Practice Parameter: Pharmacological treatment of migraine headache in children and adolescents: Report of the American Academy of Neurology Quality Standards Subcommittee and the Practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society

Management of chronic daily headache in children

Children and adolescents can develop frequent, at times daily, headaches. The more severe forms of headaches that these children experience are often migrainous. This article discusses the typical characteristics of these patients and reviews treatments considered in this condition. Unfortunately, there are no high-quality studies to definitively guide treatment in children with chronic daily headache. Treatment decisions are often made using data from adult studies, childhood studies on episodic migraine or expert opinion. Current data on which to base treatment decisions are reviewed in this article.

Pediatric headache

Headache is a common presenting complaint in the practice of child neurology. The medical and social impact of headache is often very severe both for the affected child and for his/her family. As there exist few good clinical studies to guide practitioners in choosing appropriate medications, treatments are mostly based on extrapolation of adult study results. Personal trial-and-error experience and specialized considerations for patients also influence choice and implementation. A careful medical history, however, can enable optimal choices for abortive and prophylactic use in the context of a multi-disciplinary approach toward headache management. This article provides a pathophysiologically-based overview of a wide range of therapeutic options for children and adolescents with headache.

The use of triptans for pediatric migraines

Migraine headaches frequently occur in the pediatric population, with a prevalence of 3% in children 2-7 years of age, 4-11% in children 7-11 years of age, and 8-23% in children 11 years of age and older. Migraine without aura is more than twice as common as migraine with aura in children. Headaches are the third leading cause of emergency room referrals and rank in the top five health problems of children. The 2004 American Academy of Neurology's treatment parameter for migraine in children and adolescents recommended that nasal sumatriptan be considered for acute treatment; however, data were lacking to make a decision regarding the available oral triptans at that time. The more recently released European guidelines discuss three different triptans for use in children but no specific triptan was recommended. Currently, six of the seven available triptans have been studied for efficacy and safety in the pediatric population; however, only a few well controlled clinical studies have been conducted. Sumatriptan has the most available data on outcomes in general, with nasal sumatriptan showing the most positive results. Nasal sumatriptan is approved in children older than 12 years of age in Europe. Oral sumatriptan does not show any clinical benefit versus placebo in children. Rizatriptan and zolmitriptan have conflicting efficacy and safety data, with most studies favoring the use of oral rizatriptan and nasal zolmitriptan. Almotriptan is the first triptan to obtain a US FDA indication in adolescents with migraines lasting 4 or more hours. This approval was based upon two studies, one large clinical trial and one very small, open-label, pilot study. At this time, there are insufficient data to recommend naratriptan and eletriptan for first- or second-line use in pediatric patients with migraines. There are currently no efficacy data for frovatriptan in pediatric patients, which limits its use in this population. Adverse effects of triptans and pharmacokinetic data in children and adolescents are similar to those in adults. The triptan class should be considered as an acute treatment option for children and adolescents with migraines, although their use is mostly 'off-label'. Of the available triptans, there are more positive efficacy data for sumatriptan and zolmitriptan nasal sprays, and rizatriptan and almotriptan tablets than for the other triptans.

Recognizing and diagnosing abdominal migraines

Abdominal migraine affects 1% to 4% of children and is a variant of migraine headaches. Onset is seen most often between the ages of 7 to 12 years, with girls affected more often than boys. Presenting symptoms include acute incapacitating non-colicky periumbilical abdominal pain that lasts for 1 or more hours. Pallor, anorexia, nausea, vomiting, photophobia, or headache may be associated with the episodes, and a family history of migraine headaches often is noted. The diagnostic process begins with a thorough history and physical examination and often follows a series of exclusions or elimination of other organic causes. Limited research exists regarding treatment options, but they may include pharmacologic intervention and prevention based on lifestyle modifications.

Long-term follow-up of self-hypnosis training for recurrent headaches: what the children say

The author sent surveys to 178 consecutive youths previously referred for hypnosis for headaches. The survey sought current status of headaches: treatment, application of self-hypnosis, headache intensity, frequency, duration after self-hypnosis, generalization of self-hypnosis to other problems, and attitudes regarding self-hypnosis and life stresses. Of 134 delivered surveys, 52 were returned complete. Years after treatment, 85% (44/52) reported continued relief with self-hypnosis, 44% (23/52) reported decreased headache frequency, 31% (16/52) noted decreased severity, and 56% (29/52) reported that self-hypnosis reduced headache intensity. Many (26/52) emphasized the value of self-hypnosis to life stresses. In children and adolescents, self-hypnosis is associated with significant improvement of headaches and with an enduring positive effect for many years following training. Results suggest common and spontaneous generalizability of self-hypnosis by young people to modulation of other problems in their lives.

