Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35363381›Full record

ReviewHeadache2022

Challenges and complexities in designing cluster headache prevention clinical trials: A narrative review.

David W Dodick, Peter J Goadsby, Messoud Ashina, Cristina Tassorelli, Hans-Peter Hundemer, Jennifer N Bardos, Richard Wenzel Md, Phebe Kemmer, Robert Conley, James M Martinez and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Headache, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

David W DodickDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9486-6790
Peter J GoadsbyNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Wellcome Trust King's Clinical Research Facility, King's College London, London, UK.
Messoud AshinaDepartment of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Cristina TassorelliHeadache Science Centre, IRCCS Mondino Foundation, Pavia, Italy.
Hans-Peter HundemerEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Jennifer N BardosEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Richard Wenzel MdEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Phebe KemmerEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Robert ConleyEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
James M MartinezEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Tina OakesEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
Eli Lilly (United States) · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Maryland, Baltimore · USUniversity of Pavia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide a review of challenges in clinical trials for the preventive treatment of cluster headache (CH) and highlight considerations for future studies.

backgroundCurrent guidelines for preventive treatment of CH are largely based on off-label therapies supported by a limited number of small randomized controlled trials. Guidelines for clinical trial design for CH treatments from the International Headache Society were last issued in 1995. METHODS/

resultsRandomized controlled clinical trials were identified in the European and/or United States clinical trial registries with a search term of "cluster headache," and manually reviewed. Cumulatively, there were 27 unique placebo-controlled prevention trials for episodic and/or chronic CH, of which 12 were either ongoing, not yet recruiting, or the status was unknown. Of the remaining 15 trials, 5 were terminated early and 7 of the 10 completed trials enrolled fewer patients than planned or did not report the planned sample size. A systematic search of PubMed was also utilized to identify published manuscripts reporting results from placebo-controlled preventive trials of CH. This search yielded 16 publications, of which 7 were registered. Through critical review of trial data and published manuscripts, challenges and complexities encountered in clinical trials for the preventive treatment of CH were identified. For example, the excruciating pain associated with CH demands a suitably limited baseline duration, rapid treatment efficacy onset, and poses a specific issue regarding duration of investigational treatment period and length of exposure to placebo. In episodic CH, spontaneous remission as part of natural history, and the unpredictability and irregularity of cluster periods across patients present additional key challenges.

conclusionsOptimal CH trial design should balance sound methodology to demonstrate efficacy of a potential treatment with patient needs and the natural history of the disease, including unique outcome measures and endpoint timings for chronic versus episodic CH.

Indexed as

Cluster HeadacheHeadacheHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Designchronic cluster headacheclinical trial designepisodic cluster headache

Identifiers

PMID35363381
PMCPMC9325511
OpenAlexW4220675040

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.