Theme
medstat_mrc
Top Sections
Clinical Topics & News
Conference Coverage
Education Center
Literature Monitor
Literature Review
mrc
Main menu
ICYMI Migraine Main Menu
Unpublish
Specialty Focus
Headache & Migraine
Altmetric
Click for Credit Button Label
Click For Credit
DSM Affiliated
Display in offset block
Enable Disqus
Display Author and Disclosure Link
Publication Type
News
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Disable Sticky Ads
Disable Ad Block Mitigation
Featured Buckets Admin
Show Ads on this Publication's Homepage
Consolidated Pub
Show Article Page Numbers on TOC
Use larger logo size
Off
publication_blueconic_enabled
Off
Show More Destinations Menu
Disable Adhesion on Publication
Off
Restore Menu Label on Mobile Navigation
Disable Facebook Pixel from Publication
Exclude this publication from publication selection on articles and quiz
Gating Strategy
First Page Free
Challenge Center
Disable Inline Native ads
Supporter Name /ID
Nurtec ODT (rimegepant) [ 6660 ]
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
398249.1
Activity ID
109171
Product Name
Clinical Briefings ICYMI
Product ID
112

Migraine in children and teens: managing the pain

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 14:23

By the time Mira Halker started high school, hardly a day passed that she wasn’t either getting a migraine attack or recovering from one. She missed volleyball team practice. She missed classes. She missed social events. And few people understood. After all, she looked healthy.

“A lot of times, people think I’m faking it,” said Mira, now 16, who lives in Phoenix. Friends called her flaky; her volleyball coaches questioned her dedication to the team. “I’m like, ‘I’m not trying to get out of this. This is not what this is about,’ ” she said.

Her mother, Rashmi B. Halker Singh, MD, is a neurologist at Mayo Clinic who happens to specialize in migraine. Even so, finding a solution was not easy. Neither ibuprofen nor triptans, nor various preventive measures such as a daily prescription for topiramate controlled the pain and associated symptoms. Mira was barely making it through her school day and had to quit volleyball. Then, in the spring of 10th grade, Mira told her mother that she couldn’t go to prom because the loud noises and lights could give her a migraine attack.

Mother and daughter decided it was time to get even more aggressive. “There are these key moments in life that you can’t get back,” Dr. Singh said. “Migraine steals so much from you.”
 

Diagnosis

One of the challenges Mira’s physicians faced was deciding which medications and other therapies to prescribe to a teenager. Drug companies have been releasing a steady stream of new treatments for migraine headaches, and researchers promise more are on the way soon. Here’s what works for children, what hasn’t yet been approved for use with minors, and how to diagnose migraines in the first place, from experts at some of the nation’s leading pediatric headache centers.

Migraine affects about 10% of children, according to the American Migraine Foundation. The headaches can strike children as early as age 3 or 4 years, said Robert Little, MD, a pediatric neurologist at Phoenix Children’s Hospital.

Before puberty, boys report more migraine attacks than girls, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. But that reverses in adolescence: By age 17, as many as 8% of boys and 23% of girls have had migraine. To diagnose migraine, Juliana H. VanderPluym, MD, associate professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, said she uses the criteria published in the latest edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD): A patient must have had at least five attacks in their life; and in children and adolescents, the attacks must last no less than 2 hours.

In addition, the headaches should exhibit at least two out of four features:

1. Occur more on one side of the head than the other (although Dr. VanderPluym said in children and adolescents headaches often are bilateral).

2. Be of moderate to severe intensity.

3. Have a pounding or throbbing quality.

4. Grow worse with activity or cause an avoidance of activity.

If the attacks meet those criteria, clinicians should check to see if they meet at least one out of the two following:

1. Are sensitive to light and sounds.

2. Are associated with nausea and/or vomiting.

A clinician should consider whether the headaches are not better accounted for by another diagnosis, according to the ICHD criteria. But, Dr. VanderPluym warned that does not necessarily mean running a slew of tests.

“In the absence of red flag features, it is more than likely going to be migraine headache,” she said. That’s especially true if a child has a family history of migraine, as the condition is often passed down from parent to child.

Ultimately, the diagnosis is fairly simple and can be made in a minute or less, said Jack Gladstein, MD, a pediatrician at the University of Maryland whose research focuses on the clinical care of children and adolescents with headache.

“Migraine is acute,” Dr. Gladstein said. “It’s really bad. And it’s recurrent.”
 

 

 

First line of treatment

Whatever a patient takes to treat a migraine, they should hit it early and hard, Dr. Gladstein said.

“The first thing you say, as a primary care physician, is treat your migraine at first twinge, whatever you use. Don’t wait, don’t wish it away,” he said. “The longer you wait, the less chance anything will work.”

The second piece of advice, Dr. Gladstein said, is that whatever drug a patient is taking, they should be on the highest feasible dose. “Work as fast as you can to treat them. You want the brain to reset as quickly as you can,” he said.

Patients should begin with over-the-counter pain relievers, Dr. Little said. If those prove insufficient, they can try a triptan. Rizatriptan is the only such agent that the Food and Drug Administration has approved for children aged 6-17 years. Other drugs in the class – sumatriptan/naproxen, almotriptan, and zolmitriptan – are approved for children 12 and older.

Another migraine therapy recently approved for children aged 12 and older is the use of neurostimulators. “It’s helpful to be aware of them,” Dr. VanderPluym said.

However, if neurostimulators and acute medications prove insufficient, clinicians should warn patients not to up their doses of triptans. Rebound headaches can occur if patients take triptans more than twice a week, or a maximum 10 days per month.

Another possibility is to add a preventive therapy. One mild, first option is nutraceuticals, like riboflavin (vitamin B2) or magnesium, said Anisa F. Kelley, MD, a neurologist and associate director of the headache program at the Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

“We don’t have definitive evidence, but they’re probably doing more benefit than they are harm,” Dr. Kelley said of these therapies. “In patients who have anywhere from 4 to 8 migraine days a month, where you’re in that in-between period where you don’t necessarily need a [prescription] prophylactic, I will often start with a nutraceutical,” Dr. Kelley said.

For those patients who don’t respond to nutraceuticals, or who need more support, clinicians can prescribe amitriptyline or topiramate. Dr. VanderPluym said.

A 2017 study found such prophylactics to be no more effective than placebo in pediatric migraine patients, but experts caution the results should not be considered definitive.

For one thing, the study enrolled a highly selective group of participants, with milder forms of migraine who may have improved anyway, Dr. VanderPluym said. All participants also received lifestyle counseling.

Every time participants came in for a follow-up, they were asked questions such as how much water were they drinking and how much sleep were they getting, Dr. Kelley noted. The takeaway, she said: “Pediatric and adolescent migraine [management] is very, very much reliant on lifestyle factors.”
 

Lifestyle triggers

Clinicians should counsel their migraine patients about lifestyle changes, experts said. Getting adequate sleep, staying hydrated, and managing stress can help reduce the intensity and frequency of attacks.

Migraine patients should also be mindful of their screen time, Dr. Kelley added.

“I’ve had lots and lots of patients who find excessive screen time will trigger or worsen migraine,” she said.

As for other potential triggers of attacks, the evidence is mixed.

