Efficacy and tolerability in migraine prophylaxis of flunarizine in reduced doses: a comparison with propranolol 160 mg daily

The effect of migraine prophylaxis on migraine-related resource use and productivity

In the US, it is estimated that up to 10% of men and 25% of women, particularly those aged 25-55 years, experience debilitating migraines, such that the condition presents an enormous economic burden for patients, health systems, employers and society. Migraine headache is a particularly prevalent condition associated with major reductions in patients' quality of life. From a payer perspective, the implementation of relevant programmes of migraine prophylaxis is highly desirable. Consistent evidence exists, from several randomized, controlled studies, of the efficacy of amitriptyline, divalproex sodium, propranolol, timolol and topiramate in migraine prophylaxis. Considering resource utilization, various studies suggest that migraine prophylaxis with antiepileptics, antidepressants, beta-blockers or calcium channel antagonists markedly reduces triptan use and visits to physician offices and emergency departments (EDs), without compromising quality of care or treatment outcomes. Over recent years, the effects of topiramate in reducing resource utilization in patients with migraine have been relatively widely studied. In US claims database analyses involving >4000 patients with migraine, topiramate significantly reduced triptan use by up to 20% in the 12-month period after starting treatment. Reductions were also noted in the numbers of ED visits, diagnostic procedures, hospital admissions and migraine-related hospitalization days. These long-term benefits of topiramate manifested without any increase in overall headache-related costs. Furthermore, in detailed modelling analyses based on UK and US data, topiramate-induced savings in acute medical services were estimated to offset about one-quarter of the monthly per patient cost of the topiramate regimen, which was shown to be a dominant cost-effective intervention relative to no preventive therapy: cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated as pound 5728 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) [2005 costings] and $US10 888 per QALY (2002 costings), respectively. Overall, there is a need to improve quality of care in migraine, and prophylactic therapy appears to be an effective option, particularly with respect to decreasing resource use and improving productivity. For both health-plan payers and employers, topiramate appears to be a cost-effective intervention for preventing migraine.

Minimal acupuncture is not a valid placebo control in randomised controlled trials of acupuncture: a physiologist's perspective

Placebo-control of acupuncture is used to evaluate and distinguish between the specific effects and the non-specific ones. During 'true' acupuncture treatment in general, the needles are inserted into acupoints and stimulated until deqi is evoked. In contrast, during placebo acupuncture, the needles are inserted into non-acupoints and/or superficially (so-called minimal acupuncture). A sham acupuncture needle with a blunt tip may be used in placebo acupuncture. Both minimal acupuncture and the placebo acupuncture with the sham acupuncture needle touching the skin would evoke activity in cutaneous afferent nerves. This afferent nerve activity has pronounced effects on the functional connectivity in the brain resulting in a 'limbic touch response'. Clinical studies showed that both acupuncture and minimal acupuncture procedures induced significant alleviation of migraine and that both procedures were equally effective. In other conditions such as low back pain and knee osteoarthritis, acupuncture was found to be more potent than minimal acupuncture and conventional non-acupuncture treatment. It is probable that the responses to 'true' acupuncture and minimal acupuncture are dependent on the aetiology of the pain. Furthermore, patients and healthy individuals may have different responses. In this paper, we argue that minimal acupuncture is not valid as an inert placebo-control despite its conceptual brilliance.

Comparison of the effectiveness of topiramate and sodium valproate in pediatric migraine

Frequent migraine headaches can have a significant impact on disability, prompting the need for early recognition and treatment. The objective of this study is to compare the efficacy of topiramate and sodium valproate for the prevention of pediatric migraine, retrospectively. Mean monthly migraine frequency, intensity, and duration in the 28 patients treated with topiramate decreased from 15.3 +/- 10.1 to 4.4 +/- 5.5 episode, from 6.8 +/- 1 to 3.2 +/- 1, and from 10.2 +/- 9.4 to 2.4 +/- 3.1 hours, respectively. Headache disability improved with a reduction of Pediatric Migraine Disability Assessment score from 36 +/- 29.5 to 4.6 +/- 6.5 (P < .05). Similarly, mean monthly headache frequency, headache intensity, headache duration, and Pediatric Migraine Disability Assessment score in the 20 patients treated with sodium valproate decreased from 20.1 +/- 10.2 to 6.6 +/- 8.6, from 7.1 +/- 1 to 3.4 +/- 2.1, from 7 +/- 12 to 1.4 +/- 2.5 hours, and from 20.5 +/- 16.1 to 5.5 +/- 9.2, respectively (P < .05). In conclusion, valproate and topiramate seem to be able to manage successfully childhood migraine without substantial differences in efficacy.

