MAP0004, orally inhaled DHE: a randomized, controlled study in the acute treatment of migraine

(Headache 2011;51:507‐517) Objective.— To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of MAP0004 compared with placebo for a single migraine in adult migraineurs: The FREEDOM‐301 Study. Background.— Acute treatment of migraine remains a clinical challenge despite the availability of triptans and other agents. Injectable dihydroergotamine, although effective, is considered invasive and inconvenient, and intranasal dihydroergotamine is associated with inconsistent systemic dosage delivery. MAP0004 is an orally inhaled formulation of dihydroergotamine delivered to the systemic circulation. In a phase 2 study, MAP0004 provided significant early onset of pain relief (10 minutes, P < .05) and sustained pain relief for up to 48 hours with a favorable adverse event profile. Methods.— A phase 3, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, single‐attack, outpatient study of MAP0004, an inhaled dihydroergotamine was conducted at 102 sites in 903 adults with a history of episodic migraine. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive MAP0004 (0.63 mg emitted dose; 1.0 mg nominal dose) or placebo, administered after onset of a migraine headache with moderate to severe pain. The co‐primary endpoints were patient‐assessed pain relief and absence of photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea at 2 hours after treatment. Results.— A total of 903 patients (450 active, 453 placebo) were randomized, and 792 (395 active, 397 placebo) experienced a qualifying migraine. MAP0004 was superior to placebo in all 4 co‐primary endpoints: pain relief (58.7% vs 34.5%, P < .0001), phonophobia free (52.9% vs 33.8%, P < .0001), photophobia free (46.6% vs 27.2%, P < .0001), and nausea free (67.1% vs 58.7%, P = .0210). Additionally, significantly more patients were pain‐free at 2 hours following treatment with MAP0004 than with placebo (28.4% vs 10.1%, P < .0001). MAP0004 was well tolerated; no drug‐related serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions.— In this study, MAP0004 was effective and well tolerated for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura, providing statistically significant pain relief and freedom from photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea in adults with migraine compared with placebo.     

Effectiveness of sumatriptan in reducing productivity loss due to migraine: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of sumatriptan on migraine-related workplace productivity loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, adult migraineurs self-injected 6 mg of sumatriptan or matching placebo to treat a moderate or severe migraine within the first 4 hours of a minimum of an 8-hour work shift. Outcome measures included productivity loss and number of patients returning to normal work performance 2 hours after injection and across the work shift, time to return to normal work performance, and time to headache relief. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients underwent screening, 140 (safety population) of whom returned for clinic treatment. Of these 140 patients, 119 received migraine treatment in the workplace (intent-to-treat population), 116 of whom comprised the study population. Of these 116 patients, 76 self-administered sumatriptan, and 40 self-administered placebo. Sumatriptan treatment tended to reduce median productivity loss 2 hours after injection compared with placebo (25.2 vs 29.9 minutes, respectively; P = .14). Significant reductions in productivity loss were obtained across the work shift after sumatriptan treatment compared with placebo (36.8 vs 72.6 minutes, respectively; P = .001). Significantly more sumatriptan-treated patients vs placebo-treated patients experienced shorter return to normal work performance at 2 hours (53/76 [70%] vs 12/40 [30%], respectively) and across the work shift (64/76 [84%] vs 23/40 [58%], respectively; P < .001). Significantly more sumatriptan-treated patients experienced headache relief 1 hour after injection compared with placebo-treated patients (48/76 [63%] vs 13/40 [33%], respectively; P = .004). CONCLUSION: Across an 8-hour work shift, sumatriptan was superior to placebo in reducing productivity loss due to migraine.     

Rizatriptan for treatment of acute migraine in patients taking topiramate for migraine prophylaxis

Objective.— To assess efficacy and tolerability of rizatriptan orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) for treatment of acute migraine in patients using topiramate for migraine prophylaxis. Background.— There are limited data from prospective controlled trials demonstrating the benefit of triptans in patients who experience migraine attacks while taking prophylactic medication. Methods.— This was a worldwide, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, multiple‐attack study in adults with a >1‐year history of migraine taking a stable dose of topiramate for migraine prophylaxis and experiencing ≥2 moderate/severe attacks per month. Participants treated 3 moderate/severe attacks in crossover fashion (2 with rizatriptan 10‐mg ODT, 1 with placebo) following random assignment to 1 of 3 treatment sequences. The primary end point was 2‐hour pain relief. Results.— Two‐hour pain relief was significantly greater with rizatriptan compared with placebo (55.0% vs 17.4%, P < .001). Response rates also favored rizatriptan for sustained pain relief from 2‐24 hours (32.6% vs 11.1%, P < .001), 2‐hour pain freedom (36.0% vs 6.5%, P < .001), normal functional ability at 2 hours (42.2% vs 12.7%, P < .001), and overall treatment satisfaction at 24 hours (60.8% vs 33.6%, P < .001). Few participants reported adverse experiences (16 [15.8%] with rizatriptan, 3 [3.2%] with placebo); none were serious. Conclusion.— Rizatriptan 10‐mg ODT was superior to placebo at all pain end points for treatment of acute migraine in patients using topiramate for migraine prophylaxis. Rizatriptan was generally well tolerated in this population. These results are comparable with those from clinical trials in patients not using prophylaxis, suggesting that the use of topiramate does not affect the efficacy or tolerability of rizatriptan for acute migraine treatment.     

