Cargando…
Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine
INTRODUCTION: Onabotulinum toxin A (OnabotA) cyclic treatment is approved for the prophylactic treatment of chronic migraine (CM), a highly disabling disorder. Although treatment response varies among patients, current guidelines suggest to stop treatment after cycle 2 if no response is achieved. Th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723003/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29255444 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00655 |
_version_ | 1783285125716377600 |
---|---|
author | Sarchielli, Paola Romoli, Michele Corbelli, Ilenia Bernetti, Laura Verzina, Angela Brahimi, Elona Eusebi, Paolo Caproni, Stefano Calabresi, Paolo |
author_facet | Sarchielli, Paola Romoli, Michele Corbelli, Ilenia Bernetti, Laura Verzina, Angela Brahimi, Elona Eusebi, Paolo Caproni, Stefano Calabresi, Paolo |
author_sort | Sarchielli, Paola |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Onabotulinum toxin A (OnabotA) cyclic treatment is approved for the prophylactic treatment of chronic migraine (CM), a highly disabling disorder. Although treatment response varies among patients, current guidelines suggest to stop treatment after cycle 2 if no response is achieved. This prospective study aimed to define, in real-life setting, the evolution of the response to OnabotA over five cycles of treatment among patients non-responding to cycle 1. The results of this study might help in decision-making, in particular whether prosecuting OnabotA further or not, when facing a patient not responding to cycle 1. METHODS: Patients failing to respond at cycle 1 were recruited to complete five cycles. Key outcomes were: (i) a ≥50% reduction in headache days, (ii) a ≥50% reduction in total cumulative hours of headache on headache days and (iii) a ≥5-point improvement in Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) scores. RESULTS: Overall, 56 patients were included. Mean age was 45.7 years (female 83.9%). Severe (≥60) HIT-6 score was reported at baseline by 95.8% of patients. Responders (headache days reduction of more than 50%) progressively increased cycle after cycle, doubling from cycle 2 to cycle 5 (from 27 to 48%). In addition, patients regressed from CM to episodic migraine moving on with each cycle, with 78% of them reaching less than nine migraine days/month after cycle 5. The headache days per month decreased significantly from cycle 1 to cycle 5 (overall from 23.3 ± 5.7 to 9.2 ± 3.6; p < 0.001). During 12 months (5 cycles), migraine days per month progressively abated (from 18.5 to 8.7; p < 0.001), days with symptomatic medications intake/month consistently decreased (from 17.4 to 8.1; p < 0.001), and mean HIT-6 score lowered (from 72.4 ± 5.7 to 50.2 ± 4.3; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The positive effect of OnabotA treatment spreads over the course of the treatment and might also manifest late in treatment course among patients with no benefit after the first two cycles. Thus, the results of this real-life study suggest to extend OnabotA treatment further, beyond cycle 2, to avoid premature withdrawal in patients who would have become responders at cycle 3, 4, or 5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5723003 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57230032017-12-18 Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine Sarchielli, Paola Romoli, Michele Corbelli, Ilenia Bernetti, Laura Verzina, Angela Brahimi, Elona Eusebi, Paolo Caproni, Stefano Calabresi, Paolo Front Neurol Neuroscience INTRODUCTION: Onabotulinum toxin A (OnabotA) cyclic treatment is approved for the prophylactic treatment of chronic migraine (CM), a highly disabling disorder. Although treatment response varies among patients, current guidelines suggest to stop treatment after cycle 2 if no response is achieved. This prospective study aimed to define, in real-life setting, the evolution of the response to OnabotA over five cycles of treatment among patients non-responding to cycle 1. The results of this study might help in decision-making, in particular whether prosecuting OnabotA further or not, when facing a patient not responding to cycle 1. METHODS: Patients failing to respond at cycle 1 were recruited to complete five cycles. Key outcomes were: (i) a ≥50% reduction in headache days, (ii) a ≥50% reduction in total cumulative hours of headache on headache days and (iii) a ≥5-point improvement in Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) scores. RESULTS: Overall, 56 patients were included. Mean age was 45.7 years (female 83.9%). Severe (≥60) HIT-6 score was reported at baseline by 95.8% of patients. Responders (headache days reduction of more than 50%) progressively increased cycle after cycle, doubling from cycle 2 to cycle 5 (from 27 to 48%). In addition, patients regressed from CM to episodic migraine moving on with each cycle, with 78% of them reaching less than nine migraine days/month after cycle 5. The headache days per month decreased significantly from cycle 1 to cycle 5 (overall from 23.3 ± 5.7 to 9.2 ± 3.6; p < 0.001). During 12 months (5 cycles), migraine days per month progressively abated (from 18.5 to 8.7; p < 0.001), days with symptomatic medications intake/month consistently decreased (from 17.4 to 8.1; p < 0.001), and mean HIT-6 score lowered (from 72.4 ± 5.7 to 50.2 ± 4.3; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The positive effect of OnabotA treatment spreads over the course of the treatment and might also manifest late in treatment course among patients with no benefit after the first two cycles. Thus, the results of this real-life study suggest to extend OnabotA treatment further, beyond cycle 2, to avoid premature withdrawal in patients who would have become responders at cycle 3, 4, or 5. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-12-04 /pmc/articles/PMC5723003/ /pubmed/29255444 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00655 Text en Copyright © 2017 Sarchielli, Romoli, Corbelli, Bernetti, Verzina, Brahimi, Eusebi, Caproni and Calabresi. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Neuroscience Sarchielli, Paola Romoli, Michele Corbelli, Ilenia Bernetti, Laura Verzina, Angela Brahimi, Elona Eusebi, Paolo Caproni, Stefano Calabresi, Paolo Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine |
title | Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine |
title_full | Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine |
title_fullStr | Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine |
title_full_unstemmed | Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine |
title_short | Stopping Onabotulinum Treatment after the First Two Cycles Might Not Be Justified: Results of a Real-life Monocentric Prospective Study in Chronic Migraine |
title_sort | stopping onabotulinum treatment after the first two cycles might not be justified: results of a real-life monocentric prospective study in chronic migraine |
topic | Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723003/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29255444 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00655 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sarchiellipaola stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT romolimichele stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT corbelliilenia stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT bernettilaura stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT verzinaangela stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT brahimielona stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT eusebipaolo stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT capronistefano stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine AT calabresipaolo stoppingonabotulinumtreatmentafterthefirsttwocyclesmightnotbejustifiedresultsofareallifemonocentricprospectivestudyinchronicmigraine |