The importance of placebo in headache research

The best way to appreciate the efficacy of drug and behavioural therapy in the acute and prophylactic treatment of headache is to perform placebo-controlled randomized trials. In order to plan and conduct these studies in the most appropriate way, it is desirable to know which factors influence the placebo response. This paper reviews factors which influence the placebo response in clinical trials, such as expectation, blinding, route of application of drugs and age, gender and geographical distribution. Response rates of placebo in the treatment of acute headache episodes are higher than in headache prophylaxis. Invasive procedures such as injections have a higher placebo response compared with oral drugs. Variables known to influence the placebo response have to be taken into consideration to calculate properly the power of planned randomized trials.

Cost-Minimization Analysis Comparing Topiramate with Standard Treatments in Migraine Prophylaxis

Migraine is a common disorder with a relatively high burden of disease from the perspective of both society and the individual patient. Optimizing the use of prophylactic treatment may decrease the frequency and severity of attacks thus reducing the burden of disease. In this regard, topiramate has been found to be as effective as propranolol in the prevention of migraine attacks. In the present study, a cost-minimization analysis was performed. Monthly preventive medication cost and price per migraine attack reduced were used as measures. In comparison with propranolol and flunarizine, topiramate was identified as being the most costly option for migraine prophylaxis with a monthly drug cost of USD 24.97-45.04 as compared with propranolol (USD 1.72-6.87) and flunarizine (USD 6.09-12.18). Current treatment options would appear to offer better value for money in achieving effective migraine prophylaxis unless additional benefits can be identified for topiramate in this patient group.

Effectiveness and tolerability of acupuncture compared with metoprolol in migraine prophylaxis

OBJECTIVES

In a randomized controlled multicenter trial extending over 24 weeks, we investigated whether acupuncture is as effective and safe as metoprolol in the prophylactic treatment of migraine under conditions similar to routine care.

METHODS

One hundred fourteen migraine patients could be randomized to treatment over 12 weeks either with acupuncture (8 to 15 sessions) or metoprolol (100 to 200 mg daily). Main outcome measure was the difference in the number of migraine days between baseline and the weeks 9 to 12 after randomization (derived from a headache diary).

RESULTS

Two of 59 patients randomized to acupuncture withdrew prematurely from the study compared to 18 of 55 randomized to metoprolol. The number of migraine days decreased by 2.5 +/- 2.9 days (baseline 5.8 +/- 2.5 days) in the acupuncture group compared to 2.2 +/- 2.7 days (baseline 5.8 +/- 2.9 days) in the metoprolol group (P= .721). The proportion of responders (reduction of migraine attacks by > or =50%) was 61% for acupuncture and 49% for metoprolol. Both physicians and patients reported fewer adverse effects in the acupuncture group.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to missing the recruitment target (480 patients) and the high drop-out in the metoprolol group the results must be interpreted with caution. Still, they suggest that acupuncture might be an effective and safe treatment option for patients unwilling or unable to use drug prophylaxis.

Practical considerations for the treatment of elderly patients with migraine

Treatment of migraine presents special problems in the elderly. Co-morbid diseases may prohibit the use of some medications. Moreover, even when these contraindications do not exist, older patients are more likely than younger ones to develop adverse events. Managing older migraine patients, therefore, necessitates particular caution, including taking into account possible pharmacological interactions associated with the greater use of drugs for concomitant diseases in the elderly. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the safest drug for symptomatic treatment of migraine in the elderly. Use of selective serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists ('triptans') is not recommended, even in the absence of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular risk, and NSAID use should be limited because of potential gastrointestinal adverse effects. Prophylactic treatments include antidepressants, beta-adrenoceptor antagonists, calcium channel antagonists and antiepileptics. Selection of a drug from one of these classes should be dictated by the patient's co-morbidities. Beta-adrenoceptor antagonists are appropriate in patients with hypertension but are contraindicated in those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, heart failure and peripheral vascular disease. Use of antidepressants in low doses is, in general, well tolerated by elderly people and as effective, overall, as in young adults. This approach is preferred in patients with concomitant mood disorders. However, prostatism, glaucoma and heart disease make the use of tricyclic antidepressants more difficult. Fewer efficacy data in the elderly are available for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which can be tried in particular cases because of their good tolerability profile. Calcium channel antagonists are contraindicated in patients with hypotension, heart failure, atrioventricular block, Parkinson's disease or depression (flunarizine), and in those taking beta-adrenoceptor antagonists and monoamine oxidase inhibitors (verapamil). Antiepileptic drug use should be limited to migraine with high frequency of attacks and refractoriness to other treatments. Promising additional strategies include ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonists because of their effectiveness and good tolerability in patients with migraine, particularly in those with hypertension. Because of its favourable compliance and safety profile, botulinum toxin type A can be considered an alternative treatment in elderly migraine patients who have not responded to other currently available migraine prophylactic agents. Pharmacological treatment of migraine poses special problems in regard to both symptomatic and prophylactic treatment. Contraindications to triptan use, adverse effects of NSAIDs, and unwanted reactions to some antiemetics reduce the list of drugs available for the treatment of migraine attacks in elderly patients. The choice of prophylactic treatment (beta-adrenoceptor antagonists, calcium channel antagonists, antiepileptics, and more recently, some antihypertensive drugs) is influenced by co-morbidities and should be directed at those drugs that are believed to have fewer adverse effects and a better safety profile. Unfortunately, for most of these drugs, efficacy studies are lacking in the elderly.

