MigraineNCT03125525
Clinical Experience With Transcutaneous Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation in Refractory Migraine
An observational study of Migraine, run by Corfu Headache Clinic.
Trial summary
Migraine is included in the top-ten disabling diseases and conditions among the Western populations. Non-invasive neurostimulation (t-SMS), including the Cefaly® device, for the treatment of various types of pain is a relatively new field of interest. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Migraine
- What is being tested?
- Cefaly device
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 37 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2016to 30 Jun 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients non-respondint to preventive treatment of migraine with topiramate accepting to use Cefaly according to protocol proposed by their treating phycisian
Who may be able to join
- Migraine according to the criteria of International Headache Society classification III lack of response or intolerance to topiramate. Patient's consent
Who cannot join
- No
About this study
Official title: Clinical Experience With Transcutaneous Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Refractory Migraine or With Migraine and Intolerance to Topiramate: a Prospective Exploratory Clinical Study
Migraine is included in the top-ten disabling diseases and conditions among the Western populations. Non-invasive neurostimulation (t-SMS), including the Cefaly® device, for the treatment of various types of pain is a relatively new field of interest. The aim of the present study was to explore the clinical experience with Cefaly® in a cohort of migraine patients previously refractory or non-tolerant to topiramate prophylaxis.
Patients were followed prospectively after having been diagnosed with episodic or chronic migraine with a previous failure to topiramate treatment and having consented to receive preventive treatment with Cefaly® according to their treating physician's suggestion. A 1-month period of baseline observation was followed by a 3-month period of active treatment with transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation (t-SNS) with Cefaly® as the only preventive treatment.
Read the detailed description
Migraine is ranked as the sixth most disabling condition, worldwide.Presently, medications are the mainstream of migraine management; however, preventive treatment is often far from optimal. Preventive treatment for migraine is usually considered when migraine pain is present more frequently than twice a week.
Topiramate is currently the most commonly used first-line approved preventive medication for migraine. With this being said, not all patients respond to preventive medications, due to either lack of efficacy or to adverse events. As a matter of fact, adherence to migraine preventive medications, including topiramate, may be insufficient. In a health insurance database based review, 70.2% of patients who initiated migraine prophylaxis with antiepileptics were reported to be non-adherent after 6 months. Among preventive medication choices, patients are reported to adhere best, but not optimally to topiramate, with adverse events being the most common reason for topiramate discontinuation.
On the other hand, non-invasive neurostimulation is a relatively new field of interest for the treatment of various types of pain. Clinical research in this field is active, as the recent technological advances allow for safe, convenient and ease by which to self-administer treatment sessions. Cefaly® electrically the supraorbital nerve in the forehead. The supraorbital nerve is a branch of the first trigeminal division. The trigeminovascular system has a well-known involvement in headache pain. Transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation (t-SNS) with the Cefaly® (Cefaly® Technology sprl, Herstal, Belgium) device has proved to be a safe and efficient method for convenient self-delivered treatment sessions. It has received approval for the prevention of episodic migraine by the American Food and Drug Administration and by the EU, including Greece, since early 2015.
Although t-SNS use is spreading in Greece, it is not reimbursed by the social security system and in many cases it may be postponed until either a first line preventive medication fails to provide substantial relief or tolerability / safety issues ensue.
The aim of the present study was to explore and share the clinical experience with Cefaly® in a cohort of migraine patients previously refractory or intolerant to preventive treatment with topiramate, as this is a common situation in clinical practice. Additionally, we specifically explored whether the reason for the discontinuation of topiramate is correlated with the outcome of Cefaly® treatment. To the best of the authors' knowledge, no similar study has been published so far.
METHODS This was an exploratory prospective multicenter clinical study conducted in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration and approved by the principal investigator's (MV) Institutional Review Board. This study was done to explore the efficiency and safety of Cefaly® in migraine prevention in a population of patients previously refractory or intolerant to topiramate.
