Dataset Information

Evaluation of green light exposure on headache frequency and quality of life in migraine patients: A preliminary one-way cross-over clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Pharmacological management of migraine can be ineffective for some patients. We previously demonstrated that exposure to green light resulted in antinociception and reversal of thermal and mechanical hypersensitivity in rodent pain models. Given the safety of green light emitting diodes, we evaluated green light as a potential therapy in patients with episodic or chronic migraine.

Material and methods

We recruited (29 total) patients, of whom seven had episodic migraine and 22 had chronic migraine. We used a one-way cross-over design consisting of exposure for 1-2 hours daily to white light emitting diodes for 10 weeks, followed by a 2-week washout period followed by exposure for 1-2 hours daily to green light emitting diodes for 10 weeks. Patients were allowed to continue current therapies and to initiate new treatments as directed by their physicians. Outcomes consisted of patient-reported surveys. The primary outcome measure was the number of headache days per month. Secondary outcome measures included patient-reported changes in the intensity and frequency of the headaches over a two-week period and other quality of life measures including ability to fall and stay asleep, and ability to perform work. Changes in pain medications were obtained to assess potential reduction.

Results

When seven episodic migraine and 22 chronic migraine patients were analyzed as separate cohorts, white light emitting diodes produced no significant change in headache days in either episodic migraine or chronic migraine patients. Combining data from the episodic migraine and chronic migraine groups showed that white light emitting diodes produced a small, but statistically significant reduction in headache days from (days ± SEM) 18.2 ± 1.8 to 16.5 ± 2.01 days. Green light emitting diodes resulted in a significant decrease in headache days from 7.9 ± 1.6 to 2.4 ± 1.1 and from 22.3 ± 1.2 to 9.4 ± 1.6 in episodic migraine and chronic migraine patients, respectively. While some improvement in secondary outcomes was observed with white light emitting diodes, more secondary outcomes with significantly greater magnitude including assessments of quality of life, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, Headache Impact Test-6, and Five-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional survey without reported side effects were observed with green light emitting diodes. Conclusions regarding pain medications reduction with green light emitting diode exposure were not possible. No side effects of light therapy were reported. None of the patients in the study reported initiation of new therapies.

Discussion

Green light emitting diodes significantly reduced the number of headache days in people with episodic migraine or chronic migraine. Additionally, green light emitting diodes significantly improved multiple secondary outcome measures including quality of life and intensity and duration of the headache attacks. As no adverse events were reported, green light emitting diodes may provide a treatment option for those patients who prefer non-pharmacological therapies or may be considered in complementing other treatment strategies. Limitations of this study are the small number of patients evaluated. The positive data obtained support implementation of larger clinical trials to determine possible effects of green light emitting diode therapy.This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov under NCT03677206.

SUBMITTER: Martin LF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8034831 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNarrow band green light (NbGL) has been shown to relieve headache in small numbers of subjects but large-scale real-world assessments are lacking. The goal of this prospective, observational, open-label, real world study was to determine whether treatment with NbGL during the ictal phase of migraine, improves patients' perception of their headache, photophobia, anxiety and same-night sleep.MethodsThe study was conducted in purchasers of the NbGL Lamp in two phases. In Phase I purchasers of the Lamp completed a survey and were asked to participate in a 6-week diary study. In Phase 2 participants completed daily diaries for 6 weeks. Specifically, they were asked to use their judgement/impression/perception when choosing between headache-improved or headache-unimproved after using the NbGL during acute attacks. Diary outcomes of interest included rates of attacks improve in responders (≥50%), non-responders (<50%), super-responders (≥75%), and super non-responders (<30%).ResultsOf 3,875 purchasers of the Lamp for migraine, 698 (18%) agreed to participate, filled out a pre-study survey, and agreed to a 6-week daily headache diary. Complete data were provided by 181 (26%) participants. Using criteria above, 61, 39, 42, and 27% of participants were classified responder, non-responder, super-responder and super non-responder, respectively. Headache improved in 55% of all 3,232 attacks, in 82% of the 1,803 attacks treated by responders, and in 21% of the 1,429 attacks treated by non-responders. Photophobia improved in 53% of all attacks, 68% of the attacks in responders and in 35% of the attacks in non-responders. Anxiety improved in 34% of all attacks, 46% of the responders' attacks, and 18% of the non-responders' attacks. Sleep improved in 49% of all attacks, 59% of the responders' attacks, and 36% of the non-responders' attacks.ConclusionThis open-label real world study suggests that 2 h of treatment with the lamp during migraine attacks is associated with relief of pain and photophobia, reduction in anxiety, and improved sleep. The absence of rigorous diagnosis and a blinded contemporaneous control group limits the rigor of this interpretation. Improvement in photophobia, anxiety and sleep among the responders may be secondary to the improvement in the headache itself.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04841083).