Patient outcome in migraine prophylaxis: the role of psychopharmacological agents

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a serious illness that needs correct treatment for acute attacks and, in addition, a treatment prophylaxis, since patients with migraine suffer during acute attacks and also between attacks.

METHODS

A systematic review of the most relevant clinical trials of migraine headache and its epidemiology, pathophysiology, comorbidity, and prophylactic treatment (medical and nonmedical) was carried out using "Medline" and "PsychINFO" from 1973 to 2009. Approximately 110 trials met our inclusion criteria and were included in the current review.

RESULTS

The most effective pharmacological treatment for migraine prophylaxis is propranolol and anticonvulsants such as topiramate, valproic acid, and amitriptyline. Nonmedical treatments such as acupuncture, biofeedback, and melatonin have also been proposed. Peripheral neurostimulation has been suggested for the treatment of chronic daily headache that does not respond to prophylaxis and for the treatment of drug-resistant primary headache. The majority of the pharmacological agents available today have limited efficacy and may cause adverse effects incompatible with long-term use.

LIMITATIONS

The review was limited by the highly variable and often insufficient reporting of the complex outcome data and by the fact that migraine prophylaxis trials typically use headache diaries to monitor the course of the disease. The results of the different studies were also presented in different ways, making comparison of the results difficult.

DISCUSSION

An adequate prophylaxis is crucial in reducing disability and preventing the evolution of the problem into a chronic progressive illness. The implications of the present findings were discussed.

Psychological factors in childhood headaches

Recurrent headaches in children are most often migraines and are based in a genetic predisposition with a low headache threshold. As with any pain experience, there is a large emotional component associated with an attack of migraines that grows in amplitude as the headaches become more frequent and resistant to medicine, sleep, or other agents that used to work. Childhood headaches are especially complicated for 3 reasons: (1) the parents' fear (communicated to the child that serious medical pathology underlies the head pain), (2) the lack of evidence-based pharmacologic treatment, and (3) the belief that these headaches are largely psychological. This article addresses the mystery surrounding childhood headaches by delving into the influence of school, friends, and family; the impact of divorce; the coping skills required for a child to manage a migrainous nervous system; the potential secondary gain from headaches; psychiatric comorbidities and how to treat them; and the role of psychological intervention.

Secondary headaches in children and adolescents

A majority of the children presented for evaluation of headache complaints, will have one of the primary headache disorder such as tension-type or migraine. During the course of the evaluation, consideration must be given to the diverse collection of other medical and systemic disorders which may also cause headache in children and adolescents. The purpose of this article is to review the spectrum of secondary headaches. In majority of the instances, a thorough medical and headache history coupled with physical and neurologic examination will uncover clues to the presence of these other disorders. This will also guide clinical decision making regarding the need for further diagnostic testing, including neuroimaging, electrophysiological testing, or specific laboratory testing.

Management considerations in the treatment of migraine in adolescents

Migraine is common in adolescents. It can significantly reduce quality of life, may contribute to significant school absences, and disrupt social activities. This article will address the clinical presentation, natural history, types, evaluation, diagnosis and prognosis of migraine. Common adolescent lifestyle factors such as stress, irregular mealtimes, and sleep deprivation may exacerbate migraines. Management options are discussed including lifestyle modifications, acute and preventative therapies. Features of chronic daily headache including comorbid conditions, management, and outcome are also addressed.

Recent concepts on cyclic vomiting syndrome in children

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a functional gastrointestinal disorder that can occur in both children and adults. Clinical courses of CVS manifesting recurrent severe vomiting episodes and interval illness may affect the long-term quality of life in children with CVS. Therefore, we should be careful in accessing a patient suggestive of CVS. Accurate diagnosis based on diagnostic criteria for CVS and the exclusion from other organic diseases mimicking clinical manifestations of cyclic vomiting is absolutely required. In patients diagnosed as CVS, optimal therapy should be performed to improve symptoms and to reduce complications in prodromal phase and emetic phase, and long-term prophylactic therapy should be tried to prevent the development of vomiting episodes. The identification of triggering factors which induce vomiting episodes might be helpful in preventing vomiting attacks. Systematic approach should be recommended to improve clinical outcome of CVS.

