Adverse reactions related to drugs for headache treatment: clinical impact

Atogepant: an emerging treatment for migraine

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, only nonspecific and not always well-tolerated medications were available for migraine prophylaxis. Currently, specific drugs such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies and second-generation gepants are marketed for migraine treatment. Atogepant, an orally active small molecule, is a potent, selective antagonist of the CGRP receptor and is the only gepant authorized exclusively for episodic migraine prophylaxis in adults.

AREAS COVERED

Using literature obtained from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov (up to February 13^rd, 2022), the authors summarize and evaluate the available data on atogepant for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

From pivotal trials, the efficacy and tolerability of atogepant in episodic migraine prophylaxis seem comparable to those of CGRP monoclonal antibodies, even if comparative studies have not been conducted. To date, limited information is available on atogepant, including the optimal dose and duration of therapy; hence, it is difficult to establish whether it could be a first-line drug for migraine prophylaxis. Furthermore, it is important to evaluate if atogepant use is associated with the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, which could result from potent and persistent blockade of vasodilation by CGRP.

Rational Use of Lasmiditan for Acute Migraine Treatment in Adults: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

This narrative review provides an update on the research that led to the development of ditans and lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine in adults and discusses the potential advantages and disadvantages of lasmiditan in clinical use.

METHODS

The electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception through January 9, 2021, to identify relevant studies. Search results were assessed for their overall relevance to this review.

FINDINGS

Because part of the effect of the triptans is mediated by the serotonin 1F receptors, which are not present in the smooth muscle, a pure agonist of these receptors, lasmiditan, was developed. Lasmiditan is hypothesized to act on antinociceptive pathways and inhibit the calcitonin gene-related peptide release. Lasmiditan was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2019 based on the results of 2 pivotal trials that found a significant difference from placebo in the percentage of patients who achieved freedom from pain and most bothersome symptom at 2 h. The main concern of lasmiditan derives from its central nervous system-related adverse effects, mainly dizziness and paraesthesia, probably attributable to its high blood brain barrier penetration. These central nervous system adverse effects impair driving performance for hours and might be suboptimal for individuals with migraine who want to quickly stop the migraine attack to resume their activities as soon as possible.

IMPLICATIONS

Despite the advantage of being beneficial in the acute treatment of migraine without vasocostrictive action, lasmiditan also presents limitations, in particular the central nervous system adverse effects. Moreover, head-to-head trials against triptans and gepants are indispensable to determine the better option for patients.

Glutamate receptor antagonists with the potential for migraine treatment

INTRODUCTION

Preclinical, clinical, and other (e.g., genetic) evidence support the concept that migraine susceptibility may at least partially result from a glutamatergic system disorder. Therefore, the receptors of the glutamatergic system are considered relatively new targets for investigational drugs to treat migraine. Investigational and established glutamate receptor antagonists (GluRAs) have been shown to possess antinociceptive properties in preclinical models of trigeminovascular nociception and have been evaluated in clinical trials. This review focuses on preclinical and clinical studies of GluRAs for the treatment of migraine. Areas covered: A PubMed database search (from 1987 to December 2016) and a review of published studies on GluRAs in migraine were conducted. Expert opinion: All published clinical trials of investigational GluRAs have been unsuccessful in establishing benefit for acute migraine treatment. Clinical trial results contrast with the preclinical data, suggesting that glutamate (Glu) does not play a decisive role after the attack has already been triggered. These antagonists may instead be useful for migraine prophylaxis. Improving patient care requires further investigating and critically analyzing the role of Glu in migraine, designing experimental models to study more receptors and their corresponding antagonists, and identifying biomarkers to facilitate trials designed to target specific subgroups of migraine patients.

Medication overuse and chronic migraine: a critical review according to clinical pharmacology

INTRODUCTION

Chronic migraine is often complicated by medication-overuse headache (MOH), a headache due to excessive intake of acute medications. Chronic migraine and MOH are serious and disabling disorders. Since chronic migraine derives from the progression of originally episodic migraine, the fundamental therapeutic strategy is prevention. This narrative review describes how to try to prevent the development of MOH and how to manage it once it has appeared.

AREAS COVERED

A PubMed database search (from 1988 to January 2015) and a review of published studies on chronic migraine and MOH were conducted.

EXPERT OPINION

In spite of progress in migraine treatment, the prevalence of chronic headaches and MOH has not changed in the course of time. Today, a large number of migraine patients have turned to numerous expert physicians and experienced all sorts of prophylactic treatments without decisive benefits. Their condition seems to have crystallized even more as chronic and intractable. This means that to prevent chronification and MOH, we need more effective drugs and better strategies to use them. In particular, we must detect disease biomarkers and predictive factors for drug response that allow for personalized treatment when migraine is still episodic and make analgesic overuse pointless.

Young adolescents' use of medicine for headache: sources of supply, availability and accessibility at home

OBJECTIVE

Use of medicines for headache is common among young adolescents but little is known about their sources of supply and access to medicines. The purpose was to describe sources of supply, availability and accessibility at home and to examine if supply, availability and accessibility were associated with medicine use.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study in eight schools where all fifth and seventh grade students (11- and 13-year-olds) answered a questionnaire about socio-demographic factors, health and medicine use. Response rate: 84.0%, n = 595.

RESULTS

The reported prevalence of headache at least monthly was 45.0%, and 42.5% had used medicines for headache during the past month. 68.2% reported that medicines for headache were always available at home, and 22.2% were allowed to use these without asking for permission. Most pupils received medicine from their parents (73.1%) and physicians (25.4%). Smaller proportions had received medicine from school nurses, teachers, friends and others; 11.6% mentioned at least three sources of supply. Pupils with frequent episodes of headache reported more sources of supply and higher availability and accessibility at home. OR for medicine use among children who mentioned three or more sources of supply was 4.53 (95% CI 2.63-7.83) in a multivariate model controlled for sex, age and prevalence of headache. Use of medicine was also associated with availability at home (OR = 1.51, 1.01-2.27) and accessibility (OR = 2.49, 1.57-3.93).

CONCLUSION

Medicine use for headache among children and young adolescents is common and control of access may be the key issue for safe medicine use.

Pharmacokinetics and interactions of headache medications, part I: introduction, pharmacokinetics, metabolism and acute treatments

Recent progress in the treatment of primary headaches has made available specific, effective and safe medications for these disorders, which are widely spread among the general population. One of the negative consequences of this undoubtedly positive progress is the risk of drug-drug interactions. This review is the first in a two-part series on pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of headache medications. Part I addresses acute treatments. Part II focuses on prophylactic treatments. The overall aim of this series is to increase the awareness of physicians, either primary care providers or specialists, regarding this topic. Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of major severity involving acute medications are a minority among those reported in literature. The main drug combinations to avoid are: i) NSAIDs plus drugs with a narrow therapeutic range (i.e., digoxin, methotrexate, etc.); ii) sumatriptan, rizatriptan or zolmitriptan plus monoamine oxidase inhibitors; iii) substrates and inhibitors of CYP2D6 (i.e., chlorpromazine, metoclopramide, etc.) and -3A4 (i.e., ergot derivatives, eletriptan, etc.), as well as other substrates or inhibitors of the same CYP isoenzymes. The risk of having clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions seems to be limited in patients with low frequency headaches, but could be higher in chronic headache sufferers with medication overuse.