Efficacy and safety of MAP0004, orally inhaled DHE in treating migraines with and without allodynia

Background.— Central sensitization develops once migraine attacks become established and can be clinically detected by the development of cutaneous allodynia. The efficacy of triptans for migraine resolution has been shown to be markedly reduced when administered in patients with established cutaneous allodynia. Objective.— The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MAP0004, a novel, orally inhaled, form of dihydroergotamine, in patients with and without cutaneous allodynia at the time of treatment. Methods.— This evaluation was a post hoc subanalysis of a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, 2‐arm, phase 3, multicenter study. The presence or absence of baseline cutaneous allodynia at the time of drug administration was based on the response to a standard questionnaire. Treatment efficacy at 2 hours posttreatment was compared in patients with and without baseline allodynia. Results.— At the time of treatment, allodynia was present in 216 patients treated with MAP0004 and 202 patients treated with placebo. MAP0004 treatment efficacy was superior to placebo, as measured by 2‐hour pain relief for patients with and without allodynia (P < .0001) and as measured by 2‐hour pain freedom for patients with (P < .0001) and without (P < .0002) allodynia. No significant within‐treatment differences after treatment with MAP0004 in patients with and without allodynia at baseline were observed. Patients were more likely to be allodynia‐free after treatment with MAP0004 compared with placebo (73% vs 66%, P = .0013). Furthermore, treatment with MAP0004 prevented the development of allodynia in patients not experiencing allodynia at baseline (P = .0057). MAP0004 was generally well tolerated. Conclusions.— This post hoc subanalysis shows that MAP0004 was similarly effective in patients whether or not allodynia was present at treatment baseline. Patients were also more likely to be allodynia‐free following treatment of a migraine with MAP0004.     

A Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of MAP0004 in Adult Patients With Migraine

Background.— Dihydroergotamine mesylate (DHE) is an effective treatment for acute migraine, but its effective use is often limited by the inconvenience and inconsistency of intranasal, intramuscular, or subcutaneous routes of administration. A new formulation of DHE delivered through the lungs by the novel Tempo^® inhaler is being developed and is designed to offer fast onset, consistent dosing, and sustained response. Objective.— This proof of principle and dose setting study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of inhaled DHE delivered by a breath‐synchronized, plume‐controlled inhaler (Tempo) in adult migraineurs. Methods.— This was a randomized, double blind, placebo‐controlled, 2‐period study conducted at 9 headache centers in the United States. Adult men and women with a documented history of acute migraine for at least 12 months, with an average of 2 to 8 attacks per month in the preceding 6 months were treated with MAP0004 0.5 or 1.0 mg systemic equivalent dose (1.0 or 2.0 mg nominal dose) or matching placebo during Treatment Period 1 (TP1). Patients who responded to treatment during TP1 were re‐randomized in Treatment Period 2 (TP2) to receive MAP0004 0.25 mg systemic equivalent dose or placebo. Results.— Of 86 patients randomized to treatment, 69 were included in the As‐Treated population in TP1. Pain relief at 2 hours was greater for MAP0004 0.5 mg (72%, P = .019) and 1.0 mg (65%, P = .071) than for placebo (33%). Pain relief at 10 (32%), 15 (46%), and 30 (55%) minutes was significantly (P < .05) greater with MAP0004 0.5 mg than with placebo (0%, 7% and 14%, respectively). Pain‐free at 2 hours was significantly greater with MAP0004 0.5 mg (44%, P = .015) and 1.0 mg (35%, P = .050) than with placebo (7%). Total migraine relief at 2 hours was significantly (P = .019) greater with MAP0004 0.5 mg (72%) than with placebo (33%). Sustained pain relief and pain‐free rates exhibited a therapeutic gain of 30% (P = .066) and 31% (P = .037) at 24 hours and 28% (P = .096) and 30% (P = .057) at 48 hours with MAP0004 0.5 mg vs placebo. MAP0004 was well tolerated with no serious or severe adverse events. Dysgeusia was reported as treatment‐related in 2 patients on placebo, 0 patients on MAP0004 0.5 mg, and 6 patients on MAP0004 1.0 mg. No clinically relevant changes were noted in spirometry, vital signs, electrocardiogram, or clinical laboratory values. No significant differences between treatments were observed in TP2. Conclusions.— In this study MAP0004 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg were well tolerated and effective at delivering clinically significant, rapid, and sustained pain relief in adult migraine patients. No additional benefit was observed with the higher dose, thus the MAP0004 0.5 mg systemic equivalent dose has been selected as the dose for further clinical study.     