Functional gastrointestinal disorders in migrainous children: efficacy of flunarizine

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) in children with migraine headache and the effects of flunarizine on gastrointestinal manifestations. We studied 50 migrainous children (mean age 8.63 years). The clinical pattern and the diagnosis of FGIDs were obtained from structured questionnaires. All subjects underwent measurement of total gastric emptying time (TGEt) performed by real-time ultrasonography of the gastric antrum at baseline (T0). In the second part of the study, we evaluated 10 migrainous children (mean age 9.8 years) with associated FGIDs. In these 10 patients, repeated TGEt evaluation together with a detailed symptom history was obtained after 1 (T1) and 2 months (T2) of treatment with flunarizine. Control groups were composed of 10 migrainous children without FGIDs (mean age 9.2 years) and nine sex- and age-matched healthy children. Gastrointestinal disorders were present in 70% of the patients. Migrainous children with FGIDs had significantly (P < 0.01) more prolonged TGEt than subjects without FGIDs. Prior to therapy, all migrainous children with FGIDs had prolongation of TGEt compared with controls (P < 0.05). Patients on flunarizine had a significant decrease in TGEt at both 1 (P < 0.01) and 2 months (P = 0.002) of therapy. The mean frequency of abdominal pain per month was significantly (P < 0.001) reduced at T1 compared with T0. The mean frequency of vomiting per month was significantly decreased at T1 (P < 0.05) and even more so at T2 (P < 0.01). Finally, the mean frequency of headache per month was significantly reduced only at T2 (P < 0.05), whereas the mean duration of headache was significantly decreased at T1 (P < 0.01) with no difference between T1 and T2. Most children with migraine report FGIDs, associated with a delayed gastric emptying. Flunarizine decreases the frequency and duration of migrainous episodes as well as the gastrointestinal symptoms.

EFNS guideline on the drug treatment of migraine - report of an EFNS task force

Migraine is one of the most frequent disabling neurological conditions with a major impact on the patients' quality of life. To give evidence-based or expert recommendations for the different drug treatment procedures of the different migraine syndromes based on a literature search and an consensus in an expert panel. All available medical reference systems were screened for all kinds of clinical studies on migraine with and without aura and on migraine-like syndromes. The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the EFNS resulting in level A,B, or C recommendations and good practice points. For the acute treatment of migraine attacks, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and triptans are recommended. The administration should follow the concept of stratified treatment. Before intake of NSAIDs and triptans, oral metoclopramide or domperidon is recommended. In very severe attacks, intravenous acetylsalicylic acid or subcutaneous sumatriptan are drugs of first choice. A status migrainosus can probably be treated by steroids. For the prophylaxis of migraine, betablockers (propranolol and metoprolol), flunarizine, valproic acid, and topiramate are drugs of first choice. Drugs of second choice for migraine prophylaxis are amitriptyline, naproxen, petasites, and bisoprolol.

