Placebo Adverse Events in Headache Trials: Headache as an Adverse Event of Placebo

Cephalalgia ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 496-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
U Reuter ◽  
M Sanchez del Rio ◽  
JA Carpay ◽  
CJ Boes ◽  
SD Silberstein ◽  
...  

We analysed the adverse events of placebo in acute and preventive randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies for migraine treatment. Fifty-seven trials (oral triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, nasal ergot alkaloids and preventive agents) were included. From 10 to 30% of subjects reported adverse events after placebo. Most common were features associated with a migraine attack, such as nausea, phono- and photophobia. Other frequent complaints resembled those of the active drug (e.g. chest pressure in triptan trials). A third group of adverse events appeared to be coincidental (e.g. sleep disturbance). Adverse events following placebo are probably related to the drug under study and the symptomatology of migraine; some have no obvious explanation.

Neurology ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1225-1230 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Ryan ◽  
A. Elkind ◽  
C. C. Baker ◽  
W. Mullican ◽  
S. DeBussey ◽  
...  

Background: Sumatriptan nasal spray may be particularly useful for patients whose nausea and vomiting preclude them from using oral migraine medication or for patients who prefer not to use an injectable migraine medication. The objective of this study was to evaluate in two clinical studies the efficacy and tolerability of the intranasal form of sumatriptan in the acute treatment of a single migraine attack. International Headache Society-diagnosed adult migraineurs in two randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter studies (n = 409 and 436) used sumatriptan nasal spray 20 mg, 10 mg, or placebo (2:1:1) for the acute treatment of a single migraine attack at home. Predose and at predetermined postdose intervals, patients recorded headache severity (none, mild, moderate, severe); time to meaningful relief; clinical disability (none, mildly impaired, severely impaired, bed rest required); presence/absence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia; and the occurrence of adverse events. Two hours postdose in the two studies, moderate or severe baseline pain was reduced to mild or none in 62 to 63% of patients treated with sumatriptan 20 mg, 43 to 54% of patients treated with sumatriptan 10 mg, and 29 to 35% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05 20 mg versus placebo for both studies and 10 mg versus placebo for study 1). Onset of relief relative to placebo began as early as 15 minutes postdose(sumatriptan 20 mg, study 2). Clinical disability at 2 hours postdose was reported as mildly impaired or normal in 72 to 74% of patients treated with sumatriptan 20 mg, 56 to 68% of patients treated with sumatriptan 10 mg, and 47 to 58% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05 20 mg versus placebo for both studies). Similar efficacy rates were observed for nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. The most common adverse event in the active treatment groups was disturbance of taste (bad, bitter, or unpleasant taste). Aside from this event, the pattern and incidence of adverse events did not differ among treatment groups. From these results we determined that sumatriptan nasal spray is a rapidly effective, well-tolerated migraine treatment. The 20-mg dose was effective in treating the entire migraine symptom complex, and the 10-mg dose was less consistently effective.


Author(s):  
PK Winner ◽  
P McAllister ◽  
G Chakhava ◽  
J Ailani ◽  
L Mehta ◽  
...  

Background: Eptinezumab is approved for migraine prevention, with demonstrated rapid onset of preventive benefit. RELIEF evaluated the efficacy and safety of eptinezumab initiated during a migraine attack. Methods: RELIEF (NCT04152083; parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled) randomized adults with migraine (4-15d/mo in 3mo prior to screening) to eptinezumab 100mg or placebo, administered IV within 1-6h of qualifying migraine onset. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were time to headache pain freedom and time to absence of most bothersome symptom (MBS). Results: Eptinezumab (n=238) compared with placebo (n=242) achieved significantly faster headache pain freedom (median 4h vs 9h; hazard ratio=1.54, P=0.0006) and absence of MBS (2h vs 3h; 1.75, P<0.0001). At 2h, 23.5% and 12.0% (P=0.0009) of eptinezumab-treated and placebo patients, respectively, reported headache pain freedom, and 55.5% and 35.8% (P<0.0001) reported absence of MBS. Significantly fewer eptinezumab-treated patients used rescue medication within 24h (31.5% vs 59.9%; P<0.0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 10.9% eptinezumab-treated and 10.3% placebo patients; no serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Infusion of the preventive migraine treatment, eptinezumab, during a migraine resulted in rapid and sustained freedom from headache pain and MBS vs placebo, starting 2h post-infusion, decreasing need for acute medication within 24h post-infusion. No notable safety findings were identified.


Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 2694-2694
Author(s):  
Amy D. Klion ◽  
Marc E. Rothenberg ◽  
John J. Murray ◽  
Anish Singh ◽  
Hans-Uwe Simon

Abstract Mepolizumab is a fully humanized monoclonal IgG antibody which binds to interleukin 5 (IL-5) with high affinity and specificity, preventing it from binding to IL-5 receptors on the eosinophil cell surface. Since IL-5 is central in eosinophil proliferation, differentiation, mobilization, activation, and survival, yet has limited effects on other cell types, IL-5 inhibition should inhibit the production and activity of eosinophils without affecting the function of other immune cells. Reducing the blood eosinophil count is a critical therapeutic objective in patients with eosinophil-driven diseases, such as hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). The safety and tolerability of mepolizumab has been evaluated, as a secondary endpoint, in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. The trial enrolled 85 patients with HES (blood eosinophil count >1500/μl for ≥6 months with documented eosinophilia-related organ involvement or dysfunction and no known cause of eosinophilia), who were negative for the FIP1L1-PDGFRα gene rearrangement. Blood eosinophil levels were stabilized at <1000 cells/μL on 20–60 mg/day prednisone monotherapy during a run-in period of up to 6 weeks, then patients were randomized to intravenous mepolizumab 750 mg (n=43) or saline (placebo; n=42) every 4 weeks for 36 weeks (final infusion at Week 32). Overall, 98% of placebo-treated and 93% of mepolizumab-treated patients reported an adverse event during treatment. The most common of these were fatigue (26% on placebo vs 30% on mepolizumab), pruritus (21% vs 28%), headache (21% vs 23%), and arthralgia (17% vs 21%). The only significant differences between the treatment groups were in pharyngolaryngeal pain (14% on placebo vs 2% on mepolizumab; P=0.027) and pain in extremity (12% on placebo vs 2% on mepolizumab; P=0.047); none of the adverse events was significantly more frequent with mepolizumab than with placebo. A greater than 8% difference in adverse event reporting for the mepolizumab vs placebo arms was noted for upper respiratory tract infections, myalgia, rhinitis, bronchitis, and urticaria. Serious adverse events were reported in 5 patients on placebo (7 events) and 7 patients on mepolizumab (14 events, including 1 death due to a cardiac arrest), but none was considered treatment related. Withdrawals due to adverse events (4 patients on placebo; 1 patient on mepolizumab) were also considered unrelated to treatment. Laboratory tests (hematology, clinical chemistry, and urinalysis), vital signs, and ECG findings did not raise any major safety concerns. In conclusion, this study, which is currently the largest placebo-controlled trial involving exclusively patients with HES, indicates that mepolizumab is safe and well tolerated in this patient population.


Cephalalgia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laís Bhering Martins ◽  
Ana Maria dos Santos Rodrigues ◽  
Débora Fernandes Rodrigues ◽  
Luana Caroline dos Santos ◽  
Antônio Lúcio Teixeira ◽  
...  