Project description:ObjectiveThis post hoc analysis in patients medically diagnosed with chronic migraine (CM) and medication-overuse headache (MOH) evaluated reductions in the use of acute headache medication (AHM) and sustained changes in the diagnostic status of CM and MOH following eptinezumab treatment in the PROMISE-2 study.BackgroundEptinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits calcitonin gene-related peptide, is approved in the United States for the preventive treatment of migraine. A previous analysis showed that eptinezumab reduced monthly migraine days and was well tolerated in the subgroup of PROMISE-2 patients diagnosed with both CM and MOH.MethodsThe phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled PROMISE-2 study (NCT02974153) randomized adults with CM to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo (administered intravenously every 12 weeks for up to two doses). MOH was prospectively diagnosed at screening by trained physicians based on 3 months of medication history and International Classification of Headache Disorders-3β criteria. This post hoc analysis evaluated changes in total and class-specific days of AHM usage, the percentage of patients using AHM at or above MOH diagnostic thresholds, and the percentage of patients experiencing monthly headache and migraine day frequency below diagnostic thresholds for MOH and/or CM.ResultsIn PROMISE-2, 431/1072 (40.2%) patients with CM were diagnosed with MOH (eptinezumab 100 mg, n = 139; 300 mg, n = 147; placebo, n = 145) and were included in this analysis. Total monthly AHM use decreased from 20.6 days/month at baseline to 10.6 days/month over 24 weeks of treatment (49% decrease) with eptinezumab 100 mg, from 20.7 to 10.5 days/month (49% decrease) with eptinezumab 300 mg, and from 19.8 to 14.0 days/month (29% decrease) with placebo. Numerically greater decreases from baseline with eptinezumab were also observed for individual drug classes. In each study month, the percentages of patients who were below MOH thresholds were numerically higher for both eptinezumab doses compared with placebo, as were the percentages of patients experiencing headache and migraine frequency below CM thresholds. Of patients with available data across the entire treatment period, 29.0% (58/200) of patients treated with eptinezumab stopped meeting and remained below diagnostic thresholds for both CM and MOH during Weeks 1-24, as well as 6.3% (6/96) of patients who received placebo.ConclusionsAcross 24 weeks of treatment, eptinezumab reduced AHM use in patients diagnosed with CM and MOH. More than one-fourth (29%) of patients treated with eptinezumab did not meet the diagnostic thresholds for either CM or MOH for the entire treatment period.

Project description:ImportanceOpen burn pits have commonly been used for waste disposal by the US military but have not been systematically investigated as an independent risk factor for headache disorders.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between exposure to open burn pits and incidence of headache and migraine.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used data from the Veterans Health Administration Headache Cohort along with data from the US Department of Defense and the Airborne Hazards and Open Burn Pit (AH&OBP) Registry to assess registry participants with potential exposure to open burn pits in the Veterans Health Administration from April 1, 2014, through October 31, 2022. Participants were included by linking data from the AH&OBP Registry to their US Department of Defense and Veterans Health Administration electronic health records. Those with preexisting headache were removed from the analytic sample. The analysis was conducted between November 1, 2022, and January 31, 2024.ExposureOpen burn pit exposure composite variables based on the registry questionnaire were examined, specifically being near open burn pits, days near open burn pits, and having open burn pit duties.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary incident outcomes included medically diagnosed headache disorders and medically diagnosed migraine.ResultsThe analytic sample included 247 583 veterans (mean [SD] age, 27.9 [7.7] years; 222 498 [89.9%] male). After covariates were controlled for at baseline, participants who were near an open burn pit with open burn pit duties had the highest adjusted odds of medically diagnosed headache disorders (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.59; 95% CI, 1.46-1.74), migraine (AOR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.43-1.79), and self-reported disabling migraine (AOR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.69-2.20) compared with those without exposure. The 2 highest quartiles of cumulative burn pit exposure (290-448 days and >448 days) had significantly higher adjusted odds of medically diagnosed headache (290-448 days: AOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.09-1.31; >448 days: AOR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.41-1.70) and migraine (290-448 days: AOR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.07-1.34; >448 days: AOR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.32-1.65).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, a dose-dependent association existed between open burn pit exposure and medically diagnosed headache and migraine. These new data identify potentially important associations between open burn bit exposure and new-onset headache among service personnel as well as a possible health condition that may be encountered more frequently in Veterans Health Administration facilities during mandatory screening for military exposures.

