CHAMP
(2017)Objective
To assess the efficacy of amitriptyline and topiramate versus placebo for migraine prevention in children and adolescents.
Study Summary
β’ High placebo response observed (~60%).
β’ Both active drugs associated with increased adverse events.
Intervention
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial of amitriptyline (1 mg/kg/day), topiramate (2 mg/kg/day), and placebo over 24 weeks in children aged 8β17 with β₯4 headache days/month. Dosing included 8-week titration and 16-week maintenance.
Inclusion Criteria
Children aged 8β17 with migraine (with or without aura) or chronic migraine; PedMIDAS score 11β139; β₯4 headache days in a 28-day baseline diary.
Study Design
Arms: Amitriptyline, Topiramate, Placebo
Patients per Arm: 132 (Amitriptyline), 130 (Topiramate), 66 (Placebo)
Outcome
β’ No significant differences in headache-related disability (PedMIDAS): P=0.91 (amitriptyline vs placebo), P=0.13 (topiramate vs placebo).
β’ Mean headache days reduction (baseline to 24 weeks): -6.7 (Amitriptyline), -6.7 (Topiramate), -5.9 (Placebo); no significant differences.
β’ Completion rate: 80% (Amitriptyline), 78% (Topiramate), 89% (Placebo).
β’ Serious adverse events: Amitriptyline (6), Topiramate (4), Placebo (2); included altered mood and suicide attempt in active arms.
β’ Significant side effects: Paresthesia (31%, Topiramate), Fatigue (30%, Amitriptyline), Dry mouth (25%, Amitriptyline), Weight loss (8%, Topiramate).
Bottom Line
Neither amitriptyline nor topiramate was superior to placebo for reducing headache frequency or disability in pediatric migraine over 24 weeks, and both active drugs were associated with higher rates of adverse events including serious psychiatric effects. These findings suggest that preventive medication strategies effective in adults may not apply to pediatric patients, and the high placebo response rate (61%) may indicate a role for non-pharmacological approaches
Major Points
- Phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized 361 children/adolescents 8-17 years with migraine in 2:2:1 ratio to amitriptyline, topiramate, or placebo
- Trial was stopped early for futility after planned interim analysis of 225 patients showed conditional power of only 16% for amitriptyline vs placebo and 14% for topiramate vs placebo
- Primary outcome (β₯50% reduction in headache days) showed no significant differences: 52% amitriptyline, 55% topiramate, 61% placebo (p=0.26 and p=0.48)
- Very high placebo response rate (61%) consistent with previous pediatric headache trials, possibly advantageous for this population
- No significant differences in any secondary outcomes including PedMIDAS disability scores, absolute headache day reduction, or trial completion rates
- Absolute reduction in headache days similar across groups: -6.7 days amitriptyline, -6.7 days topiramate, -5.9 days placebo (all clinically meaningful)
- Active drugs associated with significantly higher adverse event rates: fatigue (30% amitriptyline, 25% topiramate vs 14% placebo) and paresthesia (31% topiramate vs 7% amitriptyline vs 8% placebo)
- Serious psychiatric adverse events occurred with active treatments: 3 altered mood events with amitriptyline and 1 suicide attempt with topiramate
- Adherence was good with 81% of amitriptyline and 74% of topiramate patients having detectable drug levels
- Results suggest adult migraine treatment models may not apply to pediatric patients, and data do not support favorable risk-benefit profile for these medications in children
- Study population representative of typical pediatric migraine patients seen in clinical practice based on epidemiological data
- Multiple sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness of null findings across different missing data assumptions
Study Design
- Study Type
- Phase 3, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial with 2:2:1 allocation ratio
- Blinding
- Double-blind: patients, families, site investigators, site staff, and data coordinating center all masked to treatment assignment throughout the trial
- Sample Size
- 361
- Follow-up
- 24 weeks treatment period (8 weeks dose escalation, 16 weeks maintenance) plus 2-week weaning and 4-week follow-up = 30 weeks total
- Centers
- 31
Primary Outcome
Definition: Relative reduction of 50% or more in number of headache days comparing 28-day baseline period with last 28 days of 24-week trial. Headache day defined as calendar day (00:00 to 23:59) when patient reported β₯4 continuous hours of headache per daily diary
| Control | Intervention | HR/OR | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61% (40/66) | 52% amitriptyline (69/132); 55% topiramate (72/130) | - | Amitriptyline vs placebo p=0.26; Topiramate vs placebo p=0.48; Amitriptyline vs topiramate p=0.49 |
Limitations & Criticisms
- Trial stopped early for futility may have limited ability to detect smaller treatment effects, though multiple sensitivity analyses supported null findings
- Very high placebo response rate (61%) may have made it difficult to demonstrate drug superiority, though this is consistent with pediatric headache literature
- Relatively short 24-week treatment duration may not capture longer-term benefits or harms of these medications
- Dose escalation over 8 weeks followed by only 16-week maintenance may have been insufficient time at therapeutic dose
- No active comparator between the two drugs and placebo - would have benefited from head-to-head comparison in separate powered trial
- Inclusion of both episodic (4-14 days) and chronic (β₯15 days) migraine may have created heterogeneous population, though stratification attempted to address this
- Predominantly female (68%) and white (70%) population limits generalizability to more diverse pediatric populations
- Two-thirds of patients had previously tried and failed prophylactic medications, suggesting potentially treatment-refractory population
- No assessment of non-pharmacological interventions or behavioral treatments that might enhance or replace medication
- Missing data rate of 21% in amitriptyline and 22% in topiramate groups (vs 11% placebo) could introduce bias despite intention-to-treat analysis
- Adherence measured by drug levels only in subset of patients, not all participants
- Study powered for 70% drug response vs 50% placebo, but actual rates were much lower, raising questions about initial assumptions
- No long-term follow-up data after weaning period to assess durability of effects or rebound
- Child Depression Inventory and BRIEF assessments done quarterly may have missed psychiatric adverse events between visits
- Exclusion of very severe disability (PedMIDAS >139) limits applicability to most severely affected children
Citation
N Engl J Med 2017;376:115-24