Migraine treatment in developmental age: guidelines update

There is a serious lack of controlled studies on the pharmacological treatment of primary migraine in the developmental age; there is, consequently, an urgent need for new, evidence-based approaches to this long-neglected field of research. Moreover, previous studies have stated that the placebo response is greater in pediatric patients than in adults and that a reduction in the attack frequency in the absence of any pharmacological treatment is observed more frequently in pediatric migraine patients than in adults. Besides these preliminary considerations, the shorter duration of migraine attacks and other characteristic semeiological features of the clinical picture in children are such that the design of randomized controlled trial (RCT) is more problematic in the developmental age than in the adult. Bearing in mind all these weak points, the aim of this review was to summarize and update recent guidelines for the treatment of primary migraine in children and adolescents. The most recent guidelines are those published by the Italian Society for the study of Headache, the French Society for the study of Migraine and Headache, and the American Academy of Neurology. We have incorporated into these guidelines the results from the few, recent RCTs, clinical controlled trials, open-label studies, meta-analyses and reviews that have been published since 2004; owing to the lack of strong evidence in this field of research, we have sometimes even mentioned pilot non-controlled studies, case series and expert opinions. Lastly, evidence was classified and the recommendations were categorized according to different levels.

Medium-dose riboflavin as a prophylactic agent in children with migraine: a preliminary placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, cross-over trial

BACKGROUND

Riboflavin seems to have a promising effect on migraine in adults. The present study examines whether riboflavin has a prophylactic effect on migraine in children.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether riboflavin in a dosage of 50 mg/day has a prophylactic effect on migraine attacks in young children.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over trial included 42 children (aged 6-13 years) with migraine of whom 14 children were also suffering from tension-type headache. Following a 4-week baseline period, all children received placebo for 16 weeks then riboflavin for 16 weeks (or vice versa) with a washout period of 4 weeks in between. The primary outcome measure was reduction in mean frequency of migraine attacks and tension-type headache in the last 4 weeks at the end of the riboflavin and placebo phase, compared with the preceding baseline or wash-out period. Secondary outcome measures were mean severity and mean duration of migraine and tension-type headaches in the last 4 weeks at the end of the riboflavin and placebo phase, compared with the preceding baseline or wash-out period.

RESULTS

No significant difference in the reduction of mean frequency of migraine attacks in the last month of treatment was found between placebo and riboflavin (P = 0.44). However, a significant difference in reduction of mean frequency of headaches with a tension-type phenotype was found in favour of the riboflavin treatment (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In this group of children with migraine, there is no evidence that 50 mg riboflavin has a prophylactic effect on migraine attacks. We found some evidence that 50 mg riboflavin may have a prophylactic effect on interval headaches that may correspond to mild migraine attacks or tension-type headache attacks in children with migraine.

What happens to new-onset headache in children that present to primary care? A case-cohort study using electronic primary care records

The aim was to describe the consulting behaviour and clinical outcomes of children presenting with headache in primary care. This was a historical cohort study using data from the UK General Practitioner Research Database. Cases were children aged 5-17 years who presented to primary care with primary headache (migraine, tension-type headache, cluster headache) or undifferentiated headache (no further descriptor). Controls were age, sex and practice matched. Their records were examined for consultations, referrals, relevant treatments and specific diseases in the subsequent year. Children with headache (n = 48 575) were identified and matched to controls. At presentation, 9321 (19.2%) of headaches were labelled primary, 549 (1.1%) secondary and 38 705 (79.7%) received no formal diagnosis. Of the latter group, 2084 (5.4%) received a primary headache diagnosis in the subsequent year. Following a diagnosis of migraine, 258 (3.5%) had received a triptan and 1598 (21%) were using propranolol or pizotifen. Total consultations were higher in cases than in controls in the year before the headache: cases ages 5-8 years, mean (s.d.) 5.0 (4.0) consultations; controls 4.0 (3.5) consultations. In 1 year controls had 43 430 consultations, of which 256 (0.6%) were for headache, of whom 64 (25%) were referred to secondary care. Headache was a risk factor for benign and malignant tumours, cerebrovascular disease, primary disorders of raised intracranial pressure and depression. This risk was reduced if a diagnosis of a primary headache disorder could be made. Although there is an increased likelihood of a serious pathology with headache presentations, the risk is small particularly if a diagnosis of a primary headache is made. General practitioners are likely to be underdiagnosing migraine. This study can inform management guidelines for new presentations of headache in primary care, particularly when a secondary pathology is suspected.

