5-hydroxytryptamine1B receptor and triptan response in migraine, lack of association with common polymorphisms

The impact of genetic factors on the response to migraine therapy

Migraine is a multidimensional disease affecting a large portion of the human population presenting with a variety of symptoms. In the era of personalized medicine, successful migraine treatment presents a challenge, as several studies have shown the impact of a patient's genetic profile on therapy response. However, with the emergence of contemporary treatment options, there is promise for improved outcomes. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Scopus, in order to obtain studies investigating the impact of genetic factors on migraine therapy outcome. Overall, 23 studies were included in the current review, exhibiting diversity in the treatments used and the genetic variants investigated. Divergent genes were assessed for each category of migraine treatment. Several genetic factors were identified to contribute to the heterogeneous response to treatment. SNPs related to pharmacodynamic receptors, pharmacogenetics and migraine susceptibility loci were the most investigated variants, revealing some interesting significant results. To date, various associations have been recorded correlating the impact of genetic factors on migraine treatment responses. More extensive research needs to take place with the aim of shedding light on the labyrinthine effects of genetic variations on migraine treatment, and, consequently, these findings can promptly affect migraine treatment and improve migraine patients' life quality in the vision of precise medicine.

Using a Genetic Risk Score Approach to Predict Headache Response to Triptans in Migraine Without Aura

A large meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies has recently identified a number of risk loci for migraine without aura (MwoA). In this study, we tested the hypothesis that a genetic risk score based on single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), previously reported to be associated with MwoA at genome-wide significance, may influence headache response to triptans in patients with migraine without aura. Genotyping of rs9349379, rs2078371, rs6478241, rs11172113, rs1024905, and rs6724624 was conducted with a real-time PCR allelic discrimination assay in 172 MwoA patients, of whom 36.6% were inconsistent responders to triptans. Each genetic risk score model was constructed as an unweighted score, calculated by adding the number of risk alleles for MwoA across each SNP at selected loci. The association with headache response to triptans was evaluated by logistic regression analysis adjusted for triptan, and the P values were corrected for the false discovery rate. The genetic risk score including susceptibility risk alleles at TRPM8 rs6724624 and FGF6 rs1024905 was found to be inversely associated with risk of inconsistent response to triptans (OR, 0.62; 95%CI, 0.43-0.89; false discovery rate q value, 0.045). In addition, adding this genetic risk score to the triptan-adjusted logistic regression model significantly improved (P = .037) the discrimination accuracy, from 0.57 (95%CI, 0.50-0.65) to 0.64 (95%CI, 0.57-0.72). A modest but significant effect on risk of inconsistent response to triptans was identified for a genetic risk score model composed of 2 known risk alleles for MwoA, suggesting its potential utility in predicting headache response to triptan therapy.

Targeted Acid-Sensing Ion Channel Therapies for Migraine

Acid-sensing ion channels (ASICs) are a family of ion channels, consisting of four members; ASIC1 to 4. These channels are sensitive to changes in pH and are expressed throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems-including brain, spinal cord, and sensory ganglia. They have been implicated in a number of neurological conditions such as stroke and cerebral ischemia, traumatic brain injury, and epilepsy, and more recently in migraine. Their expression within areas of interest in the brain in migraine, such as the hypothalamus and PAG, their demonstrated involvement in preclinical models of meningeal afferent signaling, and their role in cortical spreading depression (the electrophysiological correlate of migraine aura), has enhanced research interest into these channels as potential therapeutic targets in migraine. Migraine is a disorder with a paucity of both acute and preventive therapies available, in which at best 50% of patients respond to available medications, and these medications often have intolerable side effects. There is therefore a great need for therapeutic development for this disabling condition. This review will summarize the understanding of the structure and CNS expression of ASICs, the mechanisms for their potential role in nociception, recent work in migraine, and areas for future research and drug development.