Migraine: a review and future directions for treatment

Migraine is a chronic, neurological disorder generally manifesting itself in attacks with severe headache, nausea and an increased reactivity to sensory stimuli. A low migraine threshold is set by genetic factors, although the phenotype also modulates the manifestations. The 1-year prevalence is approximately 13% and is higher among women. Patients usually experience neuropsychological dysfunction, and sometimes also reversible focal neurological symptoms. The trajectories of the characteristic symptoms of acute migraine usually follow a similar time course, indicating a reciprocal underlying mechanism. A central nervous system hyperexcitability has been demonstrated in neurophysiological studies. The dibilitating effects of migraine are not confined to the attacks per se. Many individuals do not recover completely between the attacks and most report a negative impact on the most important life domains, and an interest in testing other treatments. Young persons have a higher frequency of attacks. Acute treatment should routinely be initiated with an analgesic plus a prokinetic anti-emetic. Triptans must not be provided early during the attack to ensure their efficacy. The natural course of attacks is commonly only temporarily altered by acute treatment. Non-pharmacological treatment and drugs may be equally viable in prophylaxis for migraine. In more complicated cases, conjoint therapy should be considered. New strategies to improve adherence with existing therapeutic regimens might yield greater benefits than will new pharmacological agents.

Treatment in a Randomized Multicenter Trial of Acupuncture for Migraine (ART Migraine)

BACKGROUND

This paper aims to describe the characteristics of physicians and interventions of a large, multicenter randomized trial of acupuncture for migraine (ART Migraine) in order to enable acupuncturists to assess the study interventions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

302 patients suffering from migraine were randomized to 12 sessions of semi-standardized acupuncture (6 predefined basic points, recommendations for optional individual choice of additional points given), standardized minimal acupuncture (superficial needling of at least 5 of 10 predefined, distant non-acupuncture points) or a waiting list. 30 physicians trained and experienced in acupuncture from 18 centers in Germany participated in the trial.

RESULTS

The median duration of acupuncture training of trial physicians was 500 h (range 140-1350). Physicians had acupuncture experience for 10 (<1 to 25) years and had treated 200 (60 to >1000) patients with acupuncture in the year preceding trial participation. The 6 basic points were needled in 76-93% of sessions. Compliance with treatment instructions varied considerably among centers in the acupuncture group. In contrast, compliance with the minimal acupuncture protocol was very good. 6 of the 30 physicians stated that they would have treated patients somewhat differently outside the trial, 1 completely differently. The trial found a significant effect of those treated with acupuncture compared to those on the waiting list for treatment, but minimal acupuncture was as effective as acupuncture.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment protocols for acupuncture and minimal acupuncture in ART Migraine appeared an adequate compromise in the specific situation and for the predefined purposes. However, a relevant minority of participating physicians would have treated patients differently outside the trial.

Migraine during pregnancy: options for therapy

Migraine is common during pregnancy, but fortunately this combination of conditions obviously exists for only a finite period. The greatest frequency of migraine attacks occurs during the first trimester. Accurate diagnosis is a sine qua non in this setting as in any headache patient. It is in the first trimester that the fetus is at greatest risk from abortifacient and teratogenic drugs, and when very early pregnancy may be undiagnosed. Ergot alkaloids (including methysergide) should be avoided during pregnancy because of their teratogenicity, and most other drug classes should be used only when unavoidable. The use of prophylactic agents during pregnancy should be the exception, not the rule, and preferably only during the second and third trimesters; propranolol is probably safest in this situation. De novo headache during pregnancy usually requires expert review of the patient. Treatment tactics for uncomplicated migraine in pregnancy depend on the concurrent clinical situation. Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is the mainstay for the patient whose typical attacks continue into the first trimester. If paracetamol is insufficient, then partial agonist opioids may be used if typical migraine attacks persist in the second and third trimesters (which is uncommon). 'Chronic migraine' in pregnancy, i.e. >or=15 headache days per month, is rare, and is the greatest therapeutic challenge. Co-morbidities such as depression or epilepsy require specialised approaches. The complexities associated with these tactics are discussed in this article, and it is emphasised that none has the specific approval of regulatory authorities. Heightened pharmacovigilance will better inform the future pregnant migraineur. However, this type of information is less likely to be available for novel classes of neuropharmacological agents than for existing ones.