“There’s clearly an association with disrupted sleep and migraine, and that has been very well established,” Dr. Little said. “And there is some modest amount of evidence that regular exercise can be helpful.” But for reported food triggers, he said, there have been very inconclusive results.

Commonly reported triggers include MSG, red wine, chocolate, and aged cheese. When Dr. Little’s patients keep headache diaries, tracking their meals alongside when they got migraine attacks, they often discover individualized triggers – strawberries, for instance, in one case, he said.

Scientists believe migraines result from the inappropriate activation of the trigeminal ganglion. “The question is, what causes it to get triggered? And how does it get triggered?” Dr. Gladstein said. “And that’s where there’s a lot of difference of opinion and no conclusive evidence.” Clinicians also should make sure that something else – usually depression, anxiety, insomnia, and dizziness – is not hindering effective migraine management. “If someone has terrible insomnia, until you treat the insomnia, the headaches aren’t going to get better,” he said.

As for Mira, her migraine attacks did not significantly improve, despite trying triptans, prophylactics, lifestyle changes, and shots to block nerve pain. When the headaches threatened Mira’s chance to go to her prom, her neurologist suggested trying something different. The physician persuaded the family’s insurance to cover a calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist, an injectable monoclonal antibody treatment for migraine that the FDA has currently approved only for use in adults.

The difference for Mira has been extraordinary.

“I can do so much more than I was able to do,” said Mira, who attended the dance migraine free. “I feel liberated.”

 

 

It’s only migraine

One of the greatest challenges in diagnosing migraine can be reassuring the patient, the parents, even clinicians themselves that migraine really is the cause of all this pain and discomfort, experts said.

“A lot of migraine treatment actually comes down to migraine education,” Dr. VanderPluym said.

Patients and their parents often wonder how they can be sure that this pain is not resulting from something more dangerous than migraine, Dr. Little said. In these cases, he cites practice guidelines published by the American Academy of Neurology.

“The gist of those guidelines is that most pediatric patients do not need further workup,” he said. “But I think that there’s always a fear that you’re missing something because we don’t have a test that we can do” for migraine.

Some warning signs that further tests might be warranted, Dr. Kelley said, include:

  • Headaches that wake a patient up in the middle of the night.
  • Headaches that start first thing in the morning, especially those that include vomiting.
  • A headache pattern that suddenly gets much worse.
  • Certain symptoms that accompany the headache, such as tingling, numbness or double vision.

Although all of these signs can still stem from migraines – tingling or numbness, for instance, can be signs of migraine aura – running additional tests can rule out more serious concerns, she said.

Publications
Topics
Sections

By the time Mira Halker started high school, hardly a day passed that she wasn’t either getting a migraine attack or recovering from one. She missed volleyball team practice. She missed classes. She missed social events. And few people understood. After all, she looked healthy.

“A lot of times, people think I’m faking it,” said Mira, now 16, who lives in Phoenix. Friends called her flaky; her volleyball coaches questioned her dedication to the team. “I’m like, ‘I’m not trying to get out of this. This is not what this is about,’ ” she said.

Her mother, Rashmi B. Halker Singh, MD, is a neurologist at Mayo Clinic who happens to specialize in migraine. Even so, finding a solution was not easy. Neither ibuprofen nor triptans, nor various preventive measures such as a daily prescription for topiramate controlled the pain and associated symptoms. Mira was barely making it through her school day and had to quit volleyball. Then, in the spring of 10th grade, Mira told her mother that she couldn’t go to prom because the loud noises and lights could give her a migraine attack.

Mother and daughter decided it was time to get even more aggressive. “There are these key moments in life that you can’t get back,” Dr. Singh said. “Migraine steals so much from you.”
 

Diagnosis

One of the challenges Mira’s physicians faced was deciding which medications and other therapies to prescribe to a teenager. Drug companies have been releasing a steady stream of new treatments for migraine headaches, and researchers promise more are on the way soon. Here’s what works for children, what hasn’t yet been approved for use with minors, and how to diagnose migraines in the first place, from experts at some of the nation’s leading pediatric headache centers.

Migraine affects about 10% of children, according to the American Migraine Foundation. The headaches can strike children as early as age 3 or 4 years, said Robert Little, MD, a pediatric neurologist at Phoenix Children’s Hospital.

Before puberty, boys report more migraine attacks than girls, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. But that reverses in adolescence: By age 17, as many as 8% of boys and 23% of girls have had migraine. To diagnose migraine, Juliana H. VanderPluym, MD, associate professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, said she uses the criteria published in the latest edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD): A patient must have had at least five attacks in their life; and in children and adolescents, the attacks must last no less than 2 hours.

In addition, the headaches should exhibit at least two out of four features:

1. Occur more on one side of the head than the other (although Dr. VanderPluym said in children and adolescents headaches often are bilateral).

2. Be of moderate to severe intensity.

3. Have a pounding or throbbing quality.

4. Grow worse with activity or cause an avoidance of activity.

If the attacks meet those criteria, clinicians should check to see if they meet at least one out of the two following:

1. Are sensitive to light and sounds.

2. Are associated with nausea and/or vomiting.

A clinician should consider whether the headaches are not better accounted for by another diagnosis, according to the ICHD criteria. But, Dr. VanderPluym warned that does not necessarily mean running a slew of tests.

“In the absence of red flag features, it is more than likely going to be migraine headache,” she said. That’s especially true if a child has a family history of migraine, as the condition is often passed down from parent to child.

Ultimately, the diagnosis is fairly simple and can be made in a minute or less, said Jack Gladstein, MD, a pediatrician at the University of Maryland whose research focuses on the clinical care of children and adolescents with headache.

“Migraine is acute,” Dr. Gladstein said. “It’s really bad. And it’s recurrent.”
 

 

 

First line of treatment

Whatever a patient takes to treat a migraine, they should hit it early and hard, Dr. Gladstein said.

“The first thing you say, as a primary care physician, is treat your migraine at first twinge, whatever you use. Don’t wait, don’t wish it away,” he said. “The longer you wait, the less chance anything will work.”

The second piece of advice, Dr. Gladstein said, is that whatever drug a patient is taking, they should be on the highest feasible dose. “Work as fast as you can to treat them. You want the brain to reset as quickly as you can,” he said.

Patients should begin with over-the-counter pain relievers, Dr. Little said. If those prove insufficient, they can try a triptan. Rizatriptan is the only such agent that the Food and Drug Administration has approved for children aged 6-17 years. Other drugs in the class – sumatriptan/naproxen, almotriptan, and zolmitriptan – are approved for children 12 and older.

Another migraine therapy recently approved for children aged 12 and older is the use of neurostimulators. “It’s helpful to be aware of them,” Dr. VanderPluym said.

However, if neurostimulators and acute medications prove insufficient, clinicians should warn patients not to up their doses of triptans. Rebound headaches can occur if patients take triptans more than twice a week, or a maximum 10 days per month.

Another possibility is to add a preventive therapy. One mild, first option is nutraceuticals, like riboflavin (vitamin B2) or magnesium, said Anisa F. Kelley, MD, a neurologist and associate director of the headache program at the Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

“We don’t have definitive evidence, but they’re probably doing more benefit than they are harm,” Dr. Kelley said of these therapies. “In patients who have anywhere from 4 to 8 migraine days a month, where you’re in that in-between period where you don’t necessarily need a [prescription] prophylactic, I will often start with a nutraceutical,” Dr. Kelley said.

