Search

In this article, we examine policies related to in-state resident tuition and state financial aid policies aimed at undocumented students. To help frame the discussion and spark further debate and research in this area the article seeks to do three things. First, it provides a comprehensive review of state and institutional in-state tuition policies aimed at undocumented students as well as state college or university system responses. Second, it charts the policy landscape for state financial aid access for this population. Third, it examines the numerous implications that such policies engender and highlights the role of the federal government and the proposed Dream Act in mitigating some of these concerns. It closes by underscoring the important financial role played by the critical interaction of state, institutional, and federal policies in making college going a reality for these students while proposing avenues for future study around the issue.

Objective: To describe differences in clinical and demographic characteristics between patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) and determine the effect of migraine subtype on patient‐reported outcome measures (PROM). Background: Prior studies have characterized migraine in the general population. While this provides a basis for our understanding of migraine, we have less insight into the characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes of migraine patients who present to subspecialty headache clinics. These patients represent a subset of the population that bears the greatest burden of migraine disability and are more representative of migraine patients who seek medical care. Valuable insights can be gained from a better understanding of CM and EM in this population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients with CM or EM seen in the Cleveland Clinic Headache Center between January 2012 and June 2017. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and patient‐reported outcome measures (3‐Level European Quality of Life 5‐Dimension [EQ‐5D‐3L], Headache Impact Test‐6 [HIT‐6], Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 [PHQ‐9]) were compared between groups. Results: Eleven thousand thirty‐seven patients who had 29,032 visits were included. More CM patients reported being on disability 517/3652 (14.2%) than EM patients 249/4881 (5.1%) and had significantly worse mean HIT‐6 (67.3 ± 7.4 vs. 63.1 ± 7.4, p < 0.001) and median [interquartile range] EQ‐5D‐3L (0.77 [0.44–0.82] vs. 0.83 [0.77–1.00], p < 0.001), and PHQ‐9 (10 [6–16] vs. 5 [2–10], p < 0.001). Conclusions: There are multiple differences in demographic characteristics and comorbid conditions between patients with CM and EM. After adjustment for these factors, CM patients had higher PHQ‐9 scores, lower quality of life scores, greater disability, and greater work restrictions/unemployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the burden and consequences of migraine in Brazil in terms of health‐related quality of life (HRQoL), work productivity and daily activities, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU). Background: Despite existing data on how migraine affects populations worldwide, there are limited data on the burden of migraine in Latin America. Methods: This cross‐sectional study used patient‐reported data from the 2018 Brazil National Health and Wellness Survey. HRQoL scores (EuroQol 5‐dimension 5‐level [EQ‐5D‐5L]; 36‐item Short Form Health Survey, version 2 [SF‐36v2]; and Short Form 6‐dimension [SF‐6D]), impairments to work productivity and daily activities (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire), and all‐cause HRU were compared between migraine respondents and matched non‐migraine controls. Results: Of the 12,000 total respondents in the survey database, 1643 self‐reported a physician diagnosis of migraine and were propensity score matched 1:1 with controls without migraine. HRQoL was lower in patients with migraine versus non‐migraine controls, with significantly lower SF‐36v2 physical (mean [± SD] 50.3 [7.5] vs. 52.0 [7.6]) and mental component (mean [± SD] 42.9 [10.2] vs. 46.0 [9.9]) summary scores and SF‐6D (mean [± SD] 0.7 [0.1] vs. 0.7 [0.1]) and EQ‐5D‐5L (mean [± SD] 0.7 [0.2] vs. 0.8 [0.2]) utility scores (all p < 0.001). Patients with migraine reported higher levels of work productivity loss (mean [± SD], 40.6% [31.4%] vs. 28.6% [30.9%], including absenteeism 12.8% [19.1%] vs. 8.4% [17.1%] and presenteeism 35.0% [28.7%] vs. 24.8% [28.0%]; all p < 0.001); activity impairment (mean [± SD] 36.0% [28.8%] vs. 25.5% [28.1%]; p < 0.001); and significantly higher HRU in the past 6 months (healthcare provider and emergency department visits [mean [± SD] 7.2 [9.5] vs. 4.5 [6.3] and 1.7 [3.8] vs. 0.9 [2.2]; both p < 0.001] and hospitalizations [mean [± SD] 0.4 [2.7] vs. 0.2 [1.1]; p = 0.002]) than controls. Conclusion: Migraine is associated with poorer HRQoL, higher all‐cause HRU, and greater activity impairment and work productivity loss versus non‐migraine controls in Brazil. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Migraine is a highly disabling and often chronic neurological disease that affects more than one billion people globally. Preventive migraine treatment is recommended for individuals who have frequent and/or disabling attacks; however, many of the medications used for migraine prevention (e.g., antiepileptics, antidepressants, antihypertensives) were not specifically developed for migraine, and often have limited efficacy or poor tolerability. Four monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway, which is believed to play a crucial role in the pathophysiology of migraine, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. All four migraine-specific treatments have demonstrated efficacy based on reductions in monthly days with migraine for patients with both episodic and chronic migraine, including those with comorbidities. They have also demonstrated favorable safety and tolerability profiles. Based on these accounts, CGRP pathway-targeted monoclonal antibodies have the potential to revolutionize preventive treatment for patients with migraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin‐gene‐related peptide, has demonstrated efficacy as a preventive treatment for adults with episodic migraine or chronic migraine and inadequate response to two to four prior preventive treatment classes in the phase 3b FOCUS study. In this post hoc analysis, efficacy and effects on quality‐of‐life outcomes for fremanezumab were evaluated in subgroups of patients with and without aura or similar neurological symptoms, here referred to as migraine with or without associated neurological dysfunction. Methods: In the FOCUS study, 838 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab or matched placebo for 12 weeks of double‐blind treatment. For this post hoc analysis, subgroups of patients with migraine with and without associated neurological dysfunction at baseline were identified based on patient response to questions about symptoms. Results: In patients with migraine with associated neurological dysfunction at baseline, fremanezumab significantly reduced monthly average days with neurological symptoms (quarterly, −1.7 days; monthly, −1.8 days) compared to placebo (−0.5 days; both p ≤ 0.01). In comparison with placebo, both dosing regimens of fremanezumab yielded greater reductions in monthly migraine days over 12 weeks (p < 0.0001) and improvements in Headache Impact Test 6 and Migraine‐Specific Quality of Life scores over the last 4 weeks (p < 0.05), regardless of neurological dysfunction at baseline. Conclusions: Fremanezumab reduced days with neurological symptoms, effectively prevented migraine, and improved quality of life in patients with migraine with associated neurological dysfunction, including those with previous inadequate response to two to four migraine preventive medication classes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on Fremanezumab in individuals with chronic migraine showing inadequate response to onabotulinumtoxin A and topiramate or valproic acid. Topics include Fremanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) selectively target calcitonin gene-related peptide; and treatment-by-subgroup interactions being assessed using an analysis of covariance model for the efficacy outcomes.

Background: Migraine is associated with depression as well as negative impact on quality of life and work productivity. Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa), selectively targets the calcitonin gene‐related peptide and has proven efficacy for the preventive treatment of migraine. Objective: In this open‐label extension (OLE) of the phase 3b FOCUS study, we assessed patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) over time. Methods: Patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) completing the 12‐week, double‐blind (DB) period of the FOCUS trial entered the 12‐week OLE and received three monthly doses of fremanezumab (225 mg). PROs included the Migraine‐Specific Quality of Life (MSQoL) questionnaire (role function—restrictive [RFR], role function—preventive [RFP], and emotional function [EF] domains), EuroQol‐5‐Dimension‐5‐Level (EQ‐5D‐5L) questionnaire, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) assessment, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire, and 9‐Item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ‐9). Results: A total of 838 patients were randomized in the DB period, 807 entered the OLE at 3 months, and 772 were still enrolled at 6 months. At 6 months, patients in the quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, and placebo DB randomization groups, respectively, reported improvements in RFR (mean [standard deviation] change from baseline: 24.6 [21.9]; 22.9 [21.3]; 20.8 [26.5]), RFP (19.6 [20.0]; 18.3 [19.7]; 16.0 [19.9]), and EF (22.5 [24.2]; 19.1 [23.6]; 17.2 [24.7]) domains of the MSQoL questionnaire, the EQ‐5D‐5L questionnaire (8.0 [19.6]; 7.3 [21.1]; 6.6 [21.0]), all four domains of the WPAI questionnaire, and the PHQ‐9 (−2.4 [5.3]; −1.6 [5.5]; −2.0 [4.9]); 77.1% (209/271), 75.4% (205/272), and 68.8% (181/263) of patients were identified as PGIC responders. Conclusion: Among patients with EM or CM and prior inadequate response to multiple migraine‐preventive medication classes, progressive improvements in MSQoL, depression, and work productivity were achieved during 6 months of fremanezumab treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]