Background Previous studies have demonstrated the analgesic effects of ginger in different conditions, but evidence about its efficacy in migraine treatment is scarce. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the potential of ginger to improve acute migraine as an add-on strategy to standard treatment. Methods A double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial in the emergency room of a general hospital was conducted. Patients who sought medical care at the time of migraine attack were enrolled in this study. Only adults with episodic migraine (one to six migraine attacks per month) with or without aura were included. Sixty participants were randomized into two groups in which they received 400 mg of ginger extract (5% active ingredient) or placebo (cellulose), in addition to an intravenous drug (100 mg of ketoprofen) to treat the migraine attack. Patients filled a headache diary before, 0.5 h, 1 h, 1.5 h and 2 h after the medication. Pain severity, functional status, migraine symptoms and treatment satisfaction were also recorded. Results Patients treated with ginger showed significantly better clinical response after 1 h ( p = 0.04), 1.5 h ( p = 0.01) and 2 h ( p = 0.04). Furthermore, ginger treatment promoted reduction in pain and improvement on functional status at all times assessed. Conclusions The addition of ginger to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs may contribute to the treatment of migraine attack. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02568644)


Cephalalgia ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 254-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
PJ Goadsby ◽  
DW Dodick ◽  
M Almas ◽  
H-C Diener ◽  
P Tfelt-Hansen ◽  
...  

If treatment-emergent central nervous system (CNS) symptoms following triptan therapy represent direct pharmacological effects of the drug, they should occur independent of response to active drug. However, if they represent unmasking of neurological symptoms of the migraine attack after pain is relieved, they should be more common in responders both to active drug and to placebo. To explore this issue, we evaluated the relationship between the CNS adverse events and treatment response following triptan or placebo treatment. We used pooled data from seven double-blind, placebo-controlled trials involving eletriptan 20 mg (E20, n = 402), eletriptan 40 mg (E40, n = 1870), eletriptan 80 mg (E80, n = 1393), sumatriptan 100 mg (S100, n = 275) and placebo (Pbo, n = 1024). Somnolence was more prevalent among 2 h headache responders than non-responders for all treatments, including E80 (8.8% vs. 5.0%; P < 0.05), E40 (6.4% vs. 5.0%; NS), E20 (4.0% vs. 2.0%; NS), S100 (4.7% vs. 3.2%; NS) and Pbo (7.6% vs. 3.0%; P < 0.05). Similarly, the incidence of asthenia was higher among patients who responded to treatment compared with those who did not respond to E80 (15.2% vs. 7.8%; P < 0.05), E40 (6.5% vs. 3.6%; P < 0.05), E20 (6.5% vs. 1.0%; P < 0.05), S100 (10.1% vs. 4.7%; NS) and Pbo (4.4% vs. 2.7%; NS). The generally higher rates of somnolence and asthenia in patients who respond to treatment suggests that these treatment-emergent neurological symptoms may represent the unmasking of CNS symptoms associated with the natural resolution of a migraine attack, rather than simply representing drug-related side-effects. The rate of somnolence in placebo responders is comparable to that in responders to E40 and E80, indicating that somnolence is related, at least in some important part, to headache relief and not treatment.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Kopsky ◽  
Remko Liebregts ◽  
Jan M. Keppel Hesselink

Central neuropathic pain in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) is a common debilitating symptom, which is mostly treated with tricyclic antidepressants or antiepileptics. Unfortunately, the use of these drugs is often limited due to adverse events. We investigated the analgesic effect of topical amitriptyline 5% and 10% cream in a patient with central neuropathic pain due to MS. The analgesic effect of topical amitriptyline cream on neuropathic pain was dose related. To evaluate whether this analgesic effect is due to the active compound or placebo, we conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled n-of-1 study with amitriptyline 5% cream and placebo. The instruction was to alternate the creams every week following the pattern ABAB, with an escape possibility of amitriptyline 10% cream. The result was a complete pain reduction after application of cream B, while most of the time cream A did not reduce the pain. The patient could correctly unblind both creams, determining B as active. She noted that in the week of using the active cream no allodynia was present, with a carryover effect of one day.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1983 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 524-530
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Liston ◽  
Col William S. Foshee ◽  
Maj Wayne D. Pierson