Pathophysiology of Migraine: A Disorder of Sensory Processing

Plaguing humans for more than two millennia, manifest on every continent studied, and with more than one billion patients having an attack in any year, migraine stands as the sixth most common cause of disability on the planet. The pathophysiology of migraine has emerged from a historical consideration of the "humors" through mid-20th century distraction of the now defunct Vascular Theory to a clear place as a neurological disorder. It could be said there are three questions: why, how, and when? Why: migraine is largely accepted to be an inherited tendency for the brain to lose control of its inputs. How: the now classical trigeminal durovascular afferent pathway has been explored in laboratory and clinic; interrogated with immunohistochemistry to functional brain imaging to offer a roadmap of the attack. When: migraine attacks emerge due to a disorder of brain sensory processing that itself likely cycles, influenced by genetics and the environment. In the first, premonitory, phase that precedes headache, brain stem and diencephalic systems modulating afferent signals, light-photophobia or sound-phonophobia, begin to dysfunction and eventually to evolve to the pain phase and with time the resolution or postdromal phase. Understanding the biology of migraine through careful bench-based research has led to major classes of therapeutics being identified: triptans, serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists; gepants, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists; ditans, 5-HT1F receptor agonists, CGRP mechanisms monoclonal antibodies; and glurants, mGlu5 modulators; with the promise of more to come. Investment in understanding migraine has been very successful and leaves us at a new dawn, able to transform its impact on a global scale, as well as understand fundamental aspects of human biology.

Pharmacogenetic insights into migraine treatment in children

Pediatric migraine is a disabling condition that can affect the everyday activities and emotional states of children. Due to the multifactorial character of the pathology and the variety of the disease's phenotypes, establishment of an effective treatment is often challenging. Pharmacological treatment is often administered off-label and includes very different drugs, from analgesics to antidepressants. Since interindividual variability in therapy response commonly causes inefficacy and an exacerbation of symptoms, pharmacogenetics may help to decrease the prescription rate of useless or unsafe drugs. If there are many drugs used in migraine, then there are even more candidate or established pharmacogenetic markers that are implicated in clinical profiles. This article presents the current situation regarding the pharmacogenetics of drugs used in pediatric migraine.

Pharmacogenomics of episodic migraine: time has come for a step forward

Migraine is characterized by heterogeneous behavior in response to drugs. Many resources have been invested in attempting to unravel the genetic basis of migraine, while the role of genetics in responses to currently available drugs has received less attention. We performed a systematic literature search identifying original articles pertaining to pharmacogenomics of episodic migraine. Few primary studies on the pharmacogenomics of symptomatic and preventive medication in episodic migraine were found. The number of patients studied in the individual articles ranged from 40 up to 130. There was a strong heterogeneity among these studies. We believe that pharmacogenomics studies, if properly designed, could contribute towards optimizing the treatment and reducing the burden of migraine, in turn helping patients and optimizing resources. Our knowledge on the pharmacogenomics of migraine is growing too slowly, and concerted measures should be undertaken to speed up the process.

Genetic association of 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B gene polymorphisms with migraine in a Turkish population

Migraine, a very common headache disorder, is regarded as a polygenic disease and serotonergic pathways appear to play a major role in its pathogenesis. The present study was designed to explore the associations of polymorphisms of 5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin) receptor 1A (5-HT1A) and 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor 1B (5-HT1B) genes in Turkish migraine patients. 5-HT1A C-1019G (rs6295) promoter and 5-HT1B G861C (rs6296) exon polymorphisms in 203 migraine patients and 202 healthy subjects were analyzed by using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis. Allele and genotype frequencies were not significantly different between migraine patients and healthy subjects for both the 5-HT1A C-1019G promoter and 5-HT1B G861C exon polymorphisms. Our data do not support the hypothesis that 5-HT1A C-1019G and 5-HT1B G861C polymorphisms have effects on migraine.

Overview of migraine treatment

SUMMARY Migraine is ranked as the 19th top cause of disability worldwide by WHO. Despite advancements in migraine-specific acute treatment, only a minority of patients utilize these medications. Specific pharmacologic treatments consist of the ergot alkaloids and triptans (serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists). Both classes are regarded as relatively safe and effective; however, there is a greater concern for vasoconstrictive effects with the ergots, which limits their use. Triptans transformed migraine therapy, setting in motion revolutionary research that heightened our understanding of migraine mechanisms. However, one in three migraineurs may be triptan nonresponders and there is a group of migraine patients that remains ‘refractory’ to conventional pharmacologic migraine therapy. This article discusses the approach to migraine management, reviews currently available acute and preventive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options for migraine headache, as well as briefly focuses on novel and upcoming medicines presently under investigation.

Antimigraine efficacy of telcagepant based on patient's historical triptan response

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the same or different patients respond to triptans and telcagepant.

