Levetiracetam as preventive treatment in adults with migraine: an up-to-date systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis

Modulation of nociception and pain-evoked neurobehavioral responses by levetiracetam in a craniotomy pain model

Traditional and novel analgesic modalities have been extensively tested for post-craniotomy pain management, yet the role of newer antiepileptic drugs in this area remains obscure. This study investigates the impact of levetiracetam (LEV) on pain modulation and neurobehavioral performance in a craniotomy model. Fifty-six Wistar rats were randomly assigned into seven groups: no intervention (CTRL), administration of placebo or LEV with no further intervention (PBO and LEV, respectively), and sham-operation or craniotomy in placebo (PBO-SHAM and PBO-CR, respectively) or LEV-treated rats (LEV-SHAM and LEV-CR, respectively). Pain was assessed by the rat grimace scale before, and at 8 and 24 h after craniotomy, following intraperitoneal injections of LEV (100 mg/kg twice daily) or normal saline two consecutive days before and on the craniotomy day. Elevated plus-maze and olfactory social memory tests were performed at 24- and 48 h post-craniotomy, respectively. Upon testing conclusion blood samples were collected for cytokines estimation. Levetiracetam administration enhanced antinociception in sham and craniotomy groups. In the elevated plus-maze test, LEV-CR rats spent more time in investigating open arms and performed more open arm entries than PBO-SHAM and PBO-CR animals. The olfactory test revealed no between-groups difference in acquisition time during first contact with a juvenile rat, while LEV-CR rats spent less time to recognize the same juvenile rat compared to PBO-SHAM and PBO-CR groups. Furthermore, LEV-treatment attenuated cortisol, interleukin-6 and TNF-a release, in sham and craniotomy animals. In conclusion, preemptive use of LEV decreases nociception, improves pain-evoked behavior and attenuates stress response in rats subjected to craniotomy.

Migraine pharmacology and brain ischemia

Introduction: The aim of this review article was to analyze in details the mechanism of drugs’ effects in the treatment and prevention of a migraine attack, as well as to discuss the hypotheses of migraine pathogenesis.

Migraine attack treatment agents: The main agents for migraine attack treatment have an anti-nociceptive activity.

Agents for migraine preventive treatment: β-blocker propranolol also has anti-serotonin and analgesic activities, and most drugs used for the prophylactic treatment of migraine have a vasodilating activity.

Vascular hypothesis of migraine pathogenesis: Despite numerous studies that have expanded our understanding of migraine pathogenesis, the importance of the vascular component in the pathogenesis of this disease has not questioned yet.

Neurogenic hypotheses of cortical spreading depression: It is necessary to take into account the points of this hypothesis in the context of the pathophysiology of migraine.

Neurochemical serotonin hypotheses of migraine pathogenesis: Serotonin plays an important role in the pathogenesis of migraine.

Trigemino-vascular hypotheses of migraine pathogenesis: The trigemino-vascular hypothesis claims to solve the problem of migraine pain.

Migraine and ischemic brain damage: Migraine is a risk factor for ischemic stroke and cognitive disorders.

Search for the new anti-ischemic anti-migraine preparations: A methodology for the search for new anti-ischemic anti-serotonin drugs for the treatment of migraine is proposed.

Conclusion: Belonging of a drug to one or another pharmacological group does not always correspond to its therapeutic effect on the pathogenetic processes of migraine. Migraine with its variety of forms cannot fit only one of the proposed hypotheses on the pathogenesis of this disease.

Graphical abstract:

Preventive Migraine Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article provides an overview of preventive interventions for migraine, including when to start and how to choose a treatment, pharmacologic options (both older oral treatments and new monoclonal antibodies to calcitonin gene-related peptide [CGRP] or its receptor), nonpharmacologic treatment such as neuromodulation, and preventive treatment of refractory migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

The migraine preventive treatment landscape has been transformed by the development of monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor. These treatments, which are given subcutaneously or intravenously monthly or quarterly, have high efficacy and were well tolerated in clinical trials. Emerging real-world studies have found higher rates of adverse events than were seen in clinical trials. They are currently recommended for use if two traditional preventive therapies have proven inadequate. Since the commonly cited 2012 American Headache Society/American Academy of Neurology migraine prevention guidelines were released, clinical trials supporting the preventive use of lisinopril, candesartan, and memantine have been published. Neuromodulation devices, including external trigeminal nerve stimulation and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation devices, have modest evidence to support preventive use. The American Headache Society/American Academy of Neurology guidelines for the preventive treatment of migraine are currently being updated. A new class of oral CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) is being tested for migraine prevention.

SUMMARY

Successful preventive treatment of migraine reduces disease burden and improves quality of life. Many pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options are available for the prevention of migraine, including newer therapies aimed at the CGRP pathway as well as older treatments with good evidence for efficacy. Multiple treatment trials may be required to find the best preventive for an individual patient.