Almotriptan Increases Pain-Free Status in Patients With Acute Migraine Treated in Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Objectives.—Evaluate the efficacy of a single oral dose of almotriptan in achieving pain-free status during treatment of acute migraine attacks.
Methods.—This pooled analysis (N=1321) used data from two randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trials (studies A and B) to determine the proportion of patients with migraine achieving pain-free status 2 hours after a single oral dose of study medication (almotriptan or placebo). Pain was assessed using a 4-point integer scale (0=no headache, 3=severe headache), and recorded in a patient self-assessment booklet.
Results.—The proportion of patients pain-free at 2 hours after study medication was significantly greater with almotriptan 6.25 mg (both studies P ≤.002) and almotriptan 12.5 mg (both studies P ≤.001) than with placebo. In study A, 11.6% of patients taking almotriptan 12.5 mg versus 2.5% of patients receiving placebo were pain-free at 1 hour ( P =.016). At 1.5 hours, 26.8% of patients taking almotriptan 12.5 mg versus 8.8% receiving placebo ( P =.001) were pain-free, and at 2 hours, 38.4% on almotriptan versus 11.3% on placebo were pain-free ( P <.001). In study B, 23.8% of patients taking almotriptan 12.5 mg were free from pain at 1.5 hours versus 10.2% receiving placebo ( P <.001). At 2 hours, 39.2% taking almotriptan 12.5 mg versus 15.3% receiving placebo were pain-free ( P <.001). Increases in pain-free status with almotriptan generally occurred in a dose-dependent manner.
Conclusion.—Compared with placebo, almotriptan 12.5 mg significantly increases the proportion of patients who are pain-free by as early as 1 hour, and consistently by 1.5 hours, after a single dose.     

2000 Wolfe Award. Sumatriptan for the range of headaches in migraine sufferers: results of the Spectrum Study

BACKGROUND: Migraineurs experience a spectrum of headaches: migraine, migrainous, and episodic tension-type as defined by the International Headache Society (IHS). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of sumatriptan, 50-mg tablets, in treating the spectrum of headaches in IHS-diagnosed migraineurs. DESIGN/METHODS: Migraineurs with severe disability (Headache Impact Questionnaire score 250 or greater) were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Patients treated up to 10 headaches with sumatriptan, 50 mg, or placebo (4:1). Headache features, recorded prior to treatment, were used to classify each headache using IHS criteria. Headache response (moderate or severe pain reduced to mild or no pain) and pain-free response were recorded at 2 and 4 hours postdose (primary endpoint). Because patients treated multiple attacks, statistical methods controlling for within-subject correlation were used. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine migraineurs treated 1576 moderate or severe headaches: migraine (n = 1110), migrainous (n = 103), and tension-type (n = 363). Sumatriptan was superior to placebo for headache response 4 hours postdose (primary endpoint) across all headache types (migraine, 66% versus 48%; P<.001; migrainous, 71% versus 39%; P<.01; tension-type, 78% versus 50%, P<.001). Sumatriptan was also superior to placebo for pain-free response 4 hours postdose for migraine (41% versus 24%, P<.001) and tension-type headaches (56% versus 36%, P =.001). Sumatriptan provided superior pain-free response 2 hours postdose for migraine (18% versus 7%, P<.0001) and tension-type headache (28% versus 14%, P =.0005) compared with placebo. CONCLUSION: Sumatriptan, 50-mg tablets, are effective for the full spectrum of headaches experienced by patients with disabling migraine due to a sumatriptan-responsive mechanism.     

Assessing the ability of topiramate to improve the daily activities of patients with migraine

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of topiramate on the daily activities of patients with migraine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial Initiated on March 1, 2001, and completed on April 4, 2002. Patient-reported data from the Migraine Specific Questionnaire (MSQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) were collected at baseline and at weeks 8, 16, and 26 from an intent-to-treat population receiving either topiramate, 50, 100, or 200 mg/d, or placebo. Two activity-related MSQ domains (role restrictive [MSQ-RR] and role prevention [MSQ-RP]) and 2 activity-related SF-36 domains (role physical [SF36-RP] and vitality [SF36-VT]) were the prospectively designated secondary outcome measures. The changes in MSQ and SF-36 scores for each treatment group were calculated by measuring the area under the curve from week 8 (the beginning of the maintenance period) through week 26 of the double-blind phase, relative to the prospective baseline. A mixed-effect piecewise linear regression model was used to estimate average domain score over time. RESULTS: Patients receiving topiramate, 100 or 200 mg/d, had significantly reduced mean monthly (28-day) migraine frequency (P = .008 and P < .001, respectively) compared with placebo, but not patients receiving topiramate, 50 mg/d (P = .48). Topiramate significantly improved mean MSQ-RR domain scores (50 mg/d [P = .02], 100 mg/d [P< .001], and 200 mg/d [P < .001]) and mean MSQ-RP domain scores (50 mg/d [P = .007], 100 mg/d [P = .001], and 200 mg/d [P= .002]) vs placebo. Topiramate, 100 and 200 mg/d, significantly improved mean SF36-RP domain scores vs placebo (P = .02). Topiramate (all doses) improved SF36-VT domain scores, although not significantly vs placebo. Changes in prospectively designated domain scores were significantly correlated with changes in mean monthly migraine frequency (P < or = .001 [MSQ domains], P < or = .002 [SF-36 domains]). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported migraine-specific outcomes measured by the MSQ-RR and MSQ-RP domains improved significantly for those receiving topiramate (all doses) vs placebo. The SF36-RP domain scores improved significantly for patients receiving 100 or 200 mg/d of topiramate. Improvements in all 4 prospectively selected MSQ and SF-36 domains were significantly correlated with decreases in mean monthly migraine frequency.     