For those patients who don’t respond to nutraceuticals, or who need more support, clinicians can prescribe amitriptyline or topiramate. Dr. VanderPluym said.

A 2017 study found such prophylactics to be no more effective than placebo in pediatric migraine patients, but experts caution the results should not be considered definitive.

For one thing, the study enrolled a highly selective group of participants, with milder forms of migraine who may have improved anyway, Dr. VanderPluym said. All participants also received lifestyle counseling.

Every time participants came in for a follow-up, they were asked questions such as how much water were they drinking and how much sleep were they getting, Dr. Kelley noted. The takeaway, she said: “Pediatric and adolescent migraine [management] is very, very much reliant on lifestyle factors.”
 

Lifestyle triggers

Clinicians should counsel their migraine patients about lifestyle changes, experts said. Getting adequate sleep, staying hydrated, and managing stress can help reduce the intensity and frequency of attacks.

Migraine patients should also be mindful of their screen time, Dr. Kelley added.

“I’ve had lots and lots of patients who find excessive screen time will trigger or worsen migraine,” she said.

As for other potential triggers of attacks, the evidence is mixed.

“There’s clearly an association with disrupted sleep and migraine, and that has been very well established,” Dr. Little said. “And there is some modest amount of evidence that regular exercise can be helpful.” But for reported food triggers, he said, there have been very inconclusive results.

Commonly reported triggers include MSG, red wine, chocolate, and aged cheese. When Dr. Little’s patients keep headache diaries, tracking their meals alongside when they got migraine attacks, they often discover individualized triggers – strawberries, for instance, in one case, he said.

Scientists believe migraines result from the inappropriate activation of the trigeminal ganglion. “The question is, what causes it to get triggered? And how does it get triggered?” Dr. Gladstein said. “And that’s where there’s a lot of difference of opinion and no conclusive evidence.” Clinicians also should make sure that something else – usually depression, anxiety, insomnia, and dizziness – is not hindering effective migraine management. “If someone has terrible insomnia, until you treat the insomnia, the headaches aren’t going to get better,” he said.

As for Mira, her migraine attacks did not significantly improve, despite trying triptans, prophylactics, lifestyle changes, and shots to block nerve pain. When the headaches threatened Mira’s chance to go to her prom, her neurologist suggested trying something different. The physician persuaded the family’s insurance to cover a calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist, an injectable monoclonal antibody treatment for migraine that the FDA has currently approved only for use in adults.

The difference for Mira has been extraordinary.

“I can do so much more than I was able to do,” said Mira, who attended the dance migraine free. “I feel liberated.”

 

 

It’s only migraine

One of the greatest challenges in diagnosing migraine can be reassuring the patient, the parents, even clinicians themselves that migraine really is the cause of all this pain and discomfort, experts said.

“A lot of migraine treatment actually comes down to migraine education,” Dr. VanderPluym said.

Patients and their parents often wonder how they can be sure that this pain is not resulting from something more dangerous than migraine, Dr. Little said. In these cases, he cites practice guidelines published by the American Academy of Neurology.

“The gist of those guidelines is that most pediatric patients do not need further workup,” he said. “But I think that there’s always a fear that you’re missing something because we don’t have a test that we can do” for migraine.

Some warning signs that further tests might be warranted, Dr. Kelley said, include:

  • Headaches that wake a patient up in the middle of the night.
  • Headaches that start first thing in the morning, especially those that include vomiting.
  • A headache pattern that suddenly gets much worse.
  • Certain symptoms that accompany the headache, such as tingling, numbness or double vision.

Although all of these signs can still stem from migraines – tingling or numbness, for instance, can be signs of migraine aura – running additional tests can rule out more serious concerns, she said.

By the time Mira Halker started high school, hardly a day passed that she wasn’t either getting a migraine attack or recovering from one. She missed volleyball team practice. She missed classes. She missed social events. And few people understood. After all, she looked healthy.

“A lot of times, people think I’m faking it,” said Mira, now 16, who lives in Phoenix. Friends called her flaky; her volleyball coaches questioned her dedication to the team. “I’m like, ‘I’m not trying to get out of this. This is not what this is about,’ ” she said.

Her mother, Rashmi B. Halker Singh, MD, is a neurologist at Mayo Clinic who happens to specialize in migraine. Even so, finding a solution was not easy. Neither ibuprofen nor triptans, nor various preventive measures such as a daily prescription for topiramate controlled the pain and associated symptoms. Mira was barely making it through her school day and had to quit volleyball. Then, in the spring of 10th grade, Mira told her mother that she couldn’t go to prom because the loud noises and lights could give her a migraine attack.

Mother and daughter decided it was time to get even more aggressive. “There are these key moments in life that you can’t get back,” Dr. Singh said. “Migraine steals so much from you.”
 

Diagnosis

One of the challenges Mira’s physicians faced was deciding which medications and other therapies to prescribe to a teenager. Drug companies have been releasing a steady stream of new treatments for migraine headaches, and researchers promise more are on the way soon. Here’s what works for children, what hasn’t yet been approved for use with minors, and how to diagnose migraines in the first place, from experts at some of the nation’s leading pediatric headache centers.

Migraine affects about 10% of children, according to the American Migraine Foundation. The headaches can strike children as early as age 3 or 4 years, said Robert Little, MD, a pediatric neurologist at Phoenix Children’s Hospital.

Before puberty, boys report more migraine attacks than girls, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics. But that reverses in adolescence: By age 17, as many as 8% of boys and 23% of girls have had migraine. To diagnose migraine, Juliana H. VanderPluym, MD, associate professor of neurology at Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, said she uses the criteria published in the latest edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD): A patient must have had at least five attacks in their life; and in children and adolescents, the attacks must last no less than 2 hours.

In addition, the headaches should exhibit at least two out of four features:

1. Occur more on one side of the head than the other (although Dr. VanderPluym said in children and adolescents headaches often are bilateral).

2. Be of moderate to severe intensity.

3. Have a pounding or throbbing quality.

4. Grow worse with activity or cause an avoidance of activity.

If the attacks meet those criteria, clinicians should check to see if they meet at least one out of the two following:

1. Are sensitive to light and sounds.

2. Are associated with nausea and/or vomiting.

A clinician should consider whether the headaches are not better accounted for by another diagnosis, according to the ICHD criteria. But, Dr. VanderPluym warned that does not necessarily mean running a slew of tests.

“In the absence of red flag features, it is more than likely going to be migraine headache,” she said. That’s especially true if a child has a family history of migraine, as the condition is often passed down from parent to child.

Ultimately, the diagnosis is fairly simple and can be made in a minute or less, said Jack Gladstein, MD, a pediatrician at the University of Maryland whose research focuses on the clinical care of children and adolescents with headache.

“Migraine is acute,” Dr. Gladstein said. “It’s really bad. And it’s recurrent.”
 

 

 

First line of treatment

Whatever a patient takes to treat a migraine, they should hit it early and hard, Dr. Gladstein said.

“The first thing you say, as a primary care physician, is treat your migraine at first twinge, whatever you use. Don’t wait, don’t wish it away,” he said. “The longer you wait, the less chance anything will work.”

The second piece of advice, Dr. Gladstein said, is that whatever drug a patient is taking, they should be on the highest feasible dose. “Work as fast as you can to treat them. You want the brain to reset as quickly as you can,” he said.

