Abstract:In this editorial we present a discussion on the interpretation of the results of trials on prophylactic treatments. The aim of prophylactic treatments is twofold, to limit the burden of various diseases and, if possible, change their natural course. However, the way in which we measure the effect size of prophylactic treatments varies significantly across conditions, depending on their morbidity, mortality, symptoms, and quality of life impact, but mainly depending on the way the specific condition manifests, i.e. its symptoms and its natural course. In the case of migraine, a polygenic brain disease that is the second leading cause of disability worldwide, early introduction of migraine prophylactic treatment is crucial to limit attack frequency and delay chronification and involvement of comorbidities, that make it intractable and difficult to treat Citation 1 . The International Headache Society (IHS) recommends that testing of emerging prophylactic treatments for migraine should include reduction in migraine attack frequency, among other efficacy parameters, as a primary efficacy endpoint. For the time being, and even though we already have good evidence that several prophylactic treatments significantly reduce the frequency of migraines, the IHS also recommends comparing new drug treatments in clinical trials with a placebo Citation 2–4 . The use of placebo (s) allows us to assess the effectiveness of a treatment over the positive expectation we all have that a therapeutic action will do more good than harm, which is called in medicine placebo effect . In contrast, placebo , or placebos in plural, refer to the inert substances or interventions used to induce a positive expectation Citation 5 . The way we evaluate the positive predisposition in a clinical trial is influenced by several parameters and finally we are monitoring the placebo response , which contains, in addition to the placebo effect, random beneficial changes that would occur in a patient without the effect of any treatment, within the framework of the natural history of the disease. Another important cofounder is the return to the average state of the condition, the so-called regression toward the mean . In clinical trials we usually recruit people with an exacerbation of the disease (as the inclusion criteria demand) which is normally expected to regress toward the mean after some time, also without the intervention of any treatment. All those beneficial changes observed after the application of placebo are collectively referred as placebo response and they are identifiable in clinical trials, by assessing the proportion of participants who achieved the primary efficacy endpoint in the placebo-treated arm Citation 5 . Interestingly, placebo responses in trials for migraine prophylaxis have increased over the past 30 years, making the comparison of the novel treatments with placebo more imperative than it used to be Citation 6 . Several factors might influence placebo effect and response including the gender, age, and education of a patient, the price of the drug, the status of the doctor recommending a treatment, the patient's previous experiences, the route of administation, among several other modifiable, or non-modifiable factors Citation 5 . Previous studies have shown that the placebo responses in anti-migraine preventative medications given parenterally were greater than in studies testing oral medications Citation 7–9 . Whether this increased placebo response ultimately narrowed the therapeutic gain (=treatment response minus placebo response) in a study and limited the statistical verification of a therapeutic effect remains unclear, but it is a hypothesis that one should investigate. We knew from studies with botulinumtoxinΑ for example, that placebo response is increased compared to studies testing oral drugs Citation 7 . And the same occurred when placebo responses in trials for the prevention of migraine with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide (anti-CGRP mAbs) were compared to placebo responses in trials with oral anti-migraine treatments Citation 9 , <span class -Abstract Truncated-

Real world preventative drug management of migraine among Spanish neurologists

Migraine treatment: quo vadis? Real-world data study (2015–2022) in Spain

Patients and general practitioners assessment of the main outcomes employed in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a cross sectional study

[Management of migraine by hospital emergency departments: a retrospective observational study carried out at the Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio]

Preventive and abortive treatment of migraine with traditional drugs. The state of the art

Preferences for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder treatments: a conjoint analysis with neurologists in Spain

Real-world approaches to outpatient treatment of status migrainosus: A survey study

Redefining migraine prevention: early treatment with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies enhances response in the real world

Demographic Data, Imposed Burden and Satisfaction to Acute and Prophylactic Treatments in the Era of New Treatment Options

Acute medications' intake for migraine: a one-year report in patients undergoing first evaluation at a third level Italian headache center

Treatment Patterns and Persistence Among Patients Newly Diagnosed With Migraine in South Korea: A Retrospective Analysis of Health Claims Data

Competing treatments for migraine: a headache for decision-makers

Acute treatment of migraine: quantifying the unmet need through real-world data in Italy

Placebo responses vary by route of administration in migraine prevention trials. What does this mean?

Worldwide availability of medications for migraine and tension-type headache: A survey of the International Headache Society

Is erenumab an efficient alternative for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in Spain? Results of a cost-effectiveness analysis

Efficacy of migraine prophylaxis treatments for treatment-naïve patients and those with prior treatment failure: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical reappraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention - part 3: topiramate

Real-world effectiveness and satisfaction with intravenous eptinezumab treatment in patients with chronic migraine: REVIEW, an observational, multi-site, US-based study

Migraine: Pathophysiology, Pharmacology, Treatment and Future Trends

Simultaneous Comparisons of 25 Acute Migraine Medications Based on 10 Million Users' Self-Reported Records From a Smartphone Application