Service census caps and unit-based admissions: resident workload, conference attendance, duty hour compliance, and patient safety

ObjectiveTo examine the effect of census caps and unit-based admissions on resident workload, conference attendance, duty hour compliance, and patient safety.Participants and MethodsWe implemented a census cap of 14 patients on 6 Mayo Clinic internal medicine resident hospital services and a unit-based admissions process in which patients and care teams were consolidated within hospital units. All 280 residents and 15,926 patient admissions to resident and nonresident services 1 year before the intervention (September 1, 2006, through August 31, 2007) and 1 year after the intervention (May 1, 2008, through April 30, 2009) were included. Residents' workload, conference attendance, and duty hours were tracked electronically. Patient safety variables including Rapid Response Team and cardiopulmonary resuscitation events, intensive care unit transfers, Patient Safety Indicators, and 30-day readmissions were compared preintervention and postintervention.ResultsAfter the intervention, residents' mean (SE) ratings of workload appropriateness improved (3.10 [0.08] vs 3.87 [0.08] on a 5-point scale; P<.001), as did conference attendance (1523 [56. 8%] vs 1700 [63.5%] conferences attended; P<.001). Duty hour violations for working more than 30 consecutive hours and not having 10 hours off between duty periods decreased from 77 of 9490 possible violations (0.81%) to 27 (0.28%) and from 70 (0.74%) to 14 (0.15%) violations, respectively (both, P<.001). Thirty-day readmissions to resident services decreased (1010 [18.14%] vs 682 [15. 37%]; P<.001). All other patient safety measures remained unchanged. After adjustment for illness severity, there were no significant differences in patient outcomes between resident and nonresident services.ConclusionCensus caps and unit-based admissions were associated with improvements in resident workload, conference attendance, duty hour compliance, and readmission rates while patient outcomes were maintained.     

Eptinezumab treatment initiated during a migraine attack is associated with meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcome measures: secondary results from the randomized controlled RELIEF study

BackgroundDemonstrating therapeutic value from the patient perspective is important in patient-centered migraine management. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of eptinezumab, a preventive migraine treatment, on patient-reported headache impact, acute medication optimization, and perception of disease change when initiated during a migraine attack.MethodsRELIEF was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between 2019 and 2020 in adults with ≥1-year history of migraine and 4–15 migraine days per month in the 3 months prior to screening. Patients were randomized (1:1) to a 30-min infusion of eptinezumab 100 mg or placebo within 1–6 h of a qualifying migraine attack onset. The 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and 6-item Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire (mTOQ-6) were administered at baseline and week 4, and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at week 4. A post hoc analysis of these measures was conducted in patients who reported headache pain freedom at 2 h after infusion start.ResultsOf 480 patients enrolled and treated, 476 completed the study and are included in this analysis. Mean baseline HIT-6 total scores indicated severe headache impact (eptinezumab, 65.1; placebo, 64.8). At week 4, the eptinezumab-treated group demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in HIT-6 total score compared with placebo (mean change from baseline: eptinezumab, − 8.7; placebo, − 4.5; mean [95% CI] difference from placebo: − 4.2 [− 5.75, − 2.63], P < .0001), with greater reductions in each item score vs placebo (P < .001 all comparisons). Change in HIT-6 total score in the subgroup with 2-h headache pain freedom was − 13.8 for the eptinezumab group compared with − 4.9 for the placebo group. mTOQ-6 total score mean change from baseline favored eptinezumab (change, 2.1) compared with placebo (1.2; mean [95% CI] difference: 0.9 [0.3, 1.5], P < .01). More eptinezumab-treated patients rated PGIC as much or very much improved than placebo patients (59.3% vs 25.9%).ConclusionsWhen administered during a migraine attack, eptinezumab significantly improved patient-reported outcomes after 4 weeks compared with placebo, with particularly pronounced effects in patients reporting headache pain freedom at 2 h after infusion start.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT04152083","term_id":"NCT04152083"}}NCT04152083. November 5, 2019.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-021-01376-7.     

Sumatriptan-naproxen and butalbital: a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study