Patients should begin with over-the-counter pain relievers, Dr. Little said. If those prove insufficient, they can try a triptan. Rizatriptan is the only such agent that the Food and Drug Administration has approved for children aged 6-17 years. Other drugs in the class – sumatriptan/naproxen, almotriptan, and zolmitriptan – are approved for children 12 and older.

Another migraine therapy recently approved for children aged 12 and older is the use of neurostimulators. “It’s helpful to be aware of them,” Dr. VanderPluym said.

However, if neurostimulators and acute medications prove insufficient, clinicians should warn patients not to up their doses of triptans. Rebound headaches can occur if patients take triptans more than twice a week, or a maximum 10 days per month.

Another possibility is to add a preventive therapy. One mild, first option is nutraceuticals, like riboflavin (vitamin B2) or magnesium, said Anisa F. Kelley, MD, a neurologist and associate director of the headache program at the Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

“We don’t have definitive evidence, but they’re probably doing more benefit than they are harm,” Dr. Kelley said of these therapies. “In patients who have anywhere from 4 to 8 migraine days a month, where you’re in that in-between period where you don’t necessarily need a [prescription] prophylactic, I will often start with a nutraceutical,” Dr. Kelley said.

For those patients who don’t respond to nutraceuticals, or who need more support, clinicians can prescribe amitriptyline or topiramate. Dr. VanderPluym said.

A 2017 study found such prophylactics to be no more effective than placebo in pediatric migraine patients, but experts caution the results should not be considered definitive.

For one thing, the study enrolled a highly selective group of participants, with milder forms of migraine who may have improved anyway, Dr. VanderPluym said. All participants also received lifestyle counseling.

Every time participants came in for a follow-up, they were asked questions such as how much water were they drinking and how much sleep were they getting, Dr. Kelley noted. The takeaway, she said: “Pediatric and adolescent migraine [management] is very, very much reliant on lifestyle factors.”
 

Lifestyle triggers

Clinicians should counsel their migraine patients about lifestyle changes, experts said. Getting adequate sleep, staying hydrated, and managing stress can help reduce the intensity and frequency of attacks.

Migraine patients should also be mindful of their screen time, Dr. Kelley added.

“I’ve had lots and lots of patients who find excessive screen time will trigger or worsen migraine,” she said.

As for other potential triggers of attacks, the evidence is mixed.

“There’s clearly an association with disrupted sleep and migraine, and that has been very well established,” Dr. Little said. “And there is some modest amount of evidence that regular exercise can be helpful.” But for reported food triggers, he said, there have been very inconclusive results.

Commonly reported triggers include MSG, red wine, chocolate, and aged cheese. When Dr. Little’s patients keep headache diaries, tracking their meals alongside when they got migraine attacks, they often discover individualized triggers – strawberries, for instance, in one case, he said.

Scientists believe migraines result from the inappropriate activation of the trigeminal ganglion. “The question is, what causes it to get triggered? And how does it get triggered?” Dr. Gladstein said. “And that’s where there’s a lot of difference of opinion and no conclusive evidence.” Clinicians also should make sure that something else – usually depression, anxiety, insomnia, and dizziness – is not hindering effective migraine management. “If someone has terrible insomnia, until you treat the insomnia, the headaches aren’t going to get better,” he said.

As for Mira, her migraine attacks did not significantly improve, despite trying triptans, prophylactics, lifestyle changes, and shots to block nerve pain. When the headaches threatened Mira’s chance to go to her prom, her neurologist suggested trying something different. The physician persuaded the family’s insurance to cover a calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist, an injectable monoclonal antibody treatment for migraine that the FDA has currently approved only for use in adults.

The difference for Mira has been extraordinary.

“I can do so much more than I was able to do,” said Mira, who attended the dance migraine free. “I feel liberated.”

 

 

It’s only migraine

One of the greatest challenges in diagnosing migraine can be reassuring the patient, the parents, even clinicians themselves that migraine really is the cause of all this pain and discomfort, experts said.

“A lot of migraine treatment actually comes down to migraine education,” Dr. VanderPluym said.

Patients and their parents often wonder how they can be sure that this pain is not resulting from something more dangerous than migraine, Dr. Little said. In these cases, he cites practice guidelines published by the American Academy of Neurology.

“The gist of those guidelines is that most pediatric patients do not need further workup,” he said. “But I think that there’s always a fear that you’re missing something because we don’t have a test that we can do” for migraine.

Some warning signs that further tests might be warranted, Dr. Kelley said, include:

  • Headaches that wake a patient up in the middle of the night.
  • Headaches that start first thing in the morning, especially those that include vomiting.
  • A headache pattern that suddenly gets much worse.
  • Certain symptoms that accompany the headache, such as tingling, numbness or double vision.

Although all of these signs can still stem from migraines – tingling or numbness, for instance, can be signs of migraine aura – running additional tests can rule out more serious concerns, she said.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Galcanezumab reduces migraine severity and symptoms in episodic migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 14:06

Key clinical point: Once-monthly galcanezumab significantly reduced the frequency of migraine-associated symptoms and migraine headache severity in patients with episodic migraine.

 

Major finding: Moderate-to-severe migraine headache days (MHD) reduced significantly with 240 mg galcanezumab (difference in least-squares mean change from baseline [Δ] 1.8 days,  95% CI 2.5 to 1.2) and 120 mg (Δ 1.9 days, 95% CI 2.5 to 1.2) vs placebo, with 240 mg galcanezumab also leading to significant reductions in the proportion of monthly MHD during menstrual periods (P = .04), and MHDswith nausea or vomiting (P = .02).

 

Study details: This was a secondary analysis of a phase 2 trial including 440 patients with episodic migraine who were randomly assigned to receive monthly galcanezumab (240 or 120 mg) or placebo.

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Eli Lilly Japan K.K. Two authors declared being employees and minor shareholders of Eli Lilly. Two authors reported receiving personal fees for speaker or consulting services from Eli Lilly Japan K.K. and other sources.

 

Source: Igarashi H et al. Galcanezumab effects on migraine severity and symptoms in Japanese patients with episodic migraine: Secondary analysis of a phase 2 randomized trial. Neurol Ther. 2022 (Oct 20). Doi: 10.1007/s40120-022-00410-3

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Once-monthly galcanezumab significantly reduced the frequency of migraine-associated symptoms and migraine headache severity in patients with episodic migraine.

 

Major finding: Moderate-to-severe migraine headache days (MHD) reduced significantly with 240 mg galcanezumab (difference in least-squares mean change from baseline [Δ] 1.8 days,  95% CI 2.5 to 1.2) and 120 mg (Δ 1.9 days, 95% CI 2.5 to 1.2) vs placebo, with 240 mg galcanezumab also leading to significant reductions in the proportion of monthly MHD during menstrual periods (P = .04), and MHDswith nausea or vomiting (P = .02).

 

Study details: This was a secondary analysis of a phase 2 trial including 440 patients with episodic migraine who were randomly assigned to receive monthly galcanezumab (240 or 120 mg) or placebo.

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Eli Lilly Japan K.K. Two authors declared being employees and minor shareholders of Eli Lilly. Two authors reported receiving personal fees for speaker or consulting services from Eli Lilly Japan K.K. and other sources.