Practice parameters in child neurology: do pediatricians use them?

We assessed pediatrician awareness of the parameter ''Evaluating the first non-febrile seizure in children'' and how the concepts of this parameter were incorporated into practice. Although most reported caring for children with seizures, 60% were not aware of the practice parameter. When given the clinical scenario of an otherwise healthy 8-year-old child with a first, unprovoked seizure, management was variable. Most (83%) would obtain an electroencephalography, and many (58%) would order an imaging study, usually a magnetic resonance imaging. However, most were also likely to order laboratory studies that were not indicated given the scenario and the practice parameter. This pilot study suggests that pediatricians may not be aware of this practice parameter and many may not be incorporating evidence-based recommendations regarding the evaluation of children with new-onset seizures.

Treatment of primary headache in children: a multicenter hospital-based study in France

The aim of this 6-month, prospective, multicenter study of 398 children and adolescents with primary headaches was to collect data on headache treatment in neuropediatric departments. Treatments were compared before and after consultation. Prior to consultation, the acute treatments that had been prescribed most frequently were paracetamol (82.2% of children) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs treatment (53.5%); 10.3% had received a prophylactic treatment. No differences in either acute or prophylactic treatment with respect to headache diagnosis were observed. After the neuropediatric consultation, paracetamol was replaced by a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug in about three-quarters of cases and by triptan in about one-quarter of cases. The number of children prescribed a prophylactic treatment nearly doubled, whereas there was a 5-fold and 23-fold increase in psychotherapy and relaxation training, respectively, between pre-referral and referral. We conclude that specific treatments were underused for primary headache.

Divalproex extended-release in adolescent migraine prophylaxis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 3 different doses of divalproex sodium extended-release vs placebo in the prophylaxis of migraine headaches in adolescents.

BACKGROUND

Divalproex sodium has been approved for migraine prophylaxis in adults, and previous uncontrolled data suggest divalproex sodium may be effective in preventing migraine in children and adolescents with acceptable tolerability.

METHODS

This was a 12-week, phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study in approximately 300 adolescents aged 12 to 17 years with migraine headaches. At the end of the baseline phase, subjects still meeting study criteria were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive divalproex sodium extended-release 250 mg, 500 mg, or 1000 mg once daily, or placebo. The primary efficacy variable was reduction from baseline in 4-week migraine headache rate for each active treatment group vs placebo. Standard safety assessments were conducted and testosterone and sex hormone-binding globulin levels were collected for postmenarchal females.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant treatment difference between any divalproex sodium extended-release dose group and placebo for the primary efficacy variable, reduction from baseline in 4-week migraine headache rate. There were no statistically significant differences in adverse events between any active treatment group and placebo. A notable dose-related decrease in platelets was observed, and individuals in all 4 treatment groups had increases in ammonia levels; treatment differences in other laboratory variables were generally small. Among postmenarchal female subjects who were not taking hormonal contraceptives or other steroids, there was no statistically significant change in testosterone levels, but a statistically significant dose-related increase in sex hormone-binding globulin was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current study, divalproex sodium extended-release did not differentiate from placebo in the prophylactic treatment of migraine headaches but was generally well-tolerated in adolescents aged 12 to 17 years.

Prophylactic drugs and cytokine and leptin levels in children with migraine

The study objective was to evaluate levels of the cytokines tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-1beta, and interleukin-6 and of leptin, and then to determine the relationship between these levels and clinical responses in children with migraine after prophylactic therapy with one of four drugs. In all, 77 children who needed prophylactic drugs were treated with cyproheptadine, amitriptyline, propranolol, or flunarizine. Serum levels of the cytokines and leptin were measured before and 4 months after the treatment. Results were compared by drug for headache frequency, severity, and duration, the PedMIDAS score, and levels of each cytokine and of leptin. Each of the four drugs not only decreased the frequency and duration but also the severity of headache, and the PedMIDAS score. None of the drugs was found to be superior to others in terms of reduction in cytokine levels (P > 0.05). Both cyproheptadine and flunarizine (but not amitriptyline and propranolol) caused an increase in leptin levels (P < 0.05). These data suggest that cytokine levels are related to clinical responses, and might help in objective evaluation of clinical response in migraine. To our knowledge, the present study is the first trial to compare the effects of prophylactic drugs, cytokine levels, and leptin levels in children with migraine.

Efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in pediatric migraine

About 5-10% of school-age children manifest migraine headaches. Treatment options for pediatric migraine are limited. Topiramate is approved for migraine prophylaxis in adults, but its use in children is limited. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 37 patients, i.e., 22 (60%) girls and 15 (40%) boys (mean age, 14 years; range, 7.3-20.5 years), diagnosed with migraine without aura in 30 (81%), with aura in four (11%), and abdominal, ophthalmoplegic, and catamenial in one each. The mean follow-up was 12 +/- 5 months standard deviation (S.D.). Clinical response was qualified as excellent, good, no change, or worse. Numbers of headaches per month were 15 +/- 7 S.D. prior to treatment and 3 +/- 3.4 S.D. (P < 0.001) after treatment. An excellent or good response (>50% migraine reduction) was attained in 28 patients (76%). Ten (27%) patients exhibited adverse effects. Patients taking >2 mg/kg/day were more likely to demonstrate side effects. The mean dose for patients without adverse effects was 1.27 +/- 0.7 mg/kg/day S.D. Those who reported adverse effects were taking a mean dose of 2.8 +/- 1.5 mg/kg/day S.D. This study demonstrated that topiramate is an effective, safe alternative for the prophylaxis of pediatric migraine. An acceptable risk/benefit maintenance dose was < or =2 mg/kg/day.

Riboflavin prophylaxis in pediatric and adolescent migraine

Migraine is a common disorder in childhood and adolescence. Studies on adults show the effectiveness and tolerability of riboflavin in migraine prevention, while data on children are scarce. This retrospective study reports on our experience of using riboflavin for migraine prophylaxis in 41 pediatric and adolescent patients, who received 200 or 400 mg/day single oral dose of riboflavin for 3, 4 or 6 months. Attack frequency and intensity decreased (P < 0.01) during treatment, and these results were confirmed during the follow-up. A large number of patients (77.1%) reported that abortive drugs were effective for controlling ictal events. During the follow-up, 68.4% of cases had a 50% or greater reduction in frequency of attacks and 21.0% in intensity. Two patients had vomiting and increased appetite, respectively, most likely for causes unrelated to the use of riboflavin. In conclusion, riboflavin seems to be a well-tolerated, effective, and low-cost prophylactic treatment in children and adolescents suffering from migraine.

Pediatric migraine

Migraine is the most common cause of acute recurrent headaches in children. The pathophysiological concepts have evolved from a purely vascular etiology to a neuroinflammatory process. Clinical evaluation is the mainstay of diagnosis and should also include family history. Investigations help to rule out secondary causes. The role of new drugs in treatment of migraine is discussed and trials are quoted from literature. Indications for starting prophylaxis should be evaluated based on frequency of attacks and influence on quality of life. For management of acute attacks of migraine both acetaminophen and ibuprofen are recommended for use in children. Many drugs like antiepileptic drugs (AED), calcium channel blockers, and antidepressants have been used for prophylaxis of migraine in children. The data for use of newer drugs for migraine in children is limited, though AEDs are emerging a popular choice. Biofeedback and other nonmedicinal therapies are being used with promising results.

Placebo Efficacy in Childhood and Adolescence Migraine: An Analysis of Double-Blind and Placebo-Controlled Studies

Studies on the treatment of migraine in children and adolescents are rare and difficult to design. In particular, the high placebo response in some trials makes it difficult to prove efficacy of a verum drug. We analysed all available placebo-controlled trials on acute and on prophylactic migraine treatment in children and adolescents with respect to different placebo rates (pain free and pain relief at 2 h; rate of responders with ≥ 50% attack frequency decrease). We identified eight crossover and 11 parallel group trials on acute treatment. The placebo response rates were considerably lower in crossover trials than in parallel group trials (19.2% vs. 27.1% for pain free after 2 h and 39.4% vs. 56.9% for pain relief after 2 h). In the 10 prophylactic trials included in this analysis, only a small trend towards a lower placebo rate in crossover trials could be observed. Further significant factors associated with a lower placebo rate in childhood and adolescence trials on the acute treatment of migraine were single-centre (vs. multicentre) trials and small sample size. Age and sex were not associated with the placebo response. Our study suggests that parallel group trials on the acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents show a very low therapeutic gain due to a high placebo rate. The verum response rates, however, are very similar to those seen in adulthood trials. In conclusion, trial designs on the acute and prophylactic treatment of migraine in children and adolescents should consider the specific findings of this analysis in order to exhibit a higher probability of showing significant differences between placebo and verum drug.