Objectives.— The primary objective was to compare the efficacy of a sumatriptan and naproxen combination medication (SumaRT/Nap—85 mg sumatriptan and 500 mg naproxen sodium), a butalbital‐containing combination medication (BCM—50 mg butalbital, 325 mg acetaminophen, 40 mg caffeine), and placebo when used to treat moderate to severe migraine headache pain in subjects who used BCMs in the past. Background.— Despite the lack of Food and Drug Administration approval and the absence of placebo‐controlled trials to demonstrate efficacy, butalbital‐containing medications are among the most commonly prescribed acute migraine treatments in the United States. Butalbital‐containing medications are associated with serious and undesirable side effects, and have been linked to the chronification of migraine and development of medication‐overuse headaches. This study compares the relative efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a fixed dose SumaRT/Nap versus a BCM and placebo. Methods.— Enrolled subjects were required to have treated at least 1 migraine with a butalbital medication in the past. Enrolled subjects treated 3 moderate to severe migraines using each of the 3 study treatments once in a randomized sequence. The primary endpoint compared SumaRT/Nap versus BCM for sustained pain freedom at 2‐24 hours without the use of any rescue medication. This study combines data from 2 identical outpatient, randomized, multicenter, double‐blind, double‐dummy, 3 attack crossover studies in adult migraineurs (International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition). Results.— A total of 442 subjects treated at least 1 attack with study medication. The majority of the treated subjects were female (88%) with a mean age 43 years, who reported that their migraines had a severe impact on their lives (78% with Headache Impact Test‐6 of >59). At screening, 88% of subjects reported current butalbital use; 68% had used butalbital for more than 6 weeks; and 82% reported satisfaction with butalbital. Across treatment groups, 28‐29% of subjects took study medication within 15 minutes of migraine onset, 34‐37% of subjects took study medication >15 minutes to 2 hours after onset, and 32‐36% of subjects took study medication more than 2 hours after onset. This study did not detect a difference at the nominal 0.05 level in percent sustained pain‐free between SumaRT/Nap (8%), BCM (6%), and placebo (3%). SumaRT/Nap was superior to BCM for pain free at 2, 4, 6, 8, 24, 48 hours (P ≤ .044); pain relief (mild or no pain) at 2, 4, 6, 8, 24, 48 hours (P ≤ .01); sustained pain relief 2‐24 hours (P < .001); migraine free (pain free with no nausea, photophobia, or phonophobia) at 4, 6, 8, 24, 48 hours (P ≤ .046); and complete symptom free (migraine free with no neck/sinus pain) at 4, 6, 8, 48 hours (P ≤ .031). Adverse event incidence was similar for all treatments (10%, 12%, and 9% for placebo, SumaRT/Nap, and BCM, respectively). Nausea was the most frequent adverse event (2%, 2%, and <1% for placebo, SumaRT/Nap, and BCM, respectively). Five serious adverse events were reported by 3 subjects: viral meningitis and colon neoplasm (placebo); chest pain and hypertension 17 days postdose (SumaRT/Nap); and breast cancer (BCM). Investigators judged no serious adverse events related to study medication. Conclusions.— This study primarily included subjects whose migraines significantly impacted their lives. Before the study, these subjects used butalbital‐containing medications as part of their current migraine treatment regimen and were satisfied with it, suggesting they were butalbital responders who had found a workable treatment strategy for themselves. When treated with SumaRT/Nap versus BCM in this study, however, a significant proportion of subjects reported better treatment outcomes for themselves for both migraine pain and associated symptoms. Use of SumaRT/Nap was also associated with less rescue medication use and a longer time before use of rescue medication compared with both BCM and placebo.     

Physician Identification Badges: A Multispecialty Quality Improvement Study to Address Professional Misidentification and Bias

ObjectiveTo evaluate whether providing resident physicians with “DOCTOR” role identification badges would impact perceptions of bias in the workforce and alter misidentification rates.Participants and MethodsBetween October 2019 and December 2019, we surveyed 341 resident physicians in the anesthesiology, dermatology, internal medicine, neurologic surgery, otorhinolaryngology, and urology departments at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, before and after an 8-week intervention of providing “DOCTOR” role identification badges. Differences between paired preintervention and postintervention survey answers were measured, with a focus on the frequency of experiencing perceived bias and role misidentification (significance level, α=.01). Free-text comments were also compared.ResultsOf the 159 residents who returned both the before and after surveys (survey response rate, 46.6% [159 of 341]), 128 (80.5%) wore the “DOCTOR” badge. After the intervention, residents who wore the badges were statistically significantly less likely to report role misidentification at least once a week from patients, nonphysician team members, and other physicians (50.8% [65] preintervention vs 10.2% [13] postintervention; 35.9% [46] vs 8.6% [11]; 18.0% [23] vs 3.9% [5], respectively; all P<.001). The 66 female residents reported statistically significantly fewer episodes of gender bias (65.2% [43] vs 31.8% [21]; P<.001). The 13 residents who identified as underrepresented in medicine reported statistically significantly less misidentification from patients (84.6% [11] vs 23.1% [3]; P=.008); although not a statistically significant difference, the 13 residents identifying as underrepresented in medicine also reported less misidentification with nonphysician team members (46.2% [6] vs 15.4% [2]; P=.13).ConclusionResidents reported decreased role misidentification after use of a role identification badge, most prominently improved among women. Decreasing workplace bias is essential in efforts to improve both diversity and inclusion efforts in training programs.     

Women Are Less Likely to Survive AMI Presenting With Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest: A Nationwide Study

ObjectiveTo assess the impact of patient’s sex on outcomes and management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients presenting with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA).Patients and MethodsWe conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study in AMI patients admitted with OHCA between 2010 and 2017 from the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project (MINAP) registry. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the role of sex as a predictor of clinical outcomes and treatment strategy.ResultsOf 16,278 patients, women constituted almost one-quarter of the population (n=3710 [22.7%]). Women were older (median age 69 [IQR, 57-79] years vs 63 [IQR, 54-72] years, P<.001), experienced longer call-to-hospital-arrival time (median, 1.2 hours vs 1.1 hours; P=.008), were less likely to present with shockable rhythm (86.8% vs 91.5%, P<.001), and less likely to receive dual antiplatelet therapy (73.8% vs 78.6%, P<.001), beta blockers (64.7% vs 72.3%, P<.001), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (49.0% vs 55.3%, P<.001), coronary angiography (73.7% vs 83.3%, P<.001), and percutaneous coronary intervention (37.5% vs. 40.7%, p 0.004). After adjusting for patient characteristics and management, women had significantly higher odds of in-hospital death compared with men (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5) and lower odds of receiving coronary angiography (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.75) and coronary artery bypass graft (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.40).ConclusionWomen were less likely to survive following OHCA secondary to AMI. Hospital protocols that minimize physician bias and improve women-physician communication are needed to close this gap.     