 

Source: Igarashi H et al. Galcanezumab effects on migraine severity and symptoms in Japanese patients with episodic migraine: Secondary analysis of a phase 2 randomized trial. Neurol Ther. 2022 (Oct 20). Doi: 10.1007/s40120-022-00410-3

Key clinical point: Once-monthly galcanezumab significantly reduced the frequency of migraine-associated symptoms and migraine headache severity in patients with episodic migraine.

 

Major finding: Moderate-to-severe migraine headache days (MHD) reduced significantly with 240 mg galcanezumab (difference in least-squares mean change from baseline [Δ] 1.8 days,  95% CI 2.5 to 1.2) and 120 mg (Δ 1.9 days, 95% CI 2.5 to 1.2) vs placebo, with 240 mg galcanezumab also leading to significant reductions in the proportion of monthly MHD during menstrual periods (P = .04), and MHDswith nausea or vomiting (P = .02).

 

Study details: This was a secondary analysis of a phase 2 trial including 440 patients with episodic migraine who were randomly assigned to receive monthly galcanezumab (240 or 120 mg) or placebo.

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Eli Lilly Japan K.K. Two authors declared being employees and minor shareholders of Eli Lilly. Two authors reported receiving personal fees for speaker or consulting services from Eli Lilly Japan K.K. and other sources.

 

Source: Igarashi H et al. Galcanezumab effects on migraine severity and symptoms in Japanese patients with episodic migraine: Secondary analysis of a phase 2 randomized trial. Neurol Ther. 2022 (Oct 20). Doi: 10.1007/s40120-022-00410-3

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Adenosine induces headache and short-lasting vasodilation but not migraine attacks

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 14:21

Key clinical point: Adenosine vs placebo infusion increased headaches and short-lasting vasodilation without a significant induction of migraine attacks in patients with migraine without aura.

Major finding: The incidence of migraine attacks was not significantly different after adenosine vs placebo infusion (39% vs 17%; P = .29); however, a higher proportion of patients receiving adenosine vs placebo reported headache (78% vs 33%; P < .01). Adenosine vs placebo increased heart rate (area under the curve [AUC]T0-120 min, P < .001), facial skin blood flow (AUCT0-120 min, P < .05), and left superficial temporal artery diameter (AUCT0-20 min, P = .01), but decreased middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity (AUCT0-20 min, P < .001).

 

Study details: This randomized controlled trial included 18 patients with migraine without aura who received adenosine or placebo infusion over 20 minutes on two study days separated by a 1 week washout period.

 

Disclosures: This study received support from the Lundbeck Foundation. M Ashina reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria for lectures and presentations, and royalties from various sources, including Lundbeck.

 

Source: Thuraiaiyah J et al. Adenosine causes short-lasting vasodilation and headache, but not migraine attacks in migraine patients: A randomized clinical trial. Pain. 2022 (Oct 17). Doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002804

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Adenosine vs placebo infusion increased headaches and short-lasting vasodilation without a significant induction of migraine attacks in patients with migraine without aura.

Major finding: The incidence of migraine attacks was not significantly different after adenosine vs placebo infusion (39% vs 17%; P = .29); however, a higher proportion of patients receiving adenosine vs placebo reported headache (78% vs 33%; P < .01). Adenosine vs placebo increased heart rate (area under the curve [AUC]T0-120 min, P < .001), facial skin blood flow (AUCT0-120 min, P < .05), and left superficial temporal artery diameter (AUCT0-20 min, P = .01), but decreased middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity (AUCT0-20 min, P < .001).

 

Study details: This randomized controlled trial included 18 patients with migraine without aura who received adenosine or placebo infusion over 20 minutes on two study days separated by a 1 week washout period.

 

Disclosures: This study received support from the Lundbeck Foundation. M Ashina reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria for lectures and presentations, and royalties from various sources, including Lundbeck.

 

Source: Thuraiaiyah J et al. Adenosine causes short-lasting vasodilation and headache, but not migraine attacks in migraine patients: A randomized clinical trial. Pain. 2022 (Oct 17). Doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002804

Key clinical point: Adenosine vs placebo infusion increased headaches and short-lasting vasodilation without a significant induction of migraine attacks in patients with migraine without aura.

Major finding: The incidence of migraine attacks was not significantly different after adenosine vs placebo infusion (39% vs 17%; P = .29); however, a higher proportion of patients receiving adenosine vs placebo reported headache (78% vs 33%; P < .01). Adenosine vs placebo increased heart rate (area under the curve [AUC]T0-120 min, P < .001), facial skin blood flow (AUCT0-120 min, P < .05), and left superficial temporal artery diameter (AUCT0-20 min, P = .01), but decreased middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity (AUCT0-20 min, P < .001).

 

Study details: This randomized controlled trial included 18 patients with migraine without aura who received adenosine or placebo infusion over 20 minutes on two study days separated by a 1 week washout period.

 

Disclosures: This study received support from the Lundbeck Foundation. M Ashina reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria for lectures and presentations, and royalties from various sources, including Lundbeck.

 

Source: Thuraiaiyah J et al. Adenosine causes short-lasting vasodilation and headache, but not migraine attacks in migraine patients: A randomized clinical trial. Pain. 2022 (Oct 17). Doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002804

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Increased risk for migraine among individuals with childhood cancer

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 14:23

Key clinical point: Individuals diagnosed with childhood cancer were at an increased risk for antimigraine medication and hospitalization due to migraine.

 

Major finding: Compared with unaffected individuals, those diagnosed with childhood cancer were at an elevated risk for initiating antimigraine therapy (standardized incidence ratios [SIR] 1.22; 95% CI 1.09-1.36) and hospitalization due to migraine (SIR 2.44; 95% CI 1.87-3.12), with the risk for initiating antimigraine therapy being the highest among individuals diagnosed with cancer at 15-19 years of age (SIR 1.48; 95% CI 1.25-1.74).

 

Study details: This was a population-based cohort study including individuals diagnosed with childhood cancer who had data available for antimigraine prescriptions (n = 6564) and migraine hospitalization (n = 7771).

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond, Denmark. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Davidsson OB et al. Childhood cancer confers increased risk of migraine – A Danish nationwide register study. Cancer Epidemiol. 2022;81:102278 (Oct 13). Doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2022.102278

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Individuals diagnosed with childhood cancer were at an increased risk for antimigraine medication and hospitalization due to migraine.

 

Major finding: Compared with unaffected individuals, those diagnosed with childhood cancer were at an elevated risk for initiating antimigraine therapy (standardized incidence ratios [SIR] 1.22; 95% CI 1.09-1.36) and hospitalization due to migraine (SIR 2.44; 95% CI 1.87-3.12), with the risk for initiating antimigraine therapy being the highest among individuals diagnosed with cancer at 15-19 years of age (SIR 1.48; 95% CI 1.25-1.74).

 

Study details: This was a population-based cohort study including individuals diagnosed with childhood cancer who had data available for antimigraine prescriptions (n = 6564) and migraine hospitalization (n = 7771).

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond, Denmark. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Davidsson OB et al. Childhood cancer confers increased risk of migraine – A Danish nationwide register study. Cancer Epidemiol. 2022;81:102278 (Oct 13). Doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2022.102278

Key clinical point: Individuals diagnosed with childhood cancer were at an increased risk for antimigraine medication and hospitalization due to migraine.