Study on management of pediatric migraine by general practitioners in northern France

The study explored the awareness of the Haute Autorité de Santé (High Health Authority, HAS) guidelines for migraine management in children among a random sample of 100 general practitioners (GPs) dichotomised in an urban and a rural group. A questionnaire conducted by phone included questions on knowledge of pediatric migraine acute treatment and preventive therapy, referral to a child neurologist as well as GPs awareness of HAS recommendations in general. Although 45% of GPs argued they were prescribing ibuprofen as first-line abortive drug, only 3% were aware of the recommended dose. Only 48% of GPs were agreeing to initiate preventive therapy. Fifty percent of GPs stated that they knew HAS guidelines but only 24% stated that they had read them. The only significant difference between urban and rural GPs concerned the initiation of preventive therapy. Continuing educational programmes on the implementation of pediatric migraine guidelines is strongly needed.

Long-term consequences of drugs on the paediatric cardiovascular system

Many pharmacological and toxicological actions of drugs in children cannot be fully predicted from adult clinical experience or from standard non-clinical toxicology studies. Numerous drugs have direct or indirect pharmacological effects on the heart and are prescribed for children of all ages. Toxicity or secondary effects may be immediate or delayed for years after drug exposure has ceased. Originally, the aim of this review was to compile information on the effect of specific drugs on the post-natal development of the cardiovascular system and to examine long-term follow-up of the use of cardio-active drugs in children. The limited database of published information caused the original question to evolve into an examination of the medical literature for three areas of information: (i) whether vulnerable developmental windows have been identified that reflect the substantial functional development that the cardiovascular system undergoes after birth; (ii) what is known about pharmacological perturbation of development; and (iii) what the likelihood is of drug exposure during childhood. We examined different scenarios for exposure including random, isolated exposure, conditions historically associated with adults, primary or secondary cardiac disease, psychiatric and neurological conditions, asthma, cancer and HIV. Except for random, isolated drug exposures, each category of possible exposure contained numerous drugs known to have either primary or secondary effects on the cardiovascular system or to influence factors associated with atherosclerosis. It is likely that a significant number of children will be prescribed drugs having either direct or indirect effects upon the immature cardiovascular system. A confounding factor is the simultaneous use of over-the-counter medications and herbal or nutraceutical preparations that a patient, parent or guardian does not mention to a prescribing physician. Metabolism is also important in assessing drug effects in children. Differences in body water : body fat ratio, age-related gastrointestinal absorption, distribution, excretion, renal function and drug metabolizing capabilities make it possible for children to have a different metabolite profile for a drug compared with adults. There is little examination of drug effects on the interdependent processes of cardiac maturation and less examination of metabolite effects. It is difficult to identify delayed toxicities in children as these adverse events may take years to manifest with many patients lost to follow-up. Clearly this is an area of study where intermediate endpoints and surrogate markers would be of great benefit. Pharmacogenomics may be useful in providing markers of increased risk or susceptibility. A perspective must be kept in balancing the possibility of a problem with the very real benefits that many children experience from the use of these pharmaceuticals.

Measuring the Impact of Headache in Children: A Critical Review of the Literature

Headache is the most frequent neurological symptom and commonest manifestation of pain in childhood. Measuring the impact of headache in terms of health status, functioning and quality of life can inform the prioritization of competing resource claims, screen for unmet need, improve communication between patient and physician and monitor response to treatment. We undertook a critical review of the literature measuring the impact of headache in children and identified 33 papers that contained relevant information. Findings reflected a wide range of settings, age groups, methodologies and outcome measures. Considerable methodological limitations affected all studies, including inadequate description of study design, methodology and data analysis. Nevertheless, although we found the existing literature to be of inconsistent quality, the impact of headache in children and adolescents is substantial. Rigorous studies are required to quantify this burden using measures that are valid and reliable and whose development has been informed by both theoretical and practical perspectives.

Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) scores for migraine patients: Their relation to disability as measured from a headache diary

Background and Purpose

Complete information on migraine-related disabilities facilitate the making of appropriate treatment decisions. Although the accessibility and ease of use of the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) make it a very promising instrument, there are few data available for comparing HIT-6 scores with the actual amount of disability.

Methods

To determine whether the disability measured using the HIT-6 questionnaire realistically reflects the amount of disability as extracted from a headache diary, which would help when deciding a management plan, 130 patients with migraine without aura were instructed to complete a headache diary on the days on which headache occurred. Each diary booklet also contained questions on the resulting disability, and comprised five items originating from the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale. After submitting their diaries, the participants completed the HIT-6 for the same time period.

Results

Disability as recorded in diaries was present for a mean of 2.7 days per month, and its duration differed significantly with HIT-6 score: 0.9, 2.6, and 4.6 days per month for littleto-no impact, moderate impact, and severe impact, respectively. The summed disability score from diaries was also related to the HIT-6 score. Headache frequency was the only headache characteristic that contributed significantly to the HIT-6 score.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the HIT-6 could be useful for assessing headache-related disability in migraine patients, especially given that the questionnaire is both simple and ease of use.

Obsessive compulsive disorder and migraine: case report, diagnosis and therapeutic approach

Psychiatric disorders, notably mood and anxiety disorders, are frequently associated with migraine and chronic daily headaches. The obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is included in the spectrum of anxiety disorders and may be a comorbid condition in headache patients. However, little information has been reported in the literature about this association. This is an important issue as OCD may contribute to the development or maintenance of treatment-resistant chronic headaches. In this paper, we describe a young female patient with refractory chronic migraine and OCD. Considerations on diagnosis, management and treatment of these comorbid conditions are presented.

Current migraine management - patient acceptability and future approaches

Despite its high prevalence and individual as well as societal burden, migraine remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. In recent years, the options for the management of migraine patients have greatly expanded. A number of drugs belonging to various pharmacological classes and deliverable by several routes are now available both for the acute and the preventive treatments of migraine. Nevertheless, disability and satisfaction remain low in many subjects because treatments are not accessible, not optimized, not effective, or simply not tolerated. There is thus still considerable room for better education, for more efficient therapies and for greater support from national health systems. In spite of useful internationally accepted guidelines, anti-migraine treatment has to be individually tailored to each patient taking into account the migraine subtype, the ensuing disability, the patient's previous history and present expectations, and the co-morbid disorders. In this article we will summarize the phenotypic presentations of migraine and review recommendations for acute and preventive treatment, highlighting recent advances which are relevant for clinical practice in terms of both diagnosis and management.

High-dose riboflavin for migraine prophylaxis in children: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

This is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of riboflavin for migraine prophylaxis in children. This was a randomized, double-blind study of riboflavin (200 mg daily) versus placebo in 48 children. The primary efficacy measure was the number of patients achieving a 50% or greater reduction in the number of migraine attacks per 4 weeks. Other outcome measures were the mean severity of migraine per day, mean duration of migraine, days with nausea or vomiting, analgesic use, and adverse effects. A 50% or greater reduction in headaches was seen in 14/21 patients in the placebo group and 12/27 patients in the riboflavin group (not significant P = .125). There were no differences between riboflavin and placebo for primary or secondary outcome variables. These results suggest that riboflavin is not an effective therapy for preventing migraine in children. A high placebo responder rate was seen, with implications for other studies of migraine in children.

[Antiepileptic drugs in pediatric migraine]

According to the criteria of the International Headache Society, migraine occurs in approximately 5 to 10% of children. As many as 30% of young patients with migraine experience such frequent and disabling attacks, or have unsatisfactory results and/or experience adverse effects with pharmacologic treatment of acute migraine attack, that daily preventive medications are required. Many studies have investigated the use of antiepileptic drugs in this indication but there is a paucity of placebo-controlled studies. So far, in the setting of migraine with and without aura, only flunarizine and topiramate have proved their efficacy in more than one placebo-controlled study. Uncontrolled studies suggest the possible efficacy of valproic acid, gabapentin, levetiracetam, zonisamide, and magnesium in preventive therapy of childhood periodic syndromes. Most of antiepileptic drugs used in pediatric preventive therapy are well tolerated. The most common adverse events are asthenia and somnolence.