Mild traumatic brain injury affects the features of migraine

BackgroundHeadache is one of the most common symptoms after concussion, and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is a risk factor for chronic migraine (CM). However, there remains a paucity of data regarding the impact of mTBI on migraine-related symptoms and clinical course.MethodsOf 2161 migraine patients who participated in the American Registry for Migraine Research between February 2016 and March 2020, 1098 completed questions assessing history of TBI (50.8%). Forty-four patients reported a history of moderate to severe TBI, 413 patients reported a history of mTBI. Patients’ demographics, headache symptoms and triggers, history of physical abuse, allodynia symptoms (ASC-12), migraine disability (MIDAS), depression (PHQ-2), and anxiety (GAD-7) were compared between migraine groups with (n = 413) and without (n = 641) a history of mTBI. Either the chi-square-test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate, was used for the analyses of categorical variables. The Mann-Whitney test was used for the analyses of continuous variables. Logistic regression models were used to compare variables of interest while adjusting for age, gender, and CM.ResultsA significantly higher proportion of patients with mTBI had CM (74.3% [307/413] vs. 65.8% [422/641], P = 0.004), had never been married or were divorced (36.6% [147/402] vs. 29.4% [187/636], P = 0.007), self-reported a history of physical abuse (24.3% [84/345] vs. 14.3% [70/491], P <  0.001), had mild to severe anxiety (50.5% [205/406] vs. 41.0% [258/630], P = 0.003), had headache-related vertigo (23.0% [95/413] vs. 15.9% [102/640], P = 0.009), and difficulty finding words (43.0% [174/405] vs. 32.9% [208/633], P <  0.001) in more than half their attacks, and headaches triggered by lack of sleep (39.4% [155/393] vs. 32.6% [198/607], P = 0.018) and reading (6.6% [26/393] vs. 3.0% [18/607], P = 0.016), compared to patients without mTBI. Patients with mTBI had significantly greater ASC-12 scores (median [interquartile range]; 5 [1–9] vs. 4 [1–7], P < 0.001), MIDAS scores (42 [18–85] vs. 34.5 [15–72], P = 0.034), and PHQ-2 scores (1 [0–2] vs. 1 [0–2], P = 0.012).ConclusionPatients with a history of mTBI are more likely to have a self-reported a history of physical abuse, vertigo, and allodynia during headache attacks, headaches triggered by lack of sleep and reading, greater headache burden and headache disability, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. This study suggests that a history of mTBI is associated with the phenotype, burden, clinical course, and associated comorbid diseases in patients with migraine, and highlights the importance of inquiring about a lifetime history of mTBI in patients being evaluated for migraine.     

Efficacy and tolerability of almotriptan in adolescents: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Objectives.— To assess the efficacy and safety of almotriptan 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, and 25 mg vs placebo for acute migraine treatment in adolescents. Patients and Methods.— In this double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, multicenter trial, 866 patients aged 12 to 17 years with a >1 year history of migraine (per International Headache Society criteria) were randomized to treat one migraine headache with almotriptan 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, 25 mg, or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was headache pain relief 2 hours after dosing, adjusted for baseline severity, with absence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia 2 hours after dosing as coprimary endpoints. Results.— The 2‐hour pain‐relief rate was significantly higher with almotriptan 25 mg compared with placebo (66.7% vs 55.3%; P = .022). The incidence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia at 2 hours (adjusted for baseline pain intensity) for the almotriptan 25 mg and placebo groups was not significantly different. The 2‐hour pain‐relief rates (unadjusted) were significantly higher with almotriptan 6.25 mg (71.8%), 12.5 mg (72.9%), and 25 mg (66.7%) than with placebo (55.3%; P = .001, P < .001, and P = .028, respectively). Rates for sustained pain relief also were significantly greater with almotriptan 6.25 mg (67.2%), 12.5 mg (66.9%), and 25 mg (64.5%) than with placebo group (52.4%), P < .01 for the 6.25‐ and 12.5‐mg doses and P < .05 for the 25‐mg dose. Age group subanalysis demonstrated significantly greater 2‐hour pain‐relief rates with all 3 doses of almotriptan compared with placebo for patients aged 15 to 17 years, a significantly lower incidence of photophobia and phonophobia at 2 hours with almotriptan 12.5 mg compared with placebo for patients aged 15 to 17 years, and a significantly lower incidence of photophobia with almotriptan 12.5 mg compared with placebo for those aged 12 to 14 years. Almotriptan treatment was well tolerated, with the most common adverse events (>2%) of nausea, dizziness, and somnolence. Conclusions.— Oral almotriptan was efficacious for relieving migraine headache pain in adolescents, with the 12.5‐mg dose associated with the most favorable efficacy profile with respect to relieving headache pain and associated symptoms of migraine (photophobia and phonophobia). Almotriptan treatment was well tolerated in this adolescent population.     

