• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

咖啡因复方制剂、对乙酰氨基酚、乙酰水杨酸(阿司匹林)及非甾体抗炎药在发作性偏头痛急性治疗中治疗反应的预测因素

Predictors of treatment-response to caffeine combination products, acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in acute treatment of episodic migraine.

作者信息

Ezzati Ali, Fanning Kristina M, Reed Michael L, Lipton Richard B

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA.

Mist Research, Wilmington, North Carolina, USA.

出版信息

Headache. 2023 Mar;63(3):342-352. doi: 10.1111/head.14459. Epub 2023 Feb 7.

DOI:10.1111/head.14459
PMID:36748728
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To identify predictors of acute treatment optimization for migraine with "over-the-counter" (OTC) or prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) as well as other widely used OTCs including acetaminophen, caffeine combination products (CCP), and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, aspirin) among people with episodic migraine and to develop models that predict treatment response to each class of OTCs.

BACKGROUND

Efficacy of acute OTC medications for migraine varies greatly. Identifying predictors of treatment response to particular classes of medication is a step toward evidence-based personalized therapy.

METHODS

For this prediction model development study, we used data from 2224 participants from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study who were aged ≥18 years, met criteria for migraine, had <15 monthly headache days, and reported being on monotherapy for acute migraine attacks with one of the following classes medications: CCP (N = 711), acetaminophen (N = 643), ASA (N = 110), and prescription or OTC NSAIDs (N = 760). The primary outcome measures of treatment optimization were adequate 2-h pain freedom (2hPF) and adequate 24-h pain relief (24hPR), which were defined by responses of half the time or more to the relevant items on the Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire-6.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of the participants was 46.2 (13.1) years, 79.4% (1765/2224) were female, 43.7% (972/2224) reported adequate 2hPF, and 46.1% (1025/2224) reported adequate 24hPR. Those taking CCP had better 2hPF and 24PR outcomes. For those taking NSAIDs, better outcomes were associated with lower average pain intensity (2hPF: odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-0.99; 24PR: OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.96), cutaneous allodynia (2hPF: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.96; 24PR: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95), depressive symptoms (2hPF: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.98; 24PR: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.99), and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) grade (2hPF: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.90; 24PR: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.95). Adequate 2hPF for those taking CCP was associated with male gender (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.21-2.77), lower average pain intensity (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70-0.91), lower cutaneous allodynia (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.97), and lower Migraine Symptom Severity Scale Score (MSSS; OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.97). Adequate 24hPR for those taking CCP was associated with lower average pain intensity (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.96), lower cutaneous allodynia (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.89-0.96), and lower MIDAS grade (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.96). Participants who were married (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.05-2.19), had lower average pain intensity (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.89), lower MSSS (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.99), less depression (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99), and lower MIDAS grade (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.87) had adequate 2hPF after taking acetaminophen. Participants who were married (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.02-2.21), had lower pain intensity (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.88), less depression (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.98) and lower MIDAS grade (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67) had higher 24hPR following use of acetaminophen. A lower MSSS was the only factor associated with higher 2hPF and 24PR after using ASA (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.92 and OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67-0.93). Predictive models had modest performance in identifying responders to each class of OTC.

CONCLUSION

A large subgroup of people with migraine had an inadequate response to their usual acute OTC migraine treatment 2- and 24-h after dosing. These findings suggest a need to improve OTC treatment for some and to offer prescription acute medications for others. Predictive models identified several factors associated with better treatment-response in each OTC class. Selecting OTC treatment based on factors predictive of treatment optimization might improve patient outcomes.