Participants to be treated with Cefaly® were enrolled from 2 private headache clinics, located in Athens and Thessaloniki, the first and second largest cities of Greece, respectively. Patients were diagnosed with episodic or chronic migraine, needed preventive treatment according to the treating physician's opinion, and they had not responded to previous topiramate treatment, either due to inefficacy or due to intolerability or safety issues. In order to consider topiramate as failed due to inefficacy, a dose of 100mg/day for at least 3 months was required to have been received. Topiramate was considered as failed due to intolerability in any case a patient had decided to stop use of topiramate due to an adverse event regardless of its nature or severity. Patients had to have stopped topiramate at least 3 months prior to starting treatment with Cefaly®.
Both episodic and chronic (≥ 15 days of headache per month) migraine patients, according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd edition-beta version (ICHD IIIβ), were included. Upon enrolment and after giving consent to participate in the study, demographics and clinical data were captured, including the reason for topiramate discontinuation. Patients were then provided with a headache (HA) diary to be self-completed over the course of the study including questions about occurrence of HA, peak intensity level on a 0-10 numerical scale, number of acute medication doses and any adverse event. A 1-month baseline observation period was followed by a 3-month active treatment period with Cefaly® as the only preventive treatment. During the active treatment period, compliance (days the device was used as recommended, e.g. 1 full session each day) was also recorded.
The European version of Cefaly® includes three stimulation programs; one for acute migraine relief and two programs to be implemented in daily 20-minute sessions, one for migraine prevention and one for relaxation. In our study, Cefaly® was to be used based upon the protocol of the approval study of the device, in which it is used once every day on the migraine prevention program.
At their last evaluation, patients answered two additional questions regarding their total subjective satisfaction from treatment with t-SNS. The first question ("Are you satisfied with Cefaly® and wish to continue the treatment?") was aimed to access overall satisfaction from t-SNS treatment and the will to continue treatment, which was the primary evaluation of our study. The second question ("Did you encounter technical issues with the device?") was aimed to access any problems or technical difficulties arising from the use of the device.
Changes in total headache days, number of HA days with intensity ≥5/10 and days with acute medication use were analysed from baseline to the last observation or Month-3 of active treatment.
- Conditions
- Migraine
- Being tested
- Cefaly device
- Keywords
- migraine, transcutaneous, supraorbital, nerve, stimulation
- Medical subject headings
- Migraine Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Cefaly deviceDevice
Also called transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation with Cefaly
Use of Cefaly based upon the protocol of the approval study of the device, in which it is used once every day on the migraine prevention program
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Active treatment patients | Patients using Cefaly device on routine daily basis Receives: Device: Cefaly device |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in headache days
Change in headache days, as recorded on a self-administered headache questionnaire, at 1st, 2nd and 3rd month of active treatment comparing to the baseline observation.
Linear Mixed Models were performed, with patients modelled as a random effect, time (study month), and their interaction modelled as fixed effects.
Statistical significance was set to the observed level of 5%. All statistical analyses were performed using STATA v.13.
Measured: 4 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Patient overall satisfaction
Patients resonse to the question "Are you satisfied with Cefaly® and wish to continue the treatment?"
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Apr 2017
- Study start1 Jan 2016
- Primary completion30 Jun 2016
- Study completion30 Jun 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for MigraineStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 37 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Corfu Headache Clinic
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, KONSTANTINOS SPINGOS, Corfu Headache Clinic
- Investigators
- Michail Vikelis, Study director, Meditteraneo Hospital of Athens
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03125525
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CorfuHC
- Status last verified
- Apr 2017
- First submitted
- 13 Apr 2017
- Last updated
- 24 Apr 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Riederer F, Penning S, Schoenen J. Transcutaneous Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation (t-SNS) with the Cefaly(R) Device for Migraine Prevention: A Review of the Available Data. Pain Ther. 2015 Oct 14;4(2):135-47. doi: 10.1007/s40122-015-0039-5. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 26467451Vikelis M, Dermitzakis EV, Spingos KC, Vasiliadis GG, Vlachos GS, Kararizou E. Clinical experience with transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation in patients with refractory migraine or with migraine and intolerance to topiramate: a prospective exploratory clinical study. BMC Neurol. 2017 May 18;17(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s12883-017-0869-3.