Sulfisoxazole, 75 mg/kg/d in two divided doses for 3 months, was administered in a double-blind placebo crossover study to 35 children aged 6 months to 5 years who had frequent recurring episodes of otitis media. There was a 40% reduction in the rate of otitis media among patients receiving sulfisoxazole compared with those receiving placebo (0.25 v 0.42 episode per patient-month) which did not depend on age, sex, season, or several other factors. Using a randomized order, among patients who received placebo first, there was a 64% reduction on sulfisoxazole therapy compared with placebo (0.20 v 0.56 episode per patient-month). In this subgroup, there was significant improvement in eustachian tube function according to serial tympanograms. In the patients who received sulfisoxazole first, the rate of acute otitis remained low on placebo (0.28 v 0.30 episode per patient-month), and tympanogram patterns continued to improve after discontinuation of the active drug. These differences suggest a carry-over effect from the benefits of chemoprophylaxis. There was no significant difference in the species or sensitivity patterns of bacteria isolated from patients receiving sulfisoxazole or placebo. Sulfisoxazole chemoprophylaxis appears to be safe and effective in significantly reducing episodes of otitis media and improving tympanogram patterns.


1998 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 1574-1581 ◽  
Author(s):  
A N Serafini ◽  
S J Houston ◽  
I Resche ◽  
D P Quick ◽  
F M Grund ◽  
...  

PURPOSE To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of samarium-153 (153Sm) lexidronam (EDTMP) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with painful bone metastases secondary to a variety of primary malignancies were randomized to receive 153Sm-EDTMP 0.5 or 1.0 mCi/kg, or placebo. Treatment was unblinded for patients who did not respond by week 4, with those who had received placebo eligible to receive 1.0 mCi/kg of active drug in an open-label manner. Patient and physician evaluations were used to assess pain relief, as was concurrent change in opioid analgesia. RESULTS One hundred eighteen patients were enrolled onto the study. Patients who received 1.0 mCi/kg of active drug had significant reductions in pain during each of the first 4 weeks in both patient-rated and physician-rated evaluations. Pain relief was observed in 62% to 72% of those who received the 1.O-mCi/kg dose during the first 4 weeks, with marked or complete relief noted in 31% by week 4. Persistence of pain relief was seen through week 16 in 43% of patients who received 1.0 mCi/kg, of active drug. A significant correlation (P = .01) was observed between reductions in opioid analgesic use and pain scores only for those patients who received 1.0 mCi/kg 153Sm-EDTMP. Bone marrow suppression was mild, reversible, and not associated with grade 4 toxicity. CONCLUSION A single dose of 1.0 mCi/kg of 153Sm-EDTMP provided relief from pain associated with bone metastases. Pain relief was observed within 1 week of administration and persisted until at least week 16 in the majority of patients who responded.


Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (11) ◽  
pp. 3251
Author(s):  
Jennifer G. Le-Rademacher ◽  
Shauna Hillman ◽  
Elizabeth Storrick ◽  
Michelle R. Mahoney ◽  
Peter F. Thall ◽  
...  

This article introduces the adverse event (AE) burden score. The AE burden by treatment cycle is a weighted sum of all grades and AEs that the patient experienced in a cycle. The overall AE burden score is the total AE burden the patient experienced across all treatment cycles. AE data from two completed Alliance multi-center randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials, with different AE profiles (NCCTG 97-24-51: 176 patients, and A091105: 83 patients), were utilized for illustration. Results of the AE burden score analyses corroborated the trials’ primary results. In 97-24-51, the overall AE burden for patients on the treatment arm was 2.2 points higher than those on the placebo arm, with a higher AE burden for patients who went off treatment early due to AE. Similarly, in A091105, the overall AE burden was 1.6 points higher on the treatment arm. On the placebo arms, the AE burden in 97-24-51 remained constant over time; and increased in later cycles in A091105, likely attributable to the increase in disease morbidity. The AE burden score enables statistical comparisons analogous to other quantitative endpoints in clinical trials, and can readily accommodate different trial settings, diseases, and treatments, with diverse AE profiles.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document