Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41366588›Full record

SynthesisThe AAPS journal2025

Meta-Analysis of the Placebo Response in Chronic and Episodic Migraine: Insights from Migraine Preventive Drug Trials.

Anantha Ram Nookala, Nimishraj Panse, Gopichand Gottipati, Heather D Fitter, Ramana Uppoor, Mehul Mehta, Sreedharan Sabarinath

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The AAPS journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anantha Ram NookalaOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2191-2589
Nimishraj PanseOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-2479-5404
Gopichand GottipatiOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-5654-5345
Heather D FitterOffice of Neuroscience, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0009-0001-9196-9217
Ramana UppoorOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0009-0009-1459-9062
Mehul MehtaOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4973-3822
Sreedharan SabarinathOffice of Clinical Pharmacology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food & Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA. Sreedharan.sabarinath@fda.hhs.gov.ORCID 0009-0006-0392-4366

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Randomized, well-controlled trials are the gold-standard for evaluating novel therapies, but they often fail to fully account for the placebo response, particularly in pain-related conditions such as migraine, where subjective improvement is common in placebo groups. This placebo response is influenced by individual-level factors, such as prior treatment experience, expectations of treatment benefit, and demographic characteristics such as age, race, sex, and clinical trial location. As clinical trials grow increasingly global and diverse, ensuring balanced demographic distribution across treatment arms is essential to accurately assess efficacy. We conducted a meta-analysis of placebo arm data from 14 pivotal Phase 2 and 3 trials that supported approval of six drugs for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine. Data were stratified by migraine type and analyzed by demographic variables including age, sex, race, menopause status, trial region, prior prophylactic medication use, route of administration, and frequency. Changes from baseline were evaluated for monthly migraine days (primary endpoint) and migraine-related symptoms (e.g., headache days, headache days of moderate/severe intensity, photophobia/phonophobia days, and nausea/vomiting days). Placebo responses were consistently higher in subjects who had not used prior preventive medications, African Americans, and participants enrolled in North America. These findings suggest that placebo response in migraine trials may be modulated by demographic and treatment-related factors, especially when subjective endpoints are used. Accounting for these variables during trial design and subject allocation could help minimize bias, reduce the risk of false negative outcomes, and enhance the likelihood of accurately demonstrating treatment efficacy.

Indexed as

Migraine DisordersPlacebo EffectAdultChronic DiseaseClinical Trials, Phase II as TopicClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicchronic migraineclinical trial designepisodic migrainemeta-analysisplacebo response

Identifiers

PMID41366588
PMCPMC12906868

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.