摘要

目的

确定发作性偏头痛患者使用“非处方”(OTC)或处方非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)以及其他广泛使用的OTC药物(包括对乙酰氨基酚、咖啡因复方产品(CCP)和乙酰水杨酸(ASA,阿司匹林))进行急性治疗优化的预测因素,并建立预测对各类OTC药物治疗反应的模型。

背景

急性OTC偏头痛药物的疗效差异很大。确定对特定类别药物治疗反应的预测因素是迈向循证个性化治疗的一步。

方法

在这项预测模型开发研究中,我们使用了来自美国偏头痛患病率与预防(AMPP)研究的2224名参与者的数据,这些参与者年龄≥18岁,符合偏头痛标准,每月头痛天数<15天,并报告正在使用以下类别药物之一进行急性偏头痛发作的单药治疗:CCP(N = 711)、对乙酰氨基酚(N = 643)、ASA(N = 110)以及处方或OTC NSAIDs(N = 760)。治疗优化的主要结局指标是充分的2小时无痛(2hPF)和充分的24小时疼痛缓解(24hPR),这是由偏头痛治疗优化问卷-6中相关项目半数及以上时间的反应来定义的。

结果

参与者的平均(标准差)年龄为46.2(13.1)岁,79.4%(1765/2224)为女性,43.7%(972/2224)报告有充分的2hPF,46.1%(1025/2224)报告有充分的24hPR。服用CCP的患者2hPF和24PR结局更好。对于服用NSAIDs的患者,更好的结局与较低的平均疼痛强度(2hPF:比值比[OR]0.89,95%置信区间[CI]0.80-0.99;24PR:OR 0.86,95%CI 0.77-0.96)、皮肤异常性疼痛(2hPF:OR 0.92,95%CI 0.89-0.96;24PR:OR 0.91,95%CI 0.87-0.95)、抑郁症状(2hPF:OR 0.95,95%CI 0.92-0.98;24PR:OR 0.95,95%CI 0.91-0.99)以及偏头痛残疾评估量表(MIDAS)分级(2hPF:OR 0.76,95%CI 0.64-0.90;24PR:OR 0.79,95%CI 0.65-0.95)相关。服用CCP的患者充分的2hPF与男性性别(OR 1.83,95%CI 1.21-2.77)、较低的平均疼痛强度(OR 0.80,95%CI 0.70-0.91)、较低的皮肤异常性疼痛(OR 0.94,95%CI 0.90-0.97)以及较低的偏头痛症状严重程度量表评分(MSSS;OR 0.91,95%CI 0.86-0.97)相关。服用CCP的患者充分的24hPR与较低的平均疼痛强度(OR 0.85,95%CI 0.7-0.96)、较低的皮肤异常性疼痛(OR 0.92,95%CI 0.89-0.96)以及较低等级的MIDAS(OR 0.81,95%CI 0.68-0.96)相关。已婚(OR 1.51,95%CI 1.05-2.19)、平均疼痛强度较低(OR 0.79,95%CI 0.70-0.89)、MSSS较低(OR 0.93,95%CI 0.88-0.99)、抑郁较轻(OR 0.96,95%CI 0.93-0.99)以及MIDAS分级较低(OR 0.72,95%CI 0.59-0.87)的参与者在服用对乙酰氨基酚后有充分的2hPF。已婚(OR 1.50,95%CI 1.02-2.21)、疼痛强度较低(OR 0.78,95%CI 0.69-0.88)、抑郁较轻(OR 0.95,95%CI 0.91-0.98)以及MIDAS分级较低(OR 0.53,95%CI 0.42-0.67)的参与者在使用对乙酰氨基酚后有较高的24hPR。使用ASA后,较低的MSSS是与较高的2hPF和24PR相关的唯一因素(OR 0.78,95%CI 0.67-0.92和OR 0.79,95%CI 0.67-0.93)。预测模型在识别各类OTC药物的反应者方面表现一般。

结论

很大一部分偏头痛患者在服药后2小时和24小时对其常用的急性OTC偏头痛治疗反应不足。这些发现表明,需要改善部分患者的OTC治疗,并为其他患者提供处方急性药物。预测模型确定了与各类OTC药物更好治疗反应相关的几个因素。根据预测治疗优化的因素选择OTC治疗可能会改善患者结局。