Association between transient acute kidney injury and morbidity and mortality after lung transplantation: A retrospective cohort study

Purpose

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common occurrence after lung transplantation (LTx). Whether transient AKI or early recovery is associated with improved outcome is uncertain. Our aim was to describe the incidence, factors, and outcomes associated with transient AKI after LTx.

Materials and Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult recipients of LTx at the University of Alberta between 1990 and 2011. Our primary outcome transient AKI was defined as return of serum creatinine below Kidney Disease–Improving Global Outcome AKI stage I within 7 days after LTx. Secondary outcomes included occurrence of postoperative complications, mortality, and long-term kidney function.

Results

Of 445 LTx patients enrolled, AKI occurred in 306 (68.8%) within the first week after LTx. Of these, transient AKI (or early recovery) occurred in 157 (51.3%). Transient AKI was associated with fewer complications including tracheostomy (17.2% vs 38.3%; P < .001), reintubation (16.4% vs 41.9%; P < .001), decreased duration of mechanical ventilation (median [interquartile range], 69 [41-142] vs 189 [63-403] hours; P < .001), and lower rates of chronic kidney disease at 3 months (28.5% vs 51.1%, P < .001) and 1 year (49.6% vs 66.7%, P = .01) compared with persistent AKI. Factors independently associated with persistent AKI were higher body mass index (per unit; odds ratio [OR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.98; P = .01), cyclosporine use (OR, 0.29; 0.12-0.67; P = .01), longer duration of mechanical ventilation (per hour [log transformed]; OR, 0.42; 0.21-0.81; P = .01), and AKI stages II to III (OR, 0.16; 0.08-0.29; P < .001). Persistent AKI was associated with higher adjusted hazard of death (hazard ratio, 1.77 [1.08-2.93]; P = .02) when compared with transient AKI (1.44 [0.93-2.19], P = .09) and no AKI (reference category), respectively.

Conclusions

Transient AKI after LTx is associated with fewer complications and improved survival. Among survivors, persistent AKI portends an increased risk for long-term chronic kidney disease.     

Cardiac Amyloidosis Without Increased Left Ventricular Wall Thickness

ObjectivesTo determine how often left ventricular wall thickness (LVWT) is normal and to assess the effect of LVWT on clinical outcomes of patients with immunoglobulin light chain (AL) cardiac amyloidosis.Patients and MethodsA total of 117 patients with systemic AL amyloidosis were retrospectively categorized from April 1, 1995, to September 15, 2012; group A included cardiac amyloidosis patients with an LVWT greater than 12 mm (45 patients); group B, cardiac amyloidosis patients with an LVWT of 12 mm or less (25 patients); and group C, no evidence of cardiac amyloidosis (47 patients). We compared echocardiographic parameters and survival rates among the 3 groups.ResultsNo differences were found between groups A and B in the following parameters: left ventricular ejection fraction (median, 56% [interquartile range (IQR), 46%-63%] vs 56% [IQR, 49%-63%], P=.76), left arterial volume index (median, 44.5 [IQR, 38.5-59.7] vs 43.9 [IQR, 33.8-57.1] mL/m², P=.79), eˈ (median, 0.04 [IQR, 0.03-0.05] vs 0.05 [IQR, 0.04-0.06] m/s, P=.10), and E/eˈ (early diastolic mitral inflow velocity (E)/eˈ) (median, 18.4 [IQR, 12.0-23.3] vs 18.0 [IQR, 13.6-25.0], P=.98). Patients in group C exhibited significantly different values for these parameters (median, 65% [IQR, 61%-69%], 23.4 [IQR, 18.0-29.0] mL/m², 0.08 [IQR, 0.06-0.09] m/s, and 8.8 [IQR, 7.2-10.5], respectively; all P<.001). The survival rates were statistically different, with median survival times of 422, 729, and 2080 days in groups A, B, and C, respectively (P=.002). Using multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, we found that age, an N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide level of 1800 pg/mL or greater, E/eˈ, and complete hematologic remission were significant predictors of survival.ConclusionsA third of patients with AL cardiac amyloidosis were diagnosed as having an LVWT of 12 mm or less. Because appropriate therapy can improve the survival of patients with AL cardiac amyloidosis, early detection by sensitive diagnostic methods should be pursued even when LVWT is not increased.     