PubMed 28521762
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Apr 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Clinical Experience With Transcutaneous Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Refractory Migraine or With Migraine and Intolerance to Topiramate: a Prospective Exploratory Clinical Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03125525
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CorfuHC
- Conditions
- Migraine
- Keywords
- migraine, transcutaneous, supraorbital, nerve, stimulation
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 37 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Corfu Headache ClinicUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 24 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Migraine is included in the top-ten disabling diseases and conditions among the Western populations. Non-invasive neurostimulation (t-SMS), including the Cefaly® device, for the treatment of various types of pain is a relatively new field of interest. The aim of the present study was to explore the clinical experience with Cefaly® in a cohort of migraine patients previously refractory or non-tolerant to topiramate prophylaxis.
Patients were followed prospectively after having been diagnosed with episodic or chronic migraine with a previous failure to topiramate treatment and having consented to receive preventive treatment with Cefaly® according to their treating physician's suggestion. A 1-month period of baseline observation was followed by a 3-month period of active treatment with transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation (t-SNS) with Cefaly® as the only preventive treatment.
Detailed description
Migraine is ranked as the sixth most disabling condition, worldwide.Presently, medications are the mainstream of migraine management; however, preventive treatment is often far from optimal. Preventive treatment for migraine is usually considered when migraine pain is present more frequently than twice a week.
Topiramate is currently the most commonly used first-line approved preventive medication for migraine. With this being said, not all patients respond to preventive medications, due to either lack of efficacy or to adverse events. As a matter of fact, adherence to migraine preventive medications, including topiramate, may be insufficient. In a health insurance database based review, 70.2% of patients who initiated migraine prophylaxis with antiepileptics were reported to be non-adherent after 6 months. Among preventive medication choices, patients are reported to adhere best, but not optimally to topiramate, with adverse events being the most common reason for topiramate discontinuation.
On the other hand, non-invasive neurostimulation is a relatively new field of interest for the treatment of various types of pain. Clinical research in this field is active, as the recent technological advances allow for safe, convenient and ease by which to self-administer treatment sessions. Cefaly® electrically the supraorbital nerve in the forehead. The supraorbital nerve is a branch of the first trigeminal division. The trigeminovascular system has a well-known involvement in headache pain. Transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation (t-SNS) with the Cefaly® (Cefaly® Technology sprl, Herstal, Belgium) device has proved to be a safe and efficient method for convenient self-delivered treatment sessions. It has received approval for the prevention of episodic migraine by the American Food and Drug Administration and by the EU, including Greece, since early 2015.
Although t-SNS use is spreading in Greece, it is not reimbursed by the social security system and in many cases it may be postponed until either a first line preventive medication fails to provide substantial relief or tolerability / safety issues ensue.
The aim of the present study was to explore and share the clinical experience with Cefaly® in a cohort of migraine patients previously refractory or intolerant to preventive treatment with topiramate, as this is a common situation in clinical practice. Additionally, we specifically explored whether the reason for the discontinuation of topiramate is correlated with the outcome of Cefaly® treatment. To the best of the authors' knowledge, no similar study has been published so far.
METHODS This was an exploratory prospective multicenter clinical study conducted in accordance with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration and approved by the principal investigator's (MV) Institutional Review Board. This study was done to explore the efficiency and safety of Cefaly® in migraine prevention in a population of patients previously refractory or intolerant to topiramate.
Participants to be treated with Cefaly® were enrolled from 2 private headache clinics, located in Athens and Thessaloniki, the first and second largest cities of Greece, respectively. Patients were diagnosed with episodic or chronic migraine, needed preventive treatment according to the treating physician's opinion, and they had not responded to previous topiramate treatment, either due to inefficacy or due to intolerability or safety issues. In order to consider topiramate as failed due to inefficacy, a dose of 100mg/day for at least 3 months was required to have been received. Topiramate was considered as failed due to intolerability in any case a patient had decided to stop use of topiramate due to an adverse event regardless of its nature or severity. Patients had to have stopped topiramate at least 3 months prior to starting treatment with Cefaly®.