相似文献

1
Predictors of treatment-response to caffeine combination products, acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in acute treatment of episodic migraine.咖啡因复方制剂、对乙酰氨基酚、乙酰水杨酸(阿司匹林)及非甾体抗炎药在发作性偏头痛急性治疗中治疗反应的预测因素
Headache. 2023 Mar;63(3):342-352. doi: 10.1111/head.14459. Epub 2023 Feb 7.
2
Predictive models for determining treatment response to nonprescription acute medications in migraine: Results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study.用于预测非处方急性偏头痛药物治疗反应的预测模型:来自美国偏头痛患病率和预防研究的结果。
Headache. 2022 Jun;62(6):755-765. doi: 10.1111/head.14312. Epub 2022 May 11.
3
Allodynia Is Associated With Initial and Sustained Response to Acute Migraine Treatment: Results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention Study.痛觉过敏与急性偏头痛治疗的初始及持续反应相关:美国偏头痛患病率与预防研究结果
Headache. 2017 Jul;57(7):1026-1040. doi: 10.1111/head.13115. Epub 2017 Jun 11.
4
Predictors of treatment-response to acute prescription medications in migraine: Results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study.偏头痛急性处方药物治疗反应的预测因素:来自美国偏头痛患病率和预防(AMPP)研究的结果。
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2022 Dec;223:107511. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2022.107511. Epub 2022 Nov 3.
5
Predicting Inadequate Response to Acute Migraine Medication: Results From the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study.预测急性偏头痛药物治疗反应不足:来自美国偏头痛患病率和预防(AMPP)研究的结果。
Headache. 2016 Nov;56(10):1635-1648. doi: 10.1111/head.12941. Epub 2016 Oct 12.
6
Treatment of menstruation-associated migraine with the nonprescription combination of acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine: results from three randomized, placebo-controlled studies.对乙酰氨基酚、阿司匹林和咖啡因非处方组合治疗月经相关性偏头痛:三项随机、安慰剂对照研究的结果
Clin Ther. 1999 Mar;21(3):475-91. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(00)88303-4.
7
Acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine versus sumatriptan succinate in the early treatment of migraine: results from the ASSET trial.对乙酰氨基酚、阿司匹林和咖啡因与琥珀酸舒马曲坦用于偏头痛的早期治疗:ASSET试验结果
Headache. 2005 Sep;45(8):973-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2005.05177.x.
8
Efficacy and safety of acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine in alleviating migraine headache pain: three double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials.对乙酰氨基酚、阿司匹林和咖啡因缓解偏头痛疼痛的疗效及安全性:三项双盲、随机、安慰剂对照试验。
Arch Neurol. 1998 Feb;55(2):210-7. doi: 10.1001/archneur.55.2.210.
9
Treatment of severe, disabling migraine attacks in an over-the-counter population of migraine sufferers: results from three randomized, placebo-controlled studies of the combination of acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine.对非处方偏头痛患者中重度致残性偏头痛发作的治疗:对乙酰氨基酚、阿司匹林和咖啡因组合进行的三项随机、安慰剂对照研究的结果
Cephalalgia. 1999 Sep;19(7):684-91. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.1999.019007684.x.
10
Simultaneous Comparisons of 25 Acute Migraine Medications Based on 10 Million Users' Self-Reported Records From a Smartphone Application.基于智能手机应用程序 1000 万用户自我报告记录的 25 种急性偏头痛药物的同期比较。
Neurology. 2023 Dec 12;101(24):e2560-e2570. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000207964. Epub 2023 Nov 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Cut-Off Values Able to Identify Migraine Patients With Increased Pressure-Pain Sensitivity Independent of the Migraine Cycle Through a Single Assessment: A Secondary Analysis of a Multicentre, Cross-Sectional, Observational Study.通过单次评估能够识别出与偏头痛周期无关的压力疼痛敏感性增加的偏头痛患者的截断值:一项多中心、横断面、观察性研究的二次分析。
Eur J Pain. 2025 Feb;29(2):e4787. doi: 10.1002/ejp.4787.
2
Impact of a reimbursement policy change on treatment with erenumab in migraine - a real-world experience from Germany.医保报销政策变化对偏头痛依瑞奈umab 治疗的影响——来自德国的真实世界经验。
J Headache Pain. 2023 Oct 30;24(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s10194-023-01682-2.