BACKGROUND

Telcagepant is an oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist with acute antimigraine efficacy comparable to oral triptans. It is currently unknown whether migraine patients who cannot be adequately helped with triptans might benefit from treatment with telcagepant.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of data from a randomized, controlled trial of telcagepant (150 mg, 300 mg) zolmitriptan 5 mg, or placebo for a moderate/severe migraine. Responder rates were analyzed according to patients' self-reported historical triptan response (HTR): (1) good HTR (N = 660): response in 75-100% of attacks; (2) intermediate HTR (N = 248): response in 25-74% of attacks; (3) poor HTR/no use (N = 407): response in < 25% of attacks, or patient did not take triptans. A limitation of the analysis is that the last subgroup comprised mainly (91%) patients who reported that they did not take triptans, but it was not known whether these patients were triptan-naïve or had previously used triptans and stopped taking them.

RESULTS

For zolmitriptan, 2-hour pain relief rates were higher in the good HTR subgroup (116/162, 72%) than in the intermediate (29/62, 47%) and poor/no use (44/111, 40%) HTR subgroups. The 2-hour pain relief rates were similar across HTR subgroups for telcagepant 150 mg (48-58%), 300 mg (52-58%), and placebo (26-31%). In the poor/no use HTR subgroup, more patients receiving telcagepant 300 mg (56/98, 57.1%) had 2-hour pain relief than those receiving zolmitriptan (44/111, 39.6%; odds ratio = 2.11 [95% CI: 1.20,3.71], P = .009); the percentage for telcagepant 150 mg (57/119, 47.9%) was not significantly different from zolmitriptan (odds ratio = 1.41 [95% CI: 0.82, 2.40], P = .211).

CONCLUSIONS

This suggests that different patients may respond to triptans or telcagepant 300 mg. Caution should be exercised in interpreting the results because of the post-hoc nature of the analysis (clinical trial registry: NCT00442936).

[Is a migraine screener useful for pharmacists in community pharmacy to distinguish patients with migraine?]

In this study, to clarify the characteristics of a migraine screener that would be useful to pharmacists in community pharmacies, we used the migraine screener to investigate patients with migraine. Diagnosis of migraine was made according to the internal classification of headache disorders 2nd edition (ICHD-II). Eighty patients with migraine (with aura: n=21, without aura: n=59) were divided into a positive group (n=51, 64%) and a negative group (n=29, 36%) based on the results of the migraine screener, which included a 4-item (headache exacerbation in daily performance, nausea, light-sensitivity and hypersensitivity to odors). The positive rate of the migraine screener was 64%. In the positive group, patients had moderate-to-severe migraine attacks in the past 3 months. Moreover, 82% of patients in the positive group reported disturbances in their daily of life due to headache. In the negative group, 41% of patients also reported disturbances in their daily of life. Therefore, pharmacists have to check the influence of headache on daily of life not only in the positive group but also in the negative group. These findings provide useful information to guide pharmacists in community pharmacies when using the screener for migraine to distinguish patients with headache from those with migraine.

Meeting acute migraine treatment needs through novel treatment formulations

Migraineurs often do not use acute migraine-specific medications. Patient-reported satisfaction with triptans is modest. Patients are generally interested in obtaining more rapid and complete symptom relief. The role of trigeminal vascular activation may explain why some patients fail to respond to current treatment. Novel formulations of currently available acute migraine treatments have been developed, with improved clinical outcomes, response times, and pain-free rates. Currently available effective, novel, acute migraine therapies include needle-free injectable sumatriptan and effervescent diclofenac. Orally inhaled dihydroergotamine is a new treatment modality. These novel formulations may help patients achieve desirable outcomes, including faster and more complete relief, more consistent response, and improved drug tolerability.

Refractory migraine and chronic migraine: pathophysiological mechanisms

Despite increased understanding of primary headaches and their treatment, the underlying causes of refractory migraine remain unknown. This note considers potential genetic, structural, functional and pharmacological factors that could contribute to this relatively intractable condition. Further understanding of refractory migraine will require the use of medical imaging technologies, clinical experimental medicine studies on novel pharmacological agents and astute observations in clinical practice to direct potential novel therapeutic approaches.

Refractory migraine and chronic migraine: pathophysiological mechanisms

Migraine is a complex disorder of the brain whose mechanisms are only now being unravelled. It is common, disabling, and economically costly. Brain imaging has suggested a role for the brainstem. While the disorder is almost certainly inherited, the degree to which this contributes to a treatment refractory state is not clear. Indeed, no specific structural or pharmacological explanation can be seen from the data as they have been generated. It is clear that patients with more frequent headache are very likely to go on to even more frequent headache, but again these data are complex. A challenge going forward is to establish the biology of these very challenging patients who undoubtedly have substantial disability.