Both episodic and chronic (≥ 15 days of headache per month) migraine patients, according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd edition-beta version (ICHD IIIβ), were included. Upon enrolment and after giving consent to participate in the study, demographics and clinical data were captured, including the reason for topiramate discontinuation. Patients were then provided with a headache (HA) diary to be self-completed over the course of the study including questions about occurrence of HA, peak intensity level on a 0-10 numerical scale, number of acute medication doses and any adverse event. A 1-month baseline observation period was followed by a 3-month active treatment period with Cefaly® as the only preventive treatment. During the active treatment period, compliance (days the device was used as recommended, e.g. 1 full session each day) was also recorded.
The European version of Cefaly® includes three stimulation programs; one for acute migraine relief and two programs to be implemented in daily 20-minute sessions, one for migraine prevention and one for relaxation. In our study, Cefaly® was to be used based upon the protocol of the approval study of the device, in which it is used once every day on the migraine prevention program.
At their last evaluation, patients answered two additional questions regarding their total subjective satisfaction from treatment with t-SNS. The first question ("Are you satisfied with Cefaly® and wish to continue the treatment?") was aimed to access overall satisfaction from t-SNS treatment and the will to continue treatment, which was the primary evaluation of our study. The second question ("Did you encounter technical issues with the device?") was aimed to access any problems or technical difficulties arising from the use of the device.
Changes in total headache days, number of HA days with intensity ≥5/10 and days with acute medication use were analysed from baseline to the last observation or Month-3 of active treatment.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Active treatment patients | – | Device: Cefaly devicePatients using Cefaly device on routine daily basis |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients non-respondint to preventive treatment of migraine with topiramate accepting to use Cefaly according to protocol proposed by their treating phycisian
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Migraine according to the criteria of International Headache Society classification III lack of response or intolerance to topiramate. Patient's consent
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- No
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Cefaly deviceAlso: transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation with CefalyUse of Cefaly based upon the protocol of the approval study of the device, in which it is used once every day on the migraine prevention program | Device | Active treatment patients |
Primary outcome
Change in headache days
Time frame: 4 months
Change in headache days, as recorded on a self-administered headache questionnaire, at 1st, 2nd and 3rd month of active treatment comparing to the baseline observation. Linear Mixed Models were performed, with patients modelled as a random effect, time (study month), and their interaction modelled as fixed effects. Statistical significance was set to the observed level of 5%. All statistical analyses were performed using STATA v.13.
1 secondary outcome
Patient overall satisfaction
Time frame: 3 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Apr 2017.
- Background: PubMed 26467451Riederer F, Penning S, Schoenen J. Transcutaneous Supraorbital Nerve Stimulation (t-SNS) with the Cefaly(R) Device for Migraine Prevention: A Review of the Available Data. Pain Ther. 2015 Oct 14;4(2):135-47. doi: 10.1007/s40122-015-0039-5. Online ahead of print.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 28521762Vikelis M, Dermitzakis EV, Spingos KC, Vasiliadis GG, Vlachos GS, Kararizou E. Clinical experience with transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulation in patients with refractory migraine or with migraine and intolerance to topiramate: a prospective exploratory clinical study. BMC Neurol. 2017 May 18;17(1):97. doi: 10.1186/s12883-017-0869-3.
- Cefaly® Technology. (Last accessed 27 Jul. 16)Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Migraine
RecruitingObservational study
Study of the Glymphatic System in Migraine
Migraine
Active, not recruiting
Clinical and Neurophysiological Effects of tDCS to Visual and Motor Cortex in Migraine
Migraine
Active, not recruiting
App-Based Migraine Treatment: The Health enSuite Study
Migraine, Migraine With Aura
Not yet recruiting
A Prospective Study of Rimegepant for Short-term Preventive Treatment of Night-shift-related Migraine in Healthcare Professionals
Migraine Disorders
Recruiting
Marine Lipids Ease Painful TMD
Temporomandibular Disorder (TMD)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Michail Vikelis study director
Meditteraneo Hospital of Athens
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Migraine, run by Corfu Headache Clinic.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Apr 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in headache days (time frame: 4 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03125525, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Apr 2017.