Topiramate 100 mg/day in migraine prevention: a pooled analysis of double-blind randomised controlled trials

Topiramate has been shown to be effective as a preventive treatment for migraine in three large placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trials. Because the protocols were similar in design using the same primary and secondary endpoints, data from these studies were pooled to evaluate the consistency of efficacy, efficacy by gender and tolerability of topiramate 100 mg/day (n = 386) versus placebo (n = 372). Topiramate was superior to placebo as measured by the reduction in mean monthly migraine frequency, monthly migraine days and monthly migraine duration. The responder rates, defined as at least 50% reduction for the respective parameters, were significantly in favour of topiramate (p < 0.001), for example 46.3% of patients on topiramate achieved at least 50% reduction in monthly migraine period frequency compared with 22.8% on placebo (p < 0.001). Use of medication to treat the acute migraine attack was significantly reduced by topiramate compared with placebo (p < 0.001). The therapeutic effect was consistent throughout the different studies and independent of gender. The most common adverse effect was paraesthesia, mostly of mild-to-moderate severity. The findings confirm that, at a dose of 100 mg/day, topiramate is an effective and well-tolerated drug for migraine prevention.

Propranolol for migraine prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Propranolol is one of the most commonly prescribed drugs for migraine prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine whether there is evidence that propranolol is more effective than placebo and as effective as other drugs for the interval (prophylactic) treatment of patients with migraine.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Potentially eligible studies were identified by searching MEDLINE/PubMed (1966 to May 2003) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 2, 2003), and by screening bibliographies of reviews and identified articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials of at least 4 weeks duration comparing clinical effects of propranolol with placebo or another drug in adult migraine sufferers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted information on patients, methods, interventions, outcomes measured, and results using a pre-tested form. Study quality was assessed using two checklists (Jadad scale and Delphi list). Due to the heterogeneity of outcome measures and insufficient reporting of the data, only selective quantitative meta-analyses were performed. As far as possible, effect size estimates were calculated for single trials. In addition, results were summarised descriptively and by a vote count among the reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 58 trials with 5072 participants met the inclusion criteria. The 58 selected trials included 26 comparisons with placebo and 47 comparisons with other drugs. The methodological quality of the majority of trials was unsatisfactory. The principal shortcomings were high dropout rates and insufficient reporting and handling of this problem in the analysis. Overall, the 26 placebo-controlled trials showed clear short-term effects of propranolol over placebo. Due to the lack of studies with long-term follow up, it is unclear whether these effects are stable after stopping propranolol. The 47 comparisons with calcium antagonists, other beta-blockers, and a variety of other drugs did not yield any clear-cut differences. Sample size was, however, insufficient in most trials to establish equivalence.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Although many trials have relevant methodological shortcomings, there is clear evidence that propranolol is more effective than placebo in the short-term interval treatment of migraine. Evidence on long-term effects is lacking. Propranolol seems to be as effective and safe as a variety of other drugs used for migraine prophylaxis.

Prophylactic treatment of migraine with an angiotensin II receptor blocker: a randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT

There is a paucity of effective, well-tolerated drugs available for migraine prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether treatment with the angiotensin II receptor blocker candesartan is effective as a migraine-prophylactic drug.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study performed in a Norwegian neurological outpatient clinic from January 2001 to February 2002.

PATIENTS

Sixty patients aged 18 to 65 years with 2 to 6 migraine attacks per month were recruited mainly from newspaper advertisements.

INTERVENTIONS

A placebo run-in period of 4 weeks was followed by two 12-week treatment periods separated by 4 weeks of placebo washout. Thirty patients were randomly assigned to receive one 16-mg candesartan cilexetil tablet daily in the first treatment period followed by 1 placebo tablet daily in the second period. The remaining 30 received placebo followed by candesartan.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was number of days with headache; secondary end points included hours with headache, days with migraine, hours with migraine, headache severity index, level of disability, doses of triptans, doses of analgesics, acceptability of treatment, days of sick leave, and quality-of-life variables on the Short Form 36 questionnaire.

RESULTS

In a period of 12 weeks, the mean number of days with headache was 18.5 with placebo vs 13.6 with candesartan (P =.001) in the intention-to-treat analysis (n = 57). Some secondary end points also favored candesartan, including hours with headache (139 vs 95; P<.001), days with migraine (12.6 vs 9.0; P<.001), hours with migraine (92.2 vs 59.4; P<.001), headache severity index (293 vs 191; P<.001), level of disability (20.6 vs 14.1; P<.001) and days of sick leave (3.9 vs 1.4; P =.01), although there were no significant differences in health-related quality of life. The number of candesartan responders (reduction of > or =50% compared with placebo) was 18 (31.6%) of 57 for days with headache and 23 (40.4%) of 57 for days with migraine. Adverse events were similar in the 2 periods.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the angiotensin II receptor blocker candesartan provided effective migraine prophylaxis, with a tolerability profile comparable with that of placebo.