Determining Thresholds for Meaningful Change for the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) Total and Item-Specific Scores in Chronic Migraine
- PMID: 32862469
- PMCID: PMC7693226
- DOI: 10.1111/head.13946
Determining Thresholds for Meaningful Change for the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) Total and Item-Specific Scores in Chronic Migraine
Abstract
Objective: The objective of the analyses described here was to develop thresholds defining clinically meaningful response on the total and item scores of the 6-item short-form Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) in a population of patients with chronic migraine (CM).
Background: The HIT-6 is a short, easily understood, and useful measure of the impact of headache on daily life. Though widely used, limited literature supports a threshold value for clinically meaningful response within individuals over time for the HIT-6 total score and for the item scores, especially in the CM population.
Methods: PROMISE-2 is a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study comparing intravenous eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg with placebo for the preventive treatment of CM. Responder definitions for HIT-6 total and items scores using data from PROMISE-2 study were calculated via distribution-based and anchor-based methods. Distribution-based methods included half of the baseline standard deviation and baseline standard error of measurement. The change from baseline to week 12 in HIT-6 scores was assessed using the following anchors: patient global impression of change, reduction in migraine frequency, and change in EuroQol 5 dimensions 5 levels visual analog scale. Values from the literature and PROMISE-2 analyses were plotted against the cumulative distribution function of change values (baseline to week 12) and used to triangulate to empirically support clinically meaningful change definitions for the HIT-6 total and item scores in patients with CM.
Results: From the literature, 5 articles provided 7 candidate values for a responder threshold for the HIT-6 total score. From distribution- and anchor-based methods, 5 candidate values were derived from PROMISE-2 data. Using the median of all candidate values, a HIT-6 total score responder definition estimate of -6 (ie, ≥6-point improvement in the total score) appears most appropriate for discriminating between individuals with CM who have experienced meaningful change over time and those who have not. For item-level analyses using anchor-based methods, the responder definition for items 1-3 ("severe pain," "limits daily activities," and "lie down") was a 1-category improvement in response (eg, from Sometimes to Rarely); for items 4-6 ("too tired," "felt fed up or irritated," and "limits concentration"), a 2-category improvement in response (eg, from Always to Sometimes) was clinically meaningful.
Conclusions: Using a multifaceted, statistically-based approach, the recommended responder definition for the HIT-6 total score in the CM population is a ≥6-point decrease, consistent with previous literature. Anchor-based item-level responder thresholds were defined as a decrease of 1 or 2 categories, depending on the item. These CM-specific values will provide researchers and clinicians a means to interpret clinically meaningful change in the HIT-6 total and item scores and may facilitate the measurement of treatment benefits in specific functional domains of the HIT-6.
Keywords: 6-item short-form Headache Impact Test; PROMISE-2; chronic migraine; minimal clinically important difference; responder definition.
© 2020 American Headache Society.
Figures
![Fig. 1](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g001.gif)
![Fig. 2](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g002.gif)
![formula image](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g004.jpg)
![formula image](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g005.jpg)
![formula image](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g006.jpg)
![Figure 3](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g003.gif)
![formula image](https://cdn.statically.io/img/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/instance/7693226/bin/HEAD-60-2003-g006.jpg)
Similar articles
-
Psychometric validation and meaningful within-patient change of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome in patients with episodic and chronic migraine.Headache. 2021 Mar;61(3):511-526. doi: 10.1111/head.14031. Epub 2021 Jan 22. Headache. 2021. PMID: 33481276 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Migraine Headache Day Response Rates and the Implications to Patient Functioning: An Evaluation of 3 Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trials of Galcanezumab in Patients With Migraine.Headache. 2020 Nov;60(10):2304-2319. doi: 10.1111/head.14013. Headache. 2020. PMID: 33249580 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Psychometric Validation of the Role Function Restrictive Domain of the Migraine Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Version 2.1 Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome in Patients With Episodic and Chronic Migraine.Headache. 2019 May;59(5):756-774. doi: 10.1111/head.13497. Epub 2019 Mar 12. Headache. 2019. PMID: 30861580 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Content Validity of HIT-6 as a Measure of Headache Impact in People With Migraine: A Narrative Review.Headache. 2020 Jan;60(1):28-39. doi: 10.1111/head.13701. Epub 2019 Dec 6. Headache. 2020. PMID: 31811654 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Efficacy and Safety of Galcanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: A Narrative Review.Adv Ther. 2020 May;37(5):2034-2049. doi: 10.1007/s12325-020-01319-9. Epub 2020 Apr 21. Adv Ther. 2020. PMID: 32319039 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Multimodal digital health treatments for Chronic Migraine associated with Medication Overuse Headache: a literature appraisal and results of a single-arm open trial (the BE-HOME program).Neurol Sci. 2024 May 21. doi: 10.1007/s10072-024-07568-8. Online ahead of print. Neurol Sci. 2024. PMID: 38771524
-
Calcitonin gene-related peptide: a possible biomarker in migraine patients with patent foramen ovale.BMC Neurol. 2024 Apr 16;24(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s12883-024-03615-1. BMC Neurol. 2024. PMID: 38627623 Free PMC article.
-
Observational Retrospective Study in Patients Treated with Galcanezumab as Preventive Treatment for Migraine: The ORYGAM Study.Pain Ther. 2024 Jun;13(3):557-576. doi: 10.1007/s40122-024-00586-6. Epub 2024 Mar 28. Pain Ther. 2024. PMID: 38546937 Free PMC article.
-
Anti-CGRP and Anti-CGRP Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies for Migraine Prophylaxis: Retrospective Observational Study on 209 Patients.J Clin Med. 2024 Feb 17;13(4):1130. doi: 10.3390/jcm13041130. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 38398444 Free PMC article.
-
Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Neurological Conditions: Review of Concept and Methods.Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2023 Jul-Aug;26(4):334-343. doi: 10.4103/aian.aian_207_23. Epub 2023 Jun 12. Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2023. PMID: 37970301 Free PMC article.
References
-
- American Headache Society . The American Headache Society position statement on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice. Headache. 2019;59:1‐18. - PubMed
-
- Tassorelli C, Diener HC, Dodick DW, et al. Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine in adults. Cephalalgia. 2018;38:815‐832. - PubMed
-
- Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, Bjorner JB, et al. A six‐item short‐form survey for measuring headache impact: The HIT‐6. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:963‐974. - PubMed
-
- Bagley CL, Rendas‐Baum R, Maglinte GA, et al. Validating Migraine‐Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 in episodic and chronic migraine. Headache. 2011;52:409‐421. - PubMed
-
- Cole JC, Lin P, Rupnow MF. Validation of the Migraine‐Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ v. 2.1) for patients undergoing prophylactic migraine treatment. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:1231‐1237. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical