Self-medication of migraine and tension-type headache: summary of the evidence-based recommendations of the Deutsche Migräne und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft (DMKG), the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurologie (DGN), the Österreichische Kopfschmerzgesellschaft (ÖKSG) and the Schweizerische Kopfwehgesellschaft (SKG)

Research Progress on the Experimental Model and Underlying Mechanistic Studies of Tension-Type Headaches

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Tension-type headaches (TTH) significantly diminish patients' quality of life and increase absenteeism, thereby imposing a substantial economic burden. Animal models are essential tools for studying disease mechanisms and drug development. However, until now, little focus has been placed on summarizing the animal models of TTH and associated mechanistic studies. This narrative review discusses the current animal models of TTH and related mechanistic studies to provide insights into the pathophysiological mechanisms of and treatments for TTH.

RECENT FINDINGS

The primary method for constructing an animal model of TTH involves injecting a solution of pain relievers, such as adenosine triphosphate, nerve growth factor, or a high concentration of salt solution, into the neck to initiate harmful cervical muscle responses. This model enables the examination of the interaction between peripheral muscles and central sensitization, which is crucial for understanding the pathophysiology of TTH. Mechanistic studies based on this model have investigated the effect of the P2X receptor antagonist, P2X7 receptor blockade, the P2Y1 receptor agonist 2-MESADP, P2Y1 receptor antagonist MRS2179, nitric oxide synthase inhibitors, and acetylsalicylic acid. Despite notable advancements, the current model of TTH has limitations, including surgical complexity and the inability to replicate chronic tension-type headache (CTTH). To gain a more comprehensive understanding and develop more effective treatment methods, future studies should focus on simplifying surgical procedures, examining other predisposing factors, and establishing a model for chronic TTH. This will offer a deeper insight into the pathophysiological mechanism of TTH and pave the way for improved treatment approaches.

Transcranial direct current stimulation for chronic headaches, a randomized, controlled trial

Background and objectives

Chronic headaches are a frequent cause of pain and disability. The purpose of this randomized trial was to examine whether transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the primary motor cortex, reduces pain and increases daily function in individuals suffering from primary chronic headache.

Materials and methods

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial, where participants and assessors were blinded, investigated the effect of active tDCS vs. sham tDCS in chronic headache sufferers. Forty subjects between 18 and 70 years of age, with a diagnosis of primary chronic headache were randomized to either active tDCS or sham tDCS treatment groups. All patients received eight treatments over four consecutive weeks. Anodal stimulation (2 mA) directed at the primary motor cortex (M1), was applied for 30 min in the active tDCS group. Participants in the sham tDCS group received 30 s of M1 stimulation at the start and end of the 30-minute procedure; for the remaining 29 min, they did not receive any stimulation. Outcome measures based on data collected at baseline, after eight treatments and three months later included changes in daily function, pain levels, and medication.

Results

Significant improvements in both daily function and pain levels were observed in participants treated with active tDCS, compared to sham tDCS. Effects lasted up to 12 weeks post-treatment. Medication use remained unchanged in both groups throughout the trial with no serious adverse effects reported.

Conclusion

These results suggest that tDCS has the potential to improve daily function and reduce pain in patients suffering from chronic headaches. Larger randomized, controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Trial registration

The study was approved by the local ethics committee (2018/2514) and by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (54483).

Paracetamol versus ibuprofen in treating episodic tension-type headache: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common type of headache worldwide. It is defined and classified according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders. TTH is treated with over-the-counter medications, mostly paracetamol or ibuprofen. The purpose was to assess the effectiveness of paracetamol versus ibuprofen in treating episodic tension-type headache (ETTH) through direct and indirect comparisons of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We included RCTs comparing paracetamol with a placebo, ibuprofen with a placebo, or paracetamol with ibuprofen for acute ETTH treatment that were published between 1988 and 2022. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Web of Science. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias. We identified 14 studies including 6521 people with ETTH. None of the studies had a low risk of bias for all domains; this was most likely due to inadequate reporting and a small sample size. Ibuprofen (odds ratio (OR): 1.73, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-2.56) showed better efficacy than paracetamol (OR: 1.62, 95% CI 1.24-2.13) for pain-free status at 2 h, while paracetamol (OR: 1.42, 95% CI 0.87-2.30) showed better efficacy than ibuprofen (OR: 1.20, 95% CI 0.58-2.48) for pain-free status at 1 h. Paracetamol was associated with the lowest likelihood of rescue medication use (OR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.37-0.65). Ibuprofen was associated with a lower likelihood of the occurrence of any events and gastrointestinal adverse events compared with placebo and paracetamol (OR: 0.95, 95% CI 0.64-1.41 and OR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.44-1.50, respectively). Paracetamol and ibuprofen showed better efficacy than placebo in treating ETTH; there was no statistically significant difference in efficacy between the two drugs. For individuals at a higher risk (like renal insufficiency or risk of GI bleeding), paracetamol may be considered as a preferred option instead of Ibuprofen. Further meta-analyses of head-to-head trials are needed for direct comparisons in the future.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022340936.

Living with chronic headaches: A qualitative study from an outpatient pain clinic in Norway

BACKGROUND

Although headache is considered a frequently experienced type of pain, the challenges, experiences, and perceptions of people suffering from chronic headaches are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to gain subjective information regarding these aspects in daily life, in order to answer the research question "What is life like with a chronic headache?"

METHODOLOGY

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 16 patients who suffered from chronic headaches. Five main domains were explored: emotions related to headaches; trauma/stressful events; behavioural changes, relationships, and coping mechanisms.

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Participants reported that pain restricted their lives in many ways, including not being able to work, loss of status, identity, freedom, intimate relationships and friends. The majority believed that psychological and/or physiological trauma was the reason for their headaches. New information that emerged from this study was how common life events not usually considered major traumas, initiated and maintained symptoms. Shame and feelings of stigmatization appeared to be strongly associated with chronic pain, leading to a scenario where thriving, contentment and enjoyment were often lacking.

MAIN RESULTS

This study provided an in-depth understanding of how chronic headache adversely affects the lives of sufferers. Chronic headaches restrict sufferers' lives, resulting in emotional and behavioural changes and a high level of disability. The complexity of chronic headaches in clinical practice is hugely underestimated, and poorly understood by society in general.

Photocatalytic Activity of the Blends Based on TiO2 Nanoparticles and Reduced Graphene Oxide for Degradation of Acetaminophen

The aim of this work is to highlight the influence of blends based on TiO₂ nanoparticles and reduced graphene oxide (RGO) on the photodegradation of acetaminophen (AC). To this end, the catalysts of TiO₂/RGO blends with RGO sheet concentrations equal 5, 10, and 20 wt. % were prepared by the solid-state interaction of the two constituents. The preferential adsorption of TiO₂ particles onto the RGO sheets' surfaces via the water molecules on the TiO₂ particle surface was demonstrated by FTIR spectroscopy. This adsorption process induced an increase in the disordered state of the RGO sheets in the presence of the TiO₂ particles, as highlighted by Raman scattering and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The novelty of this work lies in the demonstration that TiO₂/RGO mixtures, obtained by the solid-phase interaction of the two constituents, allow an acetaminophen removal of up to 95.18% after 100 min of UV irradiation. This TiO₂/RGO catalyst induced a higher photodegradation efficiency of AC than TiO₂ due to the presence of RGO sheets, which acted as a capture agent for the photogenerated electrons of TiO_2, hindering the electron-hole recombination. The reaction kinetics of AC aqueous solutions containing TiO₂/RGO blends followed a complex first-order kinetic model. Another novelty of this work is the demonstration of the ability of PVC membranes modified with Au nanoparticles to act both as filters for the removal of TiO₂/RGO blends after AC photodegradation and as potential SERS supports, which illustrate the vibrational properties of the reused catalyst. The reuse of the TiO₂/RGO blends after the first cycle of AC photodegradation indicated their suitable stability during the five cycles of pharmaceutical compound photodegradation.

Meat tenderization using acetaminophen (paracetamol/APAP): A review on deductive biochemical mechanisms, toxicological implications and strategies for mitigation

Meats consist of edible portions originating from domestic and wild animals. Meat's palatability and sensory accessibility largely depend on its tenderness to consumers. Although many factors influence meat tenderness, the cooking method cannot be neglected. Different chemical, mechanical, and natural means of meat tenderization have been considered healthy and safe for consumers. However, many households, food vendors, and bars in developing countries engage in the unhealthy use of acetaminophen (paracetamol/APAP) in meat tenderization due to the cost reduction it offers in the overall cooking process. Acetaminophen (paracetamol/APAP) is one of the most popular, relatively cheap, and ubiquitous over-the-counter drugs that induce serious toxicity challenges when misused. It is important to note that acetaminophen during cooking is hydrolyses into a toxic compound known as 4-aminophenol, which damages the liver and kidney and results in organ failure. Despite the reports on the increase in the use of acetaminophen for meat tenderizing in many web reports, there have not been any serious scientific publications on this subject. This study adopted classical/traditional methodology to review relevant literature retrieved from Scopus, PubMed, and ScienceDirect using relevant key terms (Acetaminophen, Toxicity, Meat tenderization, APAP, paracetamol, mechanisms) and Boolean operators (AND and OR). This paper provides in-depth information on the hazard and health implications of consuming acetaminophen tenderized meat via genetic and metabolic pathways deductions. Understanding these unsafe practices will promote awareness and mitigation strategies.

An Updated Review on the Metabolite (AM404)-Mediated Central Mechanism of Action of Paracetamol (Acetaminophen): Experimental Evidence and Potential Clinical Impact

Paracetamol remains the recommended first-line option for mild-to-moderate acute pain in general population and particularly in vulnerable populations. Despite its wide use, debate exists regarding the analgesic mechanism of action (MoA) of paracetamol. A growing body of evidence challenged the notion that paracetamol exerts its analgesic effect through cyclooxygenase (COX)-dependent inhibitory effect. It is now more evident that paracetamol analgesia has multiple pathways and is mediated by the formation of the bioactive AM404 metabolite in the central nervous system (CNS). AM404 is a potent activator of TRPV₁, a major contributor to neuronal response to pain in the brain and dorsal horn. In the periaqueductal grey, the bioactive metabolite AM404 activated the TRPV₁ channel-mGlu5 receptor-PLC-DAGL-CB1 receptor signaling cascade. The present article provides a comprehensive literature review of the centrally located, COX-independent, analgesic MoA of paracetamol and relates how the current experimental evidence can be translated into clinical practice. The evidence discussed in this review established paracetamol as a central, COX-independent, antinociceptive medication that has a distinct MoA from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and a more tolerable safety profile. With the establishment of the central MoA of paracetamol, we believe that paracetamol remains the preferred first-line option for mild-to-moderate acute pain for healthy adults, children, and patients with health concerns. However, safety concerns remain with the high dose of paracetamol due to the NAPQI-mediated liver necrosis. Centrally acting paracetamol/p-aminophenol derivatives could potentiate the analgesic effect of paracetamol without increasing the risk of hepatoxicity. Moreover, the specific central MoA of paracetamol allows its combination with other analgesics, including NSAIDs, with a different MoA. Future experiments to better explain the central actions of paracetamol could pave the way for discovering new central analgesics with a better benefit-to-risk ratio.

The Quality of Counseling for Headache OTC Medications in German Community Pharmacies Using a Simulated Patient Approach: Are There Differences between Self-Purchase and Purchase for a Third Party?

Background

In Germany—as worldwide—headache is one of the most frequent causes of self-medication. The dispensing of over-the-counter (OTC) medications may only be carried out by community pharmacies (CPs). In doing so, CPs have to ensure “adequate” counseling, for both self-purchase and purchase for a third party, which also occurs in everyday pharmacy practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of counseling for headache OTC medications in German CPs and, as the first study worldwide, to analyze whether and to what extent there are differences in counseling between self-purchase and purchase for a third party.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was carried out using the covert simulated patient methodology (SPM) in all 42 CPs in the German big city Potsdam. With the help of 8 trained simulated patients (SPs), each CP was visited four times by a different SP. The SPs simulated in each CP two scenarios two times with the demand for an OTC medication against headache, which differed only in whether the demand was for themselves or for their boyfriend/girlfriend.

Results

All 168 planned pharmacy visits (84 visits per scenario) were successfully carried out. Overall, the median counseling score was 3.0 out of 9 points (interquartile range [IQR 2.0]). There were no significant differences between the two scenarios (Wilcoxon signed-rank test; p=0.495, r = 0.053). In a multivariate binary logistic regression analysis, the counseling level and the different scenarios were not significantly associated (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.635, 95% CI = 0.673–3.972, p=0.278).

Conclusions

Due to the partly considerable deficits in counseling of German CPs, policy-makers and the regional chambers of pharmacists are called upon to take appropriate measures to improve the quality of counseling. It is positive that no differences in counseling between self-purchase and purchase for a third party were found, but further verifying studies with a modified methodology are recommended.

Dispensing and Variabilities in Pricing of Headache OTC Medicines by Community Pharmacies in a German Big City: A Simulated Patient Approach

Background

In Germany, over-the-counter (OTC) medicines for self-medication may only be dispensed by community pharmacies (CPs). From the customer's point of view, "adequate" counseling includes not only the recommendation of medicines that meet guidelines, but ao the dispensing of low-priced medicines. This is all the more important in Germany against the background of free pricing and a lack of obligation to display prices. The aim was to analyze the dispensing and possible price variability of OTC medicines for headache.

Methods

The cross-sectional design of the study based on the simulated patient methodology (SPM) included all 42 CPs of the German big city Potsdam and used eight trained simulated patients (SPs). Between October and December 2020, four different SPs visited each CP four times with two almost identical scenarios with the demand for a medicine for headache.

Results

All 168 planned visits were successfully completed and ibuprofen (60.1%) was dispensed most frequently. Across all dispensed medicines, prices varied from €0.93 to €9.97 (∆ 972%; median €3.46 [interquartile range (IQR) €2.25]). For repeated dispensing of the same CPs, the price variability was a maximum of €8.77. In addition, packs with ≤10 tablets were dispensed in 47.6%, with 11 to 20 tablets in 50.6%, and with >20 tablets in 1.8% of visits.

Conclusion

Increasing price transparency and strengthening price competition could make it easier for customers to access OTC medicines according to their personal needs.

Aspirin, paracetamol (acetaminophen) and caffeine for the treatment of acute migraine attacks: A systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Many migraine patients rely on over-the-counter analgesics for the treatment of migraine attacks. Fixed-dose combinations of aspirin, paracetamol and caffeine (APC) have been used for treating migraine in many countries for a long time. We performed a meta-analysis for the comparison of APC versus placebo, which has not been done to date.

METHODS

Randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies using APC to treat a migraine attack were included in a meta-analysis. We calculated the rate ratio (RRs) associated with APC versus placebo.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included, with 3306 participants (2147 treated with APC and 1159 treated with placebo). For the primary efficacy outcome, being pain-free at 2 h, APC was superior to placebo (19.6% vs. 9.0%, RR 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-3.3). For the co-primary efficacy outcome, pain relief at 2 h, APC was superior to placebo (54.3% vs. 31.2%, RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.6-1.9). Adverse events were more frequent in the APC than the placebo groups (10.9% vs. 7.8%, RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Results showed that APC is superior to placebo in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. Efficacy, measured by pain-free response and pain relief at 2 h, was clinically relevant.

Quality appraisal of existing guidelines for the management of headache disorders by the AGREE II's method

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of existing clinical practice guidelines for headache management and their main recommendations.

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines have been developed to support the clinical decision-making. However, to achieve this goal, the quality of these guidelines must be ensured.

METHODS

A systematic search for clinical practice guidelines for headache management was conducted in the PubMed database, in websites of known guideline developers and in websites of known headache associations. The quality appraisal was performed through the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II method.

RESULTS

Twelve guidelines were evaluated. The domains of rigor of development, applicability, and editorial independence, which most influence the overall quality of guidelines, had the lowest average scores and the highest standard deviation rates (61% ± 23; 37% ± 20; 53% ± 31). The main recommendations regarding medication use for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache and migraine in adult patients consisted of paracetamol, acetylsalicylic acid, and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in all guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The statistical results indicate that the appraised guidelines have room for both individual and collective improvement. In addition, there is a well-established medication recommendation pattern among all guidelines evaluated.

Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache: 1. Rationale and description

In countries where headache services exist at all, their focus is usually on specialist (tertiary) care. This is clinically and economically inappropriate: most headache disorders can effectively and more efficiently (and at lower cost) be treated in educationally supported primary care. At the same time, compartmentalizing divisions between primary, secondary and tertiary care in many health-care systems create multiple inefficiencies, confronting patients attempting to navigate these levels (the "patient journey") with perplexing obstacles.High demand for headache care, estimated here in a needs-assessment exercise, is the biggest of the challenges to reform. It is also the principal reason why reform is necessary.The structured headache services model presented here by experts from all world regions on behalf of the Global Campaign against Headache is the suggested health-care solution to headache. It develops and refines previous proposals, responding to the challenge of high demand by basing headache services in primary care, with two supporting arguments. First, only primary care can deliver headache services equitably to the large numbers of people needing it. Second, with educational supports, they can do so effectively to most of these people. The model calls for vertical integration between care levels (primary, secondary and tertiary), and protection of the more advanced levels for the minority of patients who need them. At the same time, it is amenable to horizontal integration with other care services. It is adaptable according to the broader national or regional health services in which headache services should be embedded.It is, according to evidence and argument presented, an efficient and cost-effective model, but these are claims to be tested in formal economic analyses.

21st century headache: mapping new territory

Background

With headache experienced by up to 75% of adults worldwide in the last year, primary headache disorders constitute a major public health problem, yet they remain under-diagnosed and under-treated.

Headache prevalence and burden is changing as society evolves, with headache now occurring earlier in life. Contributing factors, mostly associated with changing life style, such as stress, bad posture, physical inactivity, sleep disturbance, poor diet and excess use of digital technology may be associated with the phenomenon that could be labelled as ‘21st century headache’. This is especially notable in workplace and learning environments where headache impacts mental clarity and therefore cognitive performance. The headache-related impact on productivity and absenteeism negatively influences an individual’s behaviour and quality of life, and is also associated with a high economic cost. Since the majority of sufferers opt to self-treat rather than seek medical advice, substantial knowledge on headache prevalence, causation and burden is unknown globally. Mapping the entire population of headache sufferers can close this knowledge gap, leading to better headache management. The broad use of digital technology to gather real world data on headache triggers, burden and management strategies, in self-treated population will allow these sufferers to access appropriate support and medication, and therefore improve quality of life.

Conclusion

These data can yield important insights into a substantial global healthcare issue and form the basis for improved patient awareness, professional education, clinical study design and drug development.

Photoluminescence as a Valuable Tool in the Optical Characterization of Acetaminophen and the Monitoring of Its Photodegradation Reactions

In this work, new evidence for the photodegradation reactions of acetaminophen (AC) is reported by photoluminescence (PL), Raman scattering and FTIR spectroscopy. Under excitation wavelength of 320 nm, AC shows a PL band in the spectral range of 340-550 nm, whose intensity decreases by exposure to UV light. The chemical interaction of AC with the NaOH solutions, having the concentration ranging between 0.001 and 0.3 M, induces a gradual enhancement of the photoluminescence excitation (PLE) and PL spectra, when the exposure time of samples at the UV light increases until 140 min, as a result of the formation of p-aminophenol and sodium acetate. This behavior is not influenced by the excipients or other active compounds in pharmaceutical products as demonstrated by PLE and PL studies. Experimental arguments for the obtaining of p-aminophenol and sodium acetate, when AC has interacted with NaOH, are shown by Raman scattering and FTIR spectroscopy.

Chinese Herbal Formula Xuefu Zhuyu for Tension-Type Headache with Qi-Stagnation and Blood-Stasis Pattern (CheruXTH): Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Tension-type headache (TTH) is the most common headache disorder. Current treatments for TTH have been reported to be associated with insufficient long-term benefits and unwanted adverse events (AEs). The Chinese herbal formula Xuefu Zhuyu (XFZY) has been utilized in TTH treatment, but the evidence supporting its efficacy remains unclear. This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of XFZY for TTH.

Methods

This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial will be undertaken in China. A total of 174 eligible participants will be randomly assigned to either an XFZY group or a placebo group (20 ml each dose, three times daily for 4 weeks) at a ratio of 1 : 1. The primary outcome is the change in mean headache intensity measured by a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include the area-under-the headache curve (AUC), headache frequency, rescue medication use, qi-stagnation and blood-stasis pattern measurement, quality of life measured by the EuroQol-5-Dimensions-5-Level (EQ-5D-5L), global evaluation of medication, and health economic indexes. Discussion. The results of the study are expected to provide evidence of high methodological and reporting quality on the efficacy and safety of XFZY for TTH. This trail is registered with ChiCTR1900026716 (registered on 19 October, 2019).

[Tension type headaches : Quo vadis?]

Episodic tension type headache is considered to be the most prevalent primary headache. If tension type headache occurs on more than 15 days per month for at least 3 consecutive months, it is classified as chronic tension type headache. In recent years, it has become obvious that it is difficult to distinguish between episodic tension type headache and a moderate migraine attack and also between chronic tension type headache and chronic migraine. In the paper, we discuss how the differential diagnosis can be more specific and which therapy is supported by the literature. In addition, we discuss differences and similarities of tension type headache and migraine and a possible similar pathophysiology of both (convergence hypothesis).

Effect of a New Synergistic Combination of Low Doses of Acetylsalicylic Acid, Caffeine, Acetaminophen, and Chlorpheniramine in Acute Low Back Pain

The present paper continues a more complex research related to the increased synergism in terms of both anti-inflammatory and analgesic effect obtained by the addition of chlorpheniramine (CLF) to the common acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), acetaminophen (PAR), and caffeine (CAF) combination. This synergistic effect was previously highlighted both in vitro in rat models and in vivo in the treatment of migraine. The aim of the research was to further evaluate the analgesic effect of a synergistic low-dose ASA-PAR-CAF-CLF combination in the treatment of low back pain, in a parallel, multiple-dose, double-blind, active controlled clinical trial. A number of 89 patients with low back pain of at least moderate intensity were randomly assigned to receive Algopirin^® (ALG), a combinational product containing 125 mg ASA, 75 mg PAR, 15 mg CAF, and 2 mg CLF, or PAR 500 mg, a drug recognized by American Pain Society as "safe and effective" in the treatment of low back pain. One tablet of the assigned product was administered three times a day for seven consecutive days. The patients evaluated their pain level using a Visual Analog Scale prior to administration, and at 1, 2, 4, and 6 h after the morning dose. Time course of effect was similar in structure and size for both treatments. Pain relief appeared rapidly and steadily increased over 4 h after drug administration. Differential pain curves of ALG and PAR were very similar and comparable with the previously determined ALG analgesia pattern in migraine. Differences between the daily mean pain scores were not statistically significant for the two treatments. Similar results were obtained for the Sum of Pain Intensity Differences (SPID) for 0-4 h and 0-6 h intervals as well as for the time course of the proportion of patients with at least 30% and at least 50% pain relief. In conclusion, in spite of very small doses of active components, ALG proved equally effective to the standard low back pain treatment and therefore a viable therapeutic alternative, mainly for patients with gastrointestinal and hepatic sensitivity. Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier EudraCT No.: 2015-002314-74.

Efficacy and safety of DFN-11 (sumatriptan injection, 3 mg) in adults with episodic migraine: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

In a previous randomized, double-blind, proof-of-concept study in rapidly escalating migraine, a 3 mg dose of subcutaneous sumatriptan (DFN-11) was associated with fewer and shorter triptan sensations than a 6 mg dose. The primary objective of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of acute treatment with DFN-11 compared with placebo in episodic migraine.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy and safety study of DFN-11 in the acute treatment of adults with episodic migraine (study RESTOR). The primary endpoint was the proportion of subjects taking DFN-11 who were pain free at 2 h postdose in the double-blind period compared with placebo. Secondary endpoints included earlier postdose timepoints, assessments of pain relief and subjects' freedom from their most bothersome symptom (MBS) (among nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia). Safety and tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 392 subjects was screened, 268 (68.4%) were randomized, and 234 (87.3% of those randomized) completed the double-blind treatment period. The proportion of subjects who were pain free at 2 h postdose was significantly greater in the DFN-11 group than in the placebo group (51.0% vs 30.8%, P  =  0.0023). Compared with placebo, significantly higher proportions of subjects treated with DFN-11 were also pain free at 30, 60, and 90 min postdose (P  ≤  0.0195). DFN-11 was significantly superior to placebo for pain relief at 60 min, 90 min, and 2 h postdose (P ≤ 0.0179). At 2 h postdose, DFN-11 was also significantly superior to placebo for freedom from photophobia (P  =  0.0056) and phonophobia (P  =  0.0167). Overall, 33.3% (37/111) who received DFN-11 and 13.4% (16/119) who received placebo experienced at least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), the most common of which were injection site swelling (7.2% vs 0.8%) and pain (7.2% vs 5.9%). Chest discomfort was about half as common in the DFN-11 treatment group as it was in the placebo group (0.9% vs 1.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study met its primary endpoint, pain freedom at 2 h postdose, with DFN-11 significantly better than placebo, and the incidence of TEAEs and triptan sensations with DFN-11 was low. The 3 mg dose of sumatriptan in DFN-11 appears to be an effective alternative to a 6 mg SC dose of sumatriptan, with good safety and tolerability. ( clinicaltrials.gov : NCT02569853; registered 07 October 2015).

Chlorpheniramine Potentiates the Analgesic Effect in Migraine of Usual Caffeine, Acetaminophen, and Acetylsalicylic Acid Combination

Previous studies indicated that addition of the antihistaminic chlorpheniramine to the usual combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen, and caffeine further increases their synergism both in terms of anti-inflammatory and analgesic effect. The present non-interventional study tested the superiority of two Algopirin® tablets, containing a total of 250 mg acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), 150 mg acetaminophen (paracetamol, PAR), 30 mg caffeine (CAF) and 4 mg chlorpheniramine (CLF) vs. a combination containing 250 mg ASA, 250 mg PAR, and 65 mg CAF recognized as "safe and effective" by FDA in treating migraine. Patients evaluated their pain intensity on the Visual Analog Scale-VAS(PI) before and 30, 60, 120, 180, and 240 min after drug intake. Interpretation of the pain curves as "survival pain curves" was considered as a method for direct comparison of the pain curves. This interpretation permitted the application of the log rank test for comparison of pain hazards. The results of the applied parametric and non-parametric statistical tests indicated significant differences between the main endpoints: both Areas Under Pain Curves and time to decrease of the pain intensity to less than 50% of the initial value comparisons highlighted that Algopirin® was more efficient in spite of smaller doses of PAR and CAF. Comparison of "survival of pain" led to the same conclusion concerning the superiority of Algopririn. Consequently, the addition of CLF permitted decreasing of ASA, PAR, and CAF doses as well as their potential side effects, without a loss of analgesic effect.

Aspirin for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH (two to 14 headache days per month), and chronic TTH (15 headache days per month or more). Aspirin is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of episodic TTH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of aspirin for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache (TTH) in adults compared with placebo or any active comparator.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database from inception to September 2016, and also reference lists of relevant published studies and reviews. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral aspirin for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective, with participants aged 18 years or over, and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. For various outcomes (predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS)), we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNT), one additional harmful outcome (NNH), or to prevent one event (NNTp) for oral aspirin compared to placebo or an active intervention.We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies enrolling adults with frequent episodic TTH; 1812 participants took medication, of which 767 were included in comparisons of aspirin 1000 mg with placebo, and 405 in comparisons of aspirin 500 mg or 650 mg with placebo. Not all of these participants provided data for outcomes of interest in this review. Four studies specified using IHS diagnostic criteria; one predated commonly recognised criteria, but described comparable characteristics and excluded migraine. All participants treated headaches of at least moderate pain intensity.None of the included studies were at low risk of bias across all domains considered, although for most studies and domains this was likely to be due to inadequate reporting rather than poor methods. We judged one study to be at high risk of bias due to small size.There were no data for aspirin at any dose for the IHS preferred outcome of being pain free at two hours, or for being pain free at any other time, and only one study provided data equivalent to having no or mild pain at two hours (very low quality evidence). Use of rescue medication was lower with aspirin 1000 mg than with placebo (2 studies, 397 participants); 14% of participants used rescue medication with aspirin 1000 mg compared with 31% with placebo (NNTp 6.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1 to 12) (low quality evidence). Two studies (397 participants) reported a Patient Global Evaluation at the end of the study; we combined the top two categories for both studies to determine the number of participants who were 'satisfied' with treatment. Aspirin 1000 mg produced more satisfied participants (55%) than did placebo (37%) (NNT 5.7, 95% CI 3.7 to 12) (very low quality evidence).Adverse events were not different between aspirin 1000 mg and placebo (RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.5), or aspirin 500 mg or 650 mg and placebo (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.8 to 2.0) (low quality evidence). Studies reported no serious adverse events.The quality of the evidence using GRADE comparing aspirin doses between 500 mg and 1000 mg with placebo was low or very low. Evidence was downgraded because of the small number of studies and events, and because the most important measures of efficacy were not reported.There were insufficient data to compare aspirin with any active comparator (paracetamol alone, paracetamol plus codeine, peppermint oil, or metamizole) at any of the doses tested.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of aspirin between 500 mg and 1000 mg provided some benefit in terms of less frequent use of rescue medication and more participants satisfied with treatment compared with placebo in adults with frequent episodic TTH who have an acute headache of moderate or severe intensity. There was no difference between a single dose of aspirin and placebo for the number of people experiencing adverse events. The amount and quality of the evidence was very limited and should be interpreted with caution.

Ketoprofen for episodic tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache day per month), frequent episodic TTH (2 to 14 headache days per month), and chronic TTH (15 headache days a month or more). Ketoprofen is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of headaches in frequent episodic TTH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of ketoprofen for treatment of episodic TTH in adults compared with placebo or any active comparator.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database up to May 2016, and also reference lists of relevant published studies and reviews. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral ketoprofen for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective, with participants aged 18 years or over, and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used the numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or one additional harmful outcome (NNH) for oral ketoprofen compared to placebo or an active intervention for a range of outcomes, predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS).We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies, all of which enrolled adults with frequent episodic TTH. They all specified using the IHS diagnostic criteria and reported mean baseline pain of at least moderate intensity. While 1253 people with TTH participated in these studies, the numbers available for any analysis were lower than this because outcomes were inconsistently reported and because many participants received active comparators.None of the included studies were at low risk of bias across all domains considered, although for most studies and domains this was likely to be due to inadequate reporting rather than poor methods. We judged one study to be at high risk of bias due to small size.Useful information was available only for ketoprofen 25 mg. For the IHS preferred outcome of being pain-free at two hours the NNT for ketoprofen 25 mg compared with placebo was 9.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.8 to 72) in two studies (272 participants; low quality evidence). The NNT was 3.7 (95% CI 2.6 to 6.3) for pain-free or mild pain at two hours in two studies (272 participants; moderate quality evidence). Fewer people needed rescue medication with ketoprofen 25 mg than with placebo, with a number needed to treat to prevent one event (NNTp) of 6.2 (95% CI 4.3 to 11) in three studies (605 participants; moderate quality evidence). The number of participants reporting any adverse event was higher with ketoprofen 25 mg than placebo (NNH 15, (95% CI 8.7 to 45)) in three studies (651 participants with 66 events; low quality evidence). Most events were of mild to moderate intensity.Ketoprofen 25 mg was not different from paracetamol 1000 mg in two studies with 276 participants for any efficacy outcomes (low to moderate quality evidence); the RR for pain-free at two hours was 1.3 (95% CI 0.9 to 2.0). The number of participants reporting any adverse event was higher with ketoprofen 25 mg than with paracetamol (NNH 17, 95% CI 8.9 to 130)) in two studies (582 participants, 68 events; low quality evidence).Studies reported no serious adverse events.We judged the quality of the evidence comparing ketoprofen 25 mg with placebo or paracetamol 1000 mg as moderate to very low. Where evidence was downgraded it was because of the small number of studies and events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ketoprofen 25 mg provided a small benefit compared with placebo in terms of being pain-free at two hours or having mild or no pain at two hours for people with frequent episodic TTH who have an acute headache of moderate or severe intensity. Its use was associated with more people experiencing adverse events. Ketoprofen 25 mg was not superior to paracetamol 1000 mg for any efficacy outcome.

Results from a pharmacy-based patient survey on the use of a fixed combination analgesic containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol and caffeine by self-diagnosing and self-treating patients

Background

Patients suffering from migraine or tension-type headache (TTH) often treat their complaints with over-the-counter (OTC) medications. Fixed dose combinations of acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol and caffeine (APC) are among the most commonly used analgesics, and their efficacy for treating acute headache pain has been well demonstrated. This investigation was run to better characterize patients who treat their headache with OTC APC combinations, as well as treatment effects.

Methods

A pharmacy-based patient survey in 164 German pharmacies was performed. Patients (age ≥18 years) who purchased APC analgesics (of the brand Thomapyrin^®) were handed a questionnaire, which had to be filled out at patients own discretion after taking the medication. Demographics, pain characteristics and perceived efficacy and tolerability data were analysed with descriptive statistics.

Results

Questionnaires from 1298 patients were analysed, of whom 71.9 % were females and 28.1 % were males. Headache patients were assigned to TTH or migraine according to diagnosis criteria of the International Headache Classification-II (ICHD-II), with 828 patients for TTH and 206 for migraine. About one third of patients in the subgroup migraine did not report their pain as migraine. Nausea, photophobia/phonophobia turned out to be the most distinguishing feature between migraine and TTH. The main reasons for purchasing the product were recommendation by the pharmacists (40.5 %) and/or friends or relatives (24.4 %). 74 % of TTH and 55 % of migraine patients reported onset of pain relief within the first 30 min. More than 90 % rated efficacy as well as tolerability to be “good” or “very good”.

Conclusions

The main reason for purchasing APC products in the pharmacy are TTH or migraine. About a third of patients fulfilling the IHCD-II criteria for migraine failed to recognize their headache as migraine. This could be explained e.g. by patients’ misconceptions about their pain. Patients’ assessments of efficacy and tolerability showed that the investigated APC combinations are valuable for the treatment of TTH and migraine headache. These data complement those of randomized clinical studies on such preparations.

Paracetamol (acetaminophen) for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about 1 person in 5 worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH (two to 14 headaches per month), and chronic TTH (15 headache days a month or more). Paracetamol (acetaminophen) is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of headaches in frequent episodic TTH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of paracetamol for the acute treatment of frequent episodic TTH in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (CRSO), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database to October 2015, and also reference lists of relevant published studies and reviews. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching online clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral paracetamol for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective, with participants aged 18 years or over, and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. We used the numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for one additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or one additional harmful outcome (NNH) for oral paracetamol compared to placebo or an active intervention for a range of outcomes, predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS).We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies, all of which enrolled adults with frequent episodic TTH. Twelve studies used the IHS diagnostic criteria or similar, six used the older classification of the Ad Hoc Committee, and five did not describe specific diagnostic criteria but generally excluded participants with migraines. Participants had moderate or severe pain at the start of treatment. While 8079 people with TTH participated in these studies, the numbers available for any analysis were lower than this because outcomes were inconsistently reported and because many participants received active comparators.None of the included studies were at low risk of bias across all domains considered, although for most studies and domains this was likely to be due to inadequate reporting rather than poor methods. We judged five studies to be at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome reporting, and seven due to small size.For the IHS preferred outcome of being pain free at two hours the NNT for paracetamol 1000 mg compared with placebo was 22 (95% confidence interval (CI) 15 to 40) in eight studies (5890 participants; high quality evidence), with no significant difference from placebo at one hour. The NNT was 10 (7.9 to 14) for pain-free or mild pain at two hours in five studies (5238 participants; high quality evidence). The use of rescue medication was lower with paracetamol 1000 mg than with placebo, with an NNTp to prevent an event of 7.8 (6.0 to 11) in six studies (1856 participants; moderate quality evidence). On limited data, the efficacy of paracetamol 500 mg to 650 mg was not superior to placebo, and paracetamol 1000 mg was not different from either ketoprofen 25 mg or ibuprofen 400 mg (low quality evidence).Adverse events were not different between paracetamol 1000 mg and placebo (RR 1.1 (0.94 to 1.3); 5605 participants; 11 studies; high quality evidence). Studies reported no serious adverse events.The quality of the evidence using GRADE comparing paracetamol 1000 mg with placebo was moderate to high. Where evidence was downgraded it was because a minority of studies reported the outcome. For comparisons of paracetamol 500 mg to 650 mg with placebo, and of paracetamol 1000 mg with active comparators, we downgraded the evidence to low quality or very low quality because of the small number of studies and events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Paracetamol 1000 mg provided a small benefit in terms of being pain free at two hours for people with frequent episodic TTH who have an acute headache of moderate or severe intensity.

Ibuprofen for acute treatment of episodic tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headache (TTH) affects about one person in five worldwide. It is divided into infrequent episodic TTH (fewer than one headache per month), frequent episodic TTH (1 to 14 headaches per month), and chronic TTH (15 headaches a month or more). Ibuprofen is one of a number of analgesics suggested for acute treatment of headaches in frequent episodic TTH.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of oral ibuprofen for treatment of acute episodic TTH in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and our own in-house database to January 2015. We sought unpublished studies by asking personal contacts and searching on-line clinical trial registers and manufacturers' websites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, placebo-controlled studies (parallel-group or cross-over) using oral ibuprofen for symptomatic relief of an acute episode of TTH. Studies had to be prospective and include at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNT) or number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNH) of oral ibuprofen compared to placebo for a range of outcomes, predominantly those recommended by the International Headache Society (IHS).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies, all of which enrolled adult participants with frequent episodic TTH. Nine used the IHS diagnostic criteria, but two used the older classification of the Ad Hoc Committee, and one did not describe diagnostic criteria but excluded participants with migraines. While 3094 people with TTH participated in these studies, the numbers available for any form of analysis were lower than this; placebo was taken by 733, standard ibuprofen 200 mg by 127, standard ibuprofen 400 mg by 892, and fast-acting ibuprofen 400 mg by 230. Participants had moderate or severe pain at the start of treatment. Other participants were either in studies not reporting outcomes we could analyse, or were given one of several active comparators in single studies.For the IHS-preferred outcome of being pain free at 2 hours the NNT for ibuprofen 400 mg (all formulations) compared with placebo was 14 (95% confidence interval (CI), 8.4 to 47) in four studies, with no significant difference from placebo at 1 hour (moderate quality evidence). The NNT was 5.9 (4.2 to 9.5) for the global evaluation of 'very good' or 'excellent' in three studies (moderate quality evidence). No study reported the number of participants experiencing no worse than mild pain at 1 or 2 hours. The use of rescue medication was lower with ibuprofen 400 mg than with placebo, with the number needed to treat to prevent one event (NNTp) of 8.9 (5.6 to 21) in two studies (low quality evidence).Adverse events were not different between ibuprofen 400 mg and placebo; RR 1.1 (0.64 to 1.7) (high-quality evidence). No serious adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ibuprofen 400 mg provides an important benefit in terms of being pain free at 2 hours for a small number of people with frequent episodic tension-type headache who have an acute headache with moderate or severe initial pain. There is no information about the lesser benefit of no worse than mild pain at 2 hours.

Muscles and their role in episodic tension-type headache: implications for treatment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Tension-type headache (TTH) imposes a heavy burden on the global population but remains incompletely understood and poorly managed.

DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT

Here, we review current knowledge of peripheral factors involved in the mechanism of TTH and make recommendations for the treatment of episodic TTH based on these.

RESULTS

Peripheral activation or sensitization of myofascial nociceptors is most probably involved in the development of muscle pain and the acute episode of TTH. Repetitive episodes of muscle pain may sensitize the central nervous system resulting in progression of TTH to the chronic form. Thus, muscular factors may be responsible not only for the acute headache episode but also for chronification of the disorder. Simple analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the mainstays of management of individual headache episodes. Ibuprofen 400 mg and aspirin 1000 mg are recommended as drugs of first choice based on treatment effect, safety profile and costs. Non-pharmacological therapies include electromyographic biofeedback, physiotherapy and muscle relaxation therapy. Future studies should aim to identify the triggers of peripheral nociception and how to avoid peripheral and central sensitization. There is a need for more effective, faster acting drugs for acute TTH.

CONCLUSION

Muscular factors play an important role in episodic TTH. Ibuprofen 400 mg and aspirin 1000 mg are recommended as drugs of first choice.

Use of a fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen and caffeine compared with acetaminophen alone in episodic tension-type headache: meta-analysis of four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies

Background

Most patients with episodic tension-type headache treat headache episodes with over-the-counter medication. Combination analgesics containing caffeine may be more effective and as well tolerated as monotherapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen (paracetamol) and caffeine in episodic tension-type headache using recently recommended endpoints.

Methods

Four randomized, controlled trials of identical design in 1,900 patients with episodic tension-type headache comparing acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen and caffeine vs. acetaminophen or placebo were pooled. Analysis populations were ‘all headache episodes’ and those with ‘severe pain at baseline’. Post-hoc defined primary endpoint: headache episodes pain-free at 2 h. Secondary endpoints: headache episodes pain-free at 1 h, headache response at 2 h (mild or no pain), degree of interference with daily activities.

Results

6,861 headache episodes were treated, including 2,215 severe headache episodes. The proportion of headache episodes pain-free at 2 h was significantly higher with the triple combination (28.5%) vs. acetaminophen (21.0%) and placebo (18.0%) (p < 0.0001), and similarly for those severe at baseline (20.2% vs. 12.1% and 10.8%; p ≤ 0.0003). A similar pattern of superiority was observed for secondary endpoints. The triple combination was generally well tolerated.

Conclusions

The combination of acetylsalicylic acid, acetaminophen and caffeine is effective and well tolerated in episodic tension-type headache, and significantly superior to acetaminophen with regard to being pain-free at 2 h, headache response at 2 h and ability to return to daily activities, even in those with pain rated severe at baseline.

Economic impact of a triptan Rx-to-OTC switch in six EU countries

INTRODUCTION

Triptans have been safely and effectively used in the management of migraine for more than fifteen years, and it seems reasonable to wonder what would be the economic impact of moving a specific triptan to OTC availability. The objective of this study was then to examine the economic impact of payer policies of a triptan Rx-to-OTC switch in six EU countries (France, UK, Spain, Italy, Germany and Poland).

METHODS

A decision model was used to model the budgetary impact of a triptan Rx-to-OTC switch from the third-party payer (TPP) and the societal perspectives, using a one-year timeframe.

RESULTS

From the TPP perspective, it is estimated that the current overall direct spending on the management of migraine attacks across the 6 EU Member States is €582 million annually, and that the savings would reach €75 million (13% of the overall direct economic burden of migraine). From the societal perspective, €86 million annually would be added.

CONCLUSIONS

Given evidence of effectiveness and safety, and given the potential savings, a triptan Rx-to-OTC switch is a reasonable public policy decision.

Aspirin with or without an antiemetic for acute migraine headaches in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 4, 2010 (Kirthi 2010). Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services and society. Many sufferers choose not to, or are unable to, seek professional help and rely on over-the-counter analgesics. Co-therapy with an antiemetic should help to reduce nausea and vomiting commonly associated with migraine headaches.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin, alone or in combination with an antiemetic, compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine headaches in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Oxford Pain Relief Database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists for studies through 10 March 2010 for the original review and to 31 January 2013 for the update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled or active-controlled studies, or both, using aspirin to treat a migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Numbers of participants achieving each outcome were used to calculate relative risk and numbers needed to treat (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or other active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

No new studies were found for this update. Thirteen studies (4222 participants) compared aspirin 900 mg or 1000 mg, alone or in combination with metoclopramide 10 mg, with placebo or other active comparators, mainly sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. For all efficacy outcomes, all active treatments were superior to placebo, with NNTs of 8.1, 4.9 and 6.6 for 2-hour pain-free, 2-hour headache relief, and 24-hour headache relief with aspirin alone versus placebo, and 8.8, 3.3 and 6.2 with aspirin plus metoclopramide versus placebo. Sumatriptan 50 mg did not differ from aspirin alone for 2-hour pain-free and headache relief, while sumatriptan 100 mg was better than the combination of aspirin plus metoclopramide for 2-hour pain-free, but not headache relief; there were no data for 24-hour headache relief.Adverse events were mostly mild and transient, occurring slightly more often with aspirin than placebo.Additional metoclopramide significantly reduced nausea (P < 0.00006) and vomiting (P = 0.002) compared with aspirin alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no new studies since the last version of this review. Aspirin 1000 mg is an effective treatment for acute migraine headaches, similar to sumatriptan 50 mg or 100 mg. Addition of metoclopramide 10 mg improves relief of nausea and vomiting. Adverse events were mainly mild and transient, and were slightly more common with aspirin than placebo, but less common than with sumatriptan 100 mg.

The efficacy and tolerability of a fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine in patients with severe headache: A post-hoc subgroup analysis from a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, single-dose, placebo-controlled parallel group study

Background: We investigated efficacy and tolerability of two tablets of the fixed combination of 250 mg acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) + 200 mg paracetamol + 50 mg caffeine (Thomapyrin) in comparison to two tablets of placebo in a post-hoc analysis of a subgroup of patients with severe headache.

Methods: Patients where included if they were used to treating their episodic tension-type headache or migraine attacks with non-prescription analgesics and reported a history of headache attacks characterized by at least severe pain and greatly impaired usual daily activities and treated headaches with pain intensity of at least 48 mm assessed on a 100-mm visual analogue scale and associated with greatly impaired usual daily activities.

Results: For the primary endpoint ‘time to 50% pain relief’ in this intention-to-treat subset ( n = 179 patients), the fixed combination of ASA, paracetamol, and caffeine was statistically significantly superior to placebo ( p = 0.0008). The superior efficacy of the triple combination could also be shown for all secondary endpoints such as time until reduction of pain intensity to 10 mm, weighted sum of pain intensity difference (%SPIDweighted), extent of impairment of daily activities, and global assessment of efficacy. Both treatments were well tolerated. The incidence of adverse events observed was low. The results for this subgroup analysis are consistent with respect to all endpoints and to the patients with non-severe headache and the overall patient population. As with all post-hoc subgroup analyses, the findings are hypothesis generating only and must be interpreted with caution.

Discussion: The results of this subgroup analysis confirm that the fixed combination of ASA (250 mg), paracetamol (200 mg), and caffeine (50 mg) is effective and well tolerated in a broad spectrum from mild to severe migraine and tension-type headache severity independently of the headache diagnosis.