Project description:ObjectiveThis experimental study aimed to assess pain sensitivity in low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM), high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM), and chronic migraine (CM) patients across the different phases of the migraine cycle.MethodIn this observational, experimental study, clinical characteristics (diary and time from the last/next headache attack), and quantitative sensory testing (QST) (wind-up pain ratio (WUR) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) from the trigeminal area and PPT from the cervical spine) was performed. LFEM, HFEM, and CM were assessed in each of the 4 migraine phases (HFEM and LFEM: interictal, preictal, ictal, and postictal; CM: interictal and ictal) and compared vs. each other's (matched for the phase) and controls.ResultsA total of 56 controls, 105 LFEM, 74 HFEM, and 32 CM were included. No differences in QST parameters were observed between LFEM, HFEM, and CM in any of the phases. During the interictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: 1) LFEM had lower trigeminal PPT (p = 0.001) and 2) lower cervical PPT (p = 0.001). No differences were observed between HFEM or CM and healthy controls. During the ictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: HFEM and CM had 1) lower trigeminal PPTs (HFEM p = 0.001; CM = p < 0.001), 2) lower cervical PPT s (HFEM p = 0.007; CM p < 0.001), and 3) higher trigeminal WUR (HFEM p = 0.001, CM p = 0.006). No differences were observed between LFEM and healthy controls. During the preictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: 1) LFEM had lower cervical PPT (p = 0.007), 2) HFEM had lower trigeminal (p = 0.013) and 3) HFEM had lower cervical (p = .006) PPTs. During the postictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: 1) LFEM had lower cervical PPT (p = 0.003), 2) HFEM had lower trigeminal PPT (p = 0.005), and 3) and HFEM had lower cervical (p = 0.007) PPTs.ConclusionThis study suggested that HFEM patients have a sensory profile matching CM better than LFEM. When assessing pain sensitivity in migraine populations, the phase with respects to headache attacks is of utmost importance and can explain the inconsistency in pain sensitivity data reported in the literature.

Project description:BackgroundMigraine is a disabling neurologic disease that can fluctuate over time in severity, frequency, and acute medication use. Harris Poll Migraine Report Card was a US population-based survey to ascertain quantifiable distinctions amongst individuals with current versus previous high-frequency headache/migraine and acute medication overuse (HFM+AMO). The objective of this report is to compare self-reported experiences in the migraine journey of adults with HFM+AMO to those who previously experienced HFM+AMO but currently have a sustained reduction in headache/migraine frequency and acute medication use.MethodsAn online survey was available to a general population panel of adults (≥18 years) with migraine per the ID Migraine™ screener. Respondents were classified into "current HFM+AMO" (within the last few months had ≥8 headache days/month and ≥10 days/month of acute medication use; n=440) or "previous HFM+AMO" (previously had HFM+AMO, but within the last few months had ≤7 headache days/month and ≤9 days/month of acute medication use; n=110). Survey questions pertained to demographics, diagnosis, living with migraine, healthcare provider (HCP) communication, and treatment.ResultsParticipants in the current HFM+AMO group had 15.2 monthly headache days and 17.4 days of monthly acute medication use in last few months compared to 4.2 and 4.1 days for the previous HFM+AMO group, respectively. Overall, current preventive pharmacologic treatment use was low (15-16%; P>0.1 for current vs previous) in both groups. Previous HFM+AMO respondents reported better current acute treatment optimization. More respondents with current (80%) than previous HFM+AMO (66%) expressed concern with their current health (P<0.05). More than one-third of both groups wished their HCP better understood their mental/emotional health (current 37%, previous 35%; P>0.1 for current vs previous) and 47% (current) to 54% (previous) of respondents worried about asking their HCP too many questions (P>0.1 for current vs previous).ConclusionApart from optimization of acute medication, medical interventions did not significantly differentiate between the current and previous HFM+AMO groups. Use of preventive pharmacological medication was low in both groups. Adults with current HFM+AMO more often had health concerns, yet both groups expressed concerns of disease burden. Optimization of acute and preventive medication and addressing mental/emotional health concerns of patients are areas where migraine care may impact outcomes regardless of their disease burden.