 

Major finding: Compared with unaffected individuals, those diagnosed with childhood cancer were at an elevated risk for initiating antimigraine therapy (standardized incidence ratios [SIR] 1.22; 95% CI 1.09-1.36) and hospitalization due to migraine (SIR 2.44; 95% CI 1.87-3.12), with the risk for initiating antimigraine therapy being the highest among individuals diagnosed with cancer at 15-19 years of age (SIR 1.48; 95% CI 1.25-1.74).

 

Study details: This was a population-based cohort study including individuals diagnosed with childhood cancer who had data available for antimigraine prescriptions (n = 6564) and migraine hospitalization (n = 7771).

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond, Denmark. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Davidsson OB et al. Childhood cancer confers increased risk of migraine – A Danish nationwide register study. Cancer Epidemiol. 2022;81:102278 (Oct 13). Doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2022.102278

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Calcified neurocysticercosis influences disease severity and treatment response in migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 14:33

Key clinical point: The presence of seemingly inert calcified lesions of neurocysticercosis (CLN) influences the course of migraine by increasing headache frequency, pain severity, and migraine-associated disability; however, patients with CLN showed a better response to amitriptyline treatment.

 

Major finding: In patients with vs without CLN, the headache frequency (P < .001), visual analog scale score (P < .001), and Migraine Disability Assessment score (P < .001) were significantly higher at baseline and not significantly different at 3 months after amitriptyline treatment; however, the magnitude of treatment response was significantly higher in patients with vs without CLN (P < .001).

 

Study details: This case-control study included age- and sex-matched patients with migraine with (n = 78) and without (n = 78) CLN on cranial computed tomography who received preventive treatment with amitriptyline.

 

Disclosures: The publication expenses were supported by the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. RK Garg reported receiving royalties for writing UpToDate articles and an honorarium for writing for MedLink Neurology.

 

Source: Sharma K et al. Does calcified neurocysticercosis affect migraine characteristics and treatment responsiveness? A case-control study. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2022 (Oct 10). Doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0335

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: The presence of seemingly inert calcified lesions of neurocysticercosis (CLN) influences the course of migraine by increasing headache frequency, pain severity, and migraine-associated disability; however, patients with CLN showed a better response to amitriptyline treatment.

 

Major finding: In patients with vs without CLN, the headache frequency (P < .001), visual analog scale score (P < .001), and Migraine Disability Assessment score (P < .001) were significantly higher at baseline and not significantly different at 3 months after amitriptyline treatment; however, the magnitude of treatment response was significantly higher in patients with vs without CLN (P < .001).

 

Study details: This case-control study included age- and sex-matched patients with migraine with (n = 78) and without (n = 78) CLN on cranial computed tomography who received preventive treatment with amitriptyline.

 

Disclosures: The publication expenses were supported by the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. RK Garg reported receiving royalties for writing UpToDate articles and an honorarium for writing for MedLink Neurology.

 

Source: Sharma K et al. Does calcified neurocysticercosis affect migraine characteristics and treatment responsiveness? A case-control study. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2022 (Oct 10). Doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0335

Key clinical point: The presence of seemingly inert calcified lesions of neurocysticercosis (CLN) influences the course of migraine by increasing headache frequency, pain severity, and migraine-associated disability; however, patients with CLN showed a better response to amitriptyline treatment.

 

Major finding: In patients with vs without CLN, the headache frequency (P < .001), visual analog scale score (P < .001), and Migraine Disability Assessment score (P < .001) were significantly higher at baseline and not significantly different at 3 months after amitriptyline treatment; however, the magnitude of treatment response was significantly higher in patients with vs without CLN (P < .001).

 

Study details: This case-control study included age- and sex-matched patients with migraine with (n = 78) and without (n = 78) CLN on cranial computed tomography who received preventive treatment with amitriptyline.

 

Disclosures: The publication expenses were supported by the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. RK Garg reported receiving royalties for writing UpToDate articles and an honorarium for writing for MedLink Neurology.

 

Source: Sharma K et al. Does calcified neurocysticercosis affect migraine characteristics and treatment responsiveness? A case-control study. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2022 (Oct 10). Doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0335

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Do autonomic symptoms influence headache frequency and treatment response in migraine?

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 15:09

Key clinical point: Autonomic symptoms were prevalent in patients with episodic or chronic migraine but demonstrated no significant correlation with headache frequency, treatment response, or reversion from chronic to episodic migraine.

 

Major finding: Overall, 60.5% of patients reported a Composite Autonomic Symptom Scale (COMPASS-31) score of 30. The median monthly headache days (P = .002) and Migraine Disability Assessment Score (P = .01) reduced significantly during the study period but change in the mean weighted COMPASS-31 score was not significant (P = .885), with no correlation observed between the COMPASS-31 score and monthly headache frequency or reversion from chronic to episodic migraine.

 

Study details: This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study including 43 patients with episodic or chronic migraine who completed 12 months of treatment and follow-up surveys.

 

Disclosures: This study did not report the source of funding. Four authors declared receiving funding, grants, or payment for developing educational presentations, serving on advisory boards, or being involved in clinical trials sponsored by various sources.

 

Source: Ray JC et al. Autonomic symptoms in migraine: Results of a prospective longitudinal study. Front Neurol. 2022;13:1036798 (Nov 3). Doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1036798

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Autonomic symptoms were prevalent in patients with episodic or chronic migraine but demonstrated no significant correlation with headache frequency, treatment response, or reversion from chronic to episodic migraine.

 

Major finding: Overall, 60.5% of patients reported a Composite Autonomic Symptom Scale (COMPASS-31) score of 30. The median monthly headache days (P = .002) and Migraine Disability Assessment Score (P = .01) reduced significantly during the study period but change in the mean weighted COMPASS-31 score was not significant (P = .885), with no correlation observed between the COMPASS-31 score and monthly headache frequency or reversion from chronic to episodic migraine.

 

Study details: This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study including 43 patients with episodic or chronic migraine who completed 12 months of treatment and follow-up surveys.

 

Disclosures: This study did not report the source of funding. Four authors declared receiving funding, grants, or payment for developing educational presentations, serving on advisory boards, or being involved in clinical trials sponsored by various sources.

 

Source: Ray JC et al. Autonomic symptoms in migraine: Results of a prospective longitudinal study. Front Neurol. 2022;13:1036798 (Nov 3). Doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1036798

Key clinical point: Autonomic symptoms were prevalent in patients with episodic or chronic migraine but demonstrated no significant correlation with headache frequency, treatment response, or reversion from chronic to episodic migraine.

 

Major finding: Overall, 60.5% of patients reported a Composite Autonomic Symptom Scale (COMPASS-31) score of 30. The median monthly headache days (P = .002) and Migraine Disability Assessment Score (P = .01) reduced significantly during the study period but change in the mean weighted COMPASS-31 score was not significant (P = .885), with no correlation observed between the COMPASS-31 score and monthly headache frequency or reversion from chronic to episodic migraine.

 

Study details: This was a prospective longitudinal cohort study including 43 patients with episodic or chronic migraine who completed 12 months of treatment and follow-up surveys.

