, 343 patients (migraine without aura: 72%; chronic migraine: 26%; migraine with aura: 2%; mean age 40.4 +/- 10 years) had used or were using triptans. Most patients (72%) continued to use triptans, above all for their efficacy. The minority (28%) discontinuing them were younger and suffered from less severe migraine; 59% of them had discontinued triptans because of adverse effects. Indeed, 92% of these patients versus 57% of patients who were currently using triptans reported adverse effects (p < .0001, Fisher's exact test). The number of patients reporting adverse effects significantly decreased with age (r = -0.230, p < .005, simple linear regression analysis). The triptan discontinued by the highest percentage of patients (84%) was subcutaneous 6 mg sumatriptan. Significantly more patients reported adverse effects with subcutaneous 6 mg (89%) and tablet 100 mg sumatriptan (67%) than with any other triptan.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase of the tolerability of triptans with age could partly explain why younger patients suffering from less severe migraine tend to discontinue triptans more than older patients suffering from more severe migraine. In the latter, the efficacy and better tolerability (but not necessarily safety) of triptans could foster the overuse of these medications.

Sumatriptan-naproxen fixed combination for acute treatment of migraine: a critical appraisal

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including naproxen and naproxen sodium, are effective yet nonspecific analgesic and anti-inflammatory drugs, which work for a variety of pain and inflammatory syndromes, including migraine. In migraine, their analgesic effect helps relieve the headache, while their anti-inflammatory effect decreases the neurogenic inflammation in the trigeminal ganglion. This is the hypothesized mechanism by which they prevent the development of central sensitization. Triptans, including sumatriptan, work early in the migraine process at the trigeminovascular unit as agonists of the serotonin receptors (5-HT receptors) 1B and 1D. They block vasoconstriction and block transmission of signals to the trigeminal nucleus and thus prevent peripheral sensitization. Therefore, combining these two drugs is an attractive modality for the abortive treatment of migraine. Sumatriptan-naproxen fixed combination tablet (Treximet [sumatriptan-naproxen]) proves to be an effective and well tolerated drug that combines these two mechanisms; yet is far from being the ultimate in migraine abortive therapy, and further research remains essential.