Overnight use of continuous low-level heatwrap therapy for relief of low back pain

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate of the efficacy and safety of 8 hours of continuous, low-level heatwrap therapy administered during sleep. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, parallel, single-blind (investigator), placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial. SETTING: Two community-based research facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-six patients, aged 18 to 55 years, with acute, nonspecific low back pain. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were stratified by baseline pain intensity and gender and randomized to one of the following treatments: evaluation of efficacy (heatwrap, n=33; oral placebo, n=34) or blinding (unheated wrap, n=5; oral ibuprofen, n=4). All treatments were administered for 3 consecutive nights with 2 days of follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: morning pain relief (hour 0) on days 2 through 4 (0-5-point verbal response scale). Secondary: mean daytime pain relief score (days 2-4, hours 0-8), mean extended pain relief score (day 4, hour 0; day 5, hour 0), muscle stiffness, lateral trunk flexibility, and disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire). RESULTS: Heatwrap therapy was significantly better than placebo at hour 0 on days 2 through 4 for mean pain relief (P=.00005); at hours 0 through 8 on days 2 through 4 for pain relief (P<.001); at hour 0 on day 4 and at hour 0 on day 5 for mean pain relief (P<.001); on day 4 in reduction of morning muscle stiffness (P<.001); for increased lateral trunk flexibility on day 4 (P<.002); and for decreased low back disability on day 4 (P=.005). Adverse events were mild and infrequent. CONCLUSIONS: Overnight use of heatwrap therapy provided effective pain relief throughout the next day, reduced muscle stiffness and disability, and improved trunk flexibility. Positive effects were sustained more than 48 hours after treatments were completed.     

Dexketoprofen Trometamol in the Acute Treatment of Migraine Attack: A Phase II,Randomized, Double-Blind,Crossover, Placebo-Controlled,Dose Optimization Study

Migraine is a disabling disease that can significantly affect a person's quality of life. This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of the 2 doses of dexketoprofen trometamol (DKP) compared to placebo for migraine treatment. Ninety-three patients with at least 1 migraine attack per month in the preceding 6 months were enrolled and randomized to 25 mg DKP, 50 mg DKP, and placebo in a randomized, double-blind, single-center, crossover, placebo-controlled study. Primary endpoint was pain-free episodes 2 hours after drug intake. The presence of accompanying symptoms and adverse effects was also recorded. Seventy-six patients (mean age 40.5 ± 10.9 and 61% female) completed the study. At baseline, mean number of attacks/month was 3.7 ± 1.3, with a mean duration of 15.4 ± 13.5 hours. Prevalence of pain-free episodes after drug intake was significantly reduced by 50 mg DKP vs placebo (33.8 vs 14.7%, P = .0065) whereas the dose of DKP 25 mg was better than placebo but did not reach statistical significance (23 vs 14.7%, P = .1182). Both 25 mg DKP (56.8 vs 25.3%, P = .0002) and 50 mg DKP improved headache relief compared to placebo. Furthermore, both doses of DKP increased the absence of functional disability (25 mg DKP, 39.7 vs 24%, P = .045; and 50 mg DKP, 45.9 vs 24%, P < .0004). Both doses of DKP were effective and well tolerated for acute migraine treatment.PerspectiveThis article demonstrates the efficacy and tolerability of DKP in the treatment of migraine without and with aura attacks. Its rapid absorption rate with higher maximum plasma concentrations and shorter time to maximum values suggest that this drug is a good option for acute migraine treatment.     

Early intervention with almotriptan: results of the AEGIS trial (AXERT Early Migraine Intervention Study)

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate prospectively the efficacy and safety of almotriptan 12.5 mg as compared to placebo when administered within 1 hour of headache pain onset for the acute treatment of 3 migraine headaches. BACKGROUND: Although clinical trials have reported improved outcomes when triptans were used early or to treat mild pain, acceptance of this treatment strategy has been hampered by both efficacy and tolerability issues. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial, patients with IHS-migraine were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to treat 3 consecutive migraine attacks with either almotriptan 12.5 mg or placebo. Patients were instructed to take their study medication at the first sign of headache pain of any intensity, within 1 hour of onset, and to record their symptoms at multiple time points during their headaches using a personal digital assistant. Clinical trial efficacy results for the first study headache and safety data for the entire study are presented. RESULTS: A total of 378 patients were randomized, 189 to each group; 162 almotriptan-treated patients, and 155 placebo-treated patients were evaluable for efficacy. Almotriptan treatment, compared to placebo, resulted in a significantly greater proportion of patients achieving 2-hour pain free (37.0% vs 23.9%, P= .010), 2-hour pain relief (72.3% vs 48.4%, P < .001) and sustained pain free (24.7% vs 16.1%, P= .040). Significant differences in pain free (P= .026) and pain relief (P= .019) between almotriptan and placebo also were observed at 1 hour. At 2 to 4 hours and 4 to 24 hours after treatment, the mean intensity of phonophobia and photophobia were significantly lower in the patients treated with almotriptan compared to the placebo-treated patients. A greater proportion of patients treating with almotriptan versus placebo reported normal functionality within 2 hours postdose (54.4% vs 38.1%, P= .007) and 4 hours postdose (74.5% vs 54.3%, P < .001). The percentage of patients experiencing 1 or more treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) was 9.8% for almotriptan and 6.4% for placebo. The only treatment-emergent AEs that occurred with a frequency of at least 1% (equivalent to 2 or more patients) in the almotriptan and placebo groups, respectively, were somnolence (1.1% and 2.3%), nausea (1.1% and 1.7%), vomiting (1.1% and 0.6%), and fatigue (1.1% and 0%). CONCLUSION: Treatment with almotriptan within 1 hour of migraine onset resulted in significantly better clinical outcomes than placebo and tolerability similar to placebo. Acute medications, such as almotriptan, that are both effective and well tolerated may encourage patients to access acute treatment earlier.