 

Disclosures: This study did not report the source of funding. Four authors declared receiving funding, grants, or payment for developing educational presentations, serving on advisory boards, or being involved in clinical trials sponsored by various sources.

 

Source: Ray JC et al. Autonomic symptoms in migraine: Results of a prospective longitudinal study. Front Neurol. 2022;13:1036798 (Nov 3). Doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1036798

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Elevated peripheral inflammatory markers may help support migraine diagnosis

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 15:23

Key clinical point: During acute headaches, patients with migraine had elevated levels of peripheral inflammatory markers (PIM), specifically the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the neutrophil-to-monocyte ratio (NMR), which could fairly differentiate between the migraine and no headache groups.

 

Major finding: Patients with migraine had higher NLR, NMR, and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (all P < .001) compared with control individuals without headache and higher NMR (P < .001) and higher NLR (P = .051) compared with patients with non-migraine headaches during acute headache attacks. NLR and NMR could fairly differentiate between the migraine and no headache groups (NLR: area under the curve [AUC] 0.65; NMR: AUC 0.61; P < .001).

 

Study details: This was a retrospective analysis of 4005 patients with acute headache attack, including those with migraine (n = 1453) or non-migraine (n = 2552) headaches, and 88,586 control individuals without headache.

 

Disclosures: This study was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundataion of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Lee S-H et al. Role of peripheral inflammatory markers in patients with acute headache attack to differentiate between migraine and non-migraine headache. J Clin Med. 2022;11(21):6538 (Nov 3). Doi: 10.3390/jcm11216538

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: During acute headaches, patients with migraine had elevated levels of peripheral inflammatory markers (PIM), specifically the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the neutrophil-to-monocyte ratio (NMR), which could fairly differentiate between the migraine and no headache groups.

 

Major finding: Patients with migraine had higher NLR, NMR, and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (all P < .001) compared with control individuals without headache and higher NMR (P < .001) and higher NLR (P = .051) compared with patients with non-migraine headaches during acute headache attacks. NLR and NMR could fairly differentiate between the migraine and no headache groups (NLR: area under the curve [AUC] 0.65; NMR: AUC 0.61; P < .001).

 

Study details: This was a retrospective analysis of 4005 patients with acute headache attack, including those with migraine (n = 1453) or non-migraine (n = 2552) headaches, and 88,586 control individuals without headache.

 

Disclosures: This study was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundataion of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Lee S-H et al. Role of peripheral inflammatory markers in patients with acute headache attack to differentiate between migraine and non-migraine headache. J Clin Med. 2022;11(21):6538 (Nov 3). Doi: 10.3390/jcm11216538

Key clinical point: During acute headaches, patients with migraine had elevated levels of peripheral inflammatory markers (PIM), specifically the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the neutrophil-to-monocyte ratio (NMR), which could fairly differentiate between the migraine and no headache groups.

 

Major finding: Patients with migraine had higher NLR, NMR, and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (all P < .001) compared with control individuals without headache and higher NMR (P < .001) and higher NLR (P = .051) compared with patients with non-migraine headaches during acute headache attacks. NLR and NMR could fairly differentiate between the migraine and no headache groups (NLR: area under the curve [AUC] 0.65; NMR: AUC 0.61; P < .001).

 

Study details: This was a retrospective analysis of 4005 patients with acute headache attack, including those with migraine (n = 1453) or non-migraine (n = 2552) headaches, and 88,586 control individuals without headache.

 

Disclosures: This study was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundataion of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education and others. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Lee S-H et al. Role of peripheral inflammatory markers in patients with acute headache attack to differentiate between migraine and non-migraine headache. J Clin Med. 2022;11(21):6538 (Nov 3). Doi: 10.3390/jcm11216538

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Real-world predictors of response to anti-CGRP mAb in migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 15:48

Key clinical point: Migraine pain characteristics indicating peripheral or central sensitization may help predict 50% response to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in patients with high frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM).

 

Major finding: In HFEM, unilateral pain (UP) + unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (UA) positively predicted 50% response (odds ratio [OR] 4.23; P = .004), whereas in CM, UP (OR 1.46; P = .039), UA (OR 1.49; P = .026), UP+UA (OR 1.90; P = .012), and UP+allodynia (OR 1.71; P = .034) positively predicted 50% response and obesity negatively predicted 50% response (OR 0.21; P = .006).

 

Study details: This was a real-life prospective cohort study including 864 anti-CGRP mAb-naive patients with HFEM or CM and unresponsiveness or contraindications for or low tolerability to >3 migraine preventive medications, who were prescribed erenumab, galcanezumab, or fremanezumab for 24 weeks.

 

Disclosures: This study was partially supported by the Italian Ministry of Health IRCCS San Raffaele Roma. Several authors reported receiving personal compensation, travel grants, honoraria, or research support from various sources.

 

Source: Barbanti P et al. Predictors of response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: A 24-week, multicenter, prospective study on 864 migraine patients. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:138 (Nov 1). Doi: 10.1186/s10194-022-01498-6

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Migraine pain characteristics indicating peripheral or central sensitization may help predict 50% response to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in patients with high frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM).

 

Major finding: In HFEM, unilateral pain (UP) + unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (UA) positively predicted 50% response (odds ratio [OR] 4.23; P = .004), whereas in CM, UP (OR 1.46; P = .039), UA (OR 1.49; P = .026), UP+UA (OR 1.90; P = .012), and UP+allodynia (OR 1.71; P = .034) positively predicted 50% response and obesity negatively predicted 50% response (OR 0.21; P = .006).

 

Study details: This was a real-life prospective cohort study including 864 anti-CGRP mAb-naive patients with HFEM or CM and unresponsiveness or contraindications for or low tolerability to >3 migraine preventive medications, who were prescribed erenumab, galcanezumab, or fremanezumab for 24 weeks.

 

Disclosures: This study was partially supported by the Italian Ministry of Health IRCCS San Raffaele Roma. Several authors reported receiving personal compensation, travel grants, honoraria, or research support from various sources.

 

Source: Barbanti P et al. Predictors of response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: A 24-week, multicenter, prospective study on 864 migraine patients. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:138 (Nov 1). Doi: 10.1186/s10194-022-01498-6

Key clinical point: Migraine pain characteristics indicating peripheral or central sensitization may help predict 50% response to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in patients with high frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM).

 

Major finding: In HFEM, unilateral pain (UP) + unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (UA) positively predicted 50% response (odds ratio [OR] 4.23; P = .004), whereas in CM, UP (OR 1.46; P = .039), UA (OR 1.49; P = .026), UP+UA (OR 1.90; P = .012), and UP+allodynia (OR 1.71; P = .034) positively predicted 50% response and obesity negatively predicted 50% response (OR 0.21; P = .006).

 

Study details: This was a real-life prospective cohort study including 864 anti-CGRP mAb-naive patients with HFEM or CM and unresponsiveness or contraindications for or low tolerability to >3 migraine preventive medications, who were prescribed erenumab, galcanezumab, or fremanezumab for 24 weeks.

 

Disclosures: This study was partially supported by the Italian Ministry of Health IRCCS San Raffaele Roma. Several authors reported receiving personal compensation, travel grants, honoraria, or research support from various sources.

 

Source: Barbanti P et al. Predictors of response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: A 24-week, multicenter, prospective study on 864 migraine patients. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:138 (Nov 1). Doi: 10.1186/s10194-022-01498-6

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan nasal spray for acute treatment of pediatric migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 15:50

Key clinical point: Despite no significant improvement in pain-free status, high-dose zolmitriptan nasal spray (ZNS) provided clinically relevant improvements with a favorable safety profile in the acute treatment of migraine in patients aged 6-11 years.

 

Major finding: At 2 hours postdose, high-dose ZNS vs placebo led to a numerically higher proportion of patients achieving pain-free status (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95% CI 0.96-2.38) and a significantly higher proportion of patients reporting a headache response (OR 1.75; P = .009). No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.

 

Study details: This was a phase 3 crossover trial with an open-label extension including 186 patients aged 6-11 years with migraine with or without aura who were randomly assigned to receive ZNS (patients <50 kg: 2.5 or 1 mg; patients 50 kg: 5 or 2.5 mg) or placebo.

 

Disclosures: This trial was funded by AstraZeneca and conducted by Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, which also supported the study’s publication. Two authors declared being employees of Amneal or a company contracted by Amneal. Two authors reported ties with various other sources.

 

Source: Yonker ME et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine in patients aged 6 to 11 years, with an open-label extension. Headache. 2022;62(9):1207-1217 (Oct 26). Doi: 10.1111/head.14391

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Despite no significant improvement in pain-free status, high-dose zolmitriptan nasal spray (ZNS) provided clinically relevant improvements with a favorable safety profile in the acute treatment of migraine in patients aged 6-11 years.

 

Major finding: At 2 hours postdose, high-dose ZNS vs placebo led to a numerically higher proportion of patients achieving pain-free status (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95% CI 0.96-2.38) and a significantly higher proportion of patients reporting a headache response (OR 1.75; P = .009). No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.

 

Study details: This was a phase 3 crossover trial with an open-label extension including 186 patients aged 6-11 years with migraine with or without aura who were randomly assigned to receive ZNS (patients <50 kg: 2.5 or 1 mg; patients 50 kg: 5 or 2.5 mg) or placebo.

 

Disclosures: This trial was funded by AstraZeneca and conducted by Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, which also supported the study’s publication. Two authors declared being employees of Amneal or a company contracted by Amneal. Two authors reported ties with various other sources.

 

Source: Yonker ME et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine in patients aged 6 to 11 years, with an open-label extension. Headache. 2022;62(9):1207-1217 (Oct 26). Doi: 10.1111/head.14391

Key clinical point: Despite no significant improvement in pain-free status, high-dose zolmitriptan nasal spray (ZNS) provided clinically relevant improvements with a favorable safety profile in the acute treatment of migraine in patients aged 6-11 years.

 

Major finding: At 2 hours postdose, high-dose ZNS vs placebo led to a numerically higher proportion of patients achieving pain-free status (odds ratio [OR] 1.51; 95% CI 0.96-2.38) and a significantly higher proportion of patients reporting a headache response (OR 1.75; P = .009). No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.

 

Study details: This was a phase 3 crossover trial with an open-label extension including 186 patients aged 6-11 years with migraine with or without aura who were randomly assigned to receive ZNS (patients <50 kg: 2.5 or 1 mg; patients 50 kg: 5 or 2.5 mg) or placebo.

 

Disclosures: This trial was funded by AstraZeneca and conducted by Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, which also supported the study’s publication. Two authors declared being employees of Amneal or a company contracted by Amneal. Two authors reported ties with various other sources.

 

Source: Yonker ME et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine in patients aged 6 to 11 years, with an open-label extension. Headache. 2022;62(9):1207-1217 (Oct 26). Doi: 10.1111/head.14391

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Zavegepant nasal spray effective and safe for acute treatment of migraine

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 12/28/2022 - 16:00

Key clinical point: A single dose of zavegepant nasal spray (20 or 10 mg) was effective for the acute treatment of migraine with a favorable safety profile.

 

Major finding: At 2 hours, a significantly higher proportion of patients treated with 20 mg or 10 mg zavegepant vs placebo reported freedom from pain (23.1% and 22.5% vs 15.5%; P = .0055 and .0113, respectively) and most bothersome symptoms (42.5% and 41.9% vs 33.7%; P = .0094 and .0155, respectively), with adverse events being mostly mild or moderate and no indications for hepatotoxicity.

 

Study details: This phase 2/3 trial included 1673 patients with migraine with or without aura who were randomly assigned to receive zavegepant (5, 10, 20 mg) or placebo to treat a single migraine attack of moderate-to-severe pain intensity.

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Seven authors declared being employees and holding stock or stock options in Biohaven Pharmaceuticals. RB Lipton declared holding stock options in Biohaven Pharmaceuticals and Manistee and reported ties with various other sources.

 

Source: Croop R et al. Zavegepant nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine: A phase 2/3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial. Headache. 2022;62(9):1153-1163 (Oct 14). Doi: 10.1111/head.14389

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: A single dose of zavegepant nasal spray (20 or 10 mg) was effective for the acute treatment of migraine with a favorable safety profile.

 

Major finding: At 2 hours, a significantly higher proportion of patients treated with 20 mg or 10 mg zavegepant vs placebo reported freedom from pain (23.1% and 22.5% vs 15.5%; P = .0055 and .0113, respectively) and most bothersome symptoms (42.5% and 41.9% vs 33.7%; P = .0094 and .0155, respectively), with adverse events being mostly mild or moderate and no indications for hepatotoxicity.

 

Study details: This phase 2/3 trial included 1673 patients with migraine with or without aura who were randomly assigned to receive zavegepant (5, 10, 20 mg) or placebo to treat a single migraine attack of moderate-to-severe pain intensity.

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Seven authors declared being employees and holding stock or stock options in Biohaven Pharmaceuticals. RB Lipton declared holding stock options in Biohaven Pharmaceuticals and Manistee and reported ties with various other sources.

 

Source: Croop R et al. Zavegepant nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine: A phase 2/3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial. Headache. 2022;62(9):1153-1163 (Oct 14). Doi: 10.1111/head.14389

Key clinical point: A single dose of zavegepant nasal spray (20 or 10 mg) was effective for the acute treatment of migraine with a favorable safety profile.

 

Major finding: At 2 hours, a significantly higher proportion of patients treated with 20 mg or 10 mg zavegepant vs placebo reported freedom from pain (23.1% and 22.5% vs 15.5%; P = .0055 and .0113, respectively) and most bothersome symptoms (42.5% and 41.9% vs 33.7%; P = .0094 and .0155, respectively), with adverse events being mostly mild or moderate and no indications for hepatotoxicity.

 

Study details: This phase 2/3 trial included 1673 patients with migraine with or without aura who were randomly assigned to receive zavegepant (5, 10, 20 mg) or placebo to treat a single migraine attack of moderate-to-severe pain intensity.

 

Disclosures: This study was funded by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Seven authors declared being employees and holding stock or stock options in Biohaven Pharmaceuticals. RB Lipton declared holding stock options in Biohaven Pharmaceuticals and Manistee and reported ties with various other sources.

 

Source: Croop R et al. Zavegepant nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine: A phase 2/3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial. Headache. 2022;62(9):1153-1163 (Oct 14). Doi: 10.1111/head.14389

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Migraine, December 2022
Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Un-Gate On Date
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Thu, 02/24/2022 - 17:15
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article