Efficacy and safety of cinnarizine in the prophylaxis of migraine in children: a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial

Unsatisfactory response to acute medications does not affect the medication overuse headache development in pediatric chronic migraine

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) negatively impacts the quality of life of 2 to 4% of pediatric patients. In adults, CM is frequently linked to medication overuse headache (MOH), but there is a much lower prevalence of MOH in children. A suboptimal response to acute therapies may lead to their reduced use, thus preventing MOH development in children and adolescents. The frequency of patients with CM who do not respond to acute therapies was examined in the present study. We investigated whether the prevalence of MOH was different between responders and non-responders. We also examined whether patients receiving prophylactic therapy had an improved response to acute therapy. Finally, we investigated if there was a difference in the frequency of psychiatric comorbidities between responders and non-responders.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed clinical data of all chronic pediatric migraineurs under the age of 18 referred to the Headache Centre at Bambino Gesù Children Hospital in June 2021 and February 2023. ICHD3 criteria were used to diagnose CM and MOH. We collected demographic data, including the age at onset of migraine and the age of the CM course. At baseline and after 3 months of preventive treatment, we evaluated the response to acute medications. Neuropsychiatric comorbidities were referred by the children's parents during the first attendance evaluation.

RESULTS

Seventy patients with CM were assessed during the chosen period. Paracetamol was tried by 41 patients (58.5%), NSAIDs by 56 patients (80.0%), and triptans by 1 patient (1.4%). Fifty-one participants (73%) were non-responder to the abortive treatment. The presence of MOH was detected in 27.1% of the whole populations. Regarding our primary aim, MOH was diagnosed in 29% of non-responder patients and 22% of responders (p > 0.05). All patients received preventative treatment. After 3 months of preventive pharmacological therapy, 65.4% of patients who did not respond to acute medications achieved a response, while 34.6% of patients who were non-responder remain non-responder (p < 0.05). Prophylactic therapy was also effective in 69% of patients who responded to acute medication (p < 0.05). Psychiatric comorbidities were detected in 68.6% of patients, with no difference between responders and non-responders (72.2% vs. 67.3%; p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the high prevalence of unresponsiveness to acute therapies in pediatric CM, it does not act as a protective factor for MOH. Moreover, responsiveness to acute drugs is improved by pharmacological preventive treatment and it is not affected by concomitant psychiatric comorbidities.

A comparative study on prophylactic efficacy of cinnarizine and amitriptyline in childhood migraine: a randomized double-blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Pediatric migraine prophylaxis is indicated when headaches are frequent and/or disabling. We aimed to conduct a study to compare the efficacy of cinnarizine and amitriptyline in pediatric migraine prophylaxis.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind trial, patients aged 4-17 years with migraine who were eligible for prophylaxis enrolled. The primary outcome was a reduction response rate of ≥50% with p < 0.005 with respect to headache characteristics. The secondary outcome was migraine disability assessment. We evaluated patients every four weeks for three months: T1: week 4, T2: week 8 and T3: week 12. The safety profile was also assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were randomly assigned to each group. However, 43 patients completed the trial. Headache frequency decreased in amitriptyline group more effectively in T1 (p = 0.004). Amitriptyline was more successful in reducing the headache duration in all three periods (p < 0.005). There was no significant difference in severity improvement and reducing disability score between the two groups (p > 0.005). No serious adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Both medications are effective in ameliorating migraine headaches and related disabilities. However, amitriptyline appears be a preferable option over cinnarizine, given its faster onset of action, efficacy in reducing headache duration and longer-lasting effects.Trial Registration: The study was registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT) under the code IRCT-20191112045413N1.

Migraine, Allergy, and Histamine: Is There a Link?

The relationship between migraines and allergies is controversial. Though they are epidemiologically linked, the underlying pathophysiological connection between them remains unclear. Migraines and allergic disorders have various underlying genetic and biological causes. As per the literature, these conditions are epidemiologically linked, and some common pathophysiological pathways have been hypothesized. The histaminergic system may be the clue to understanding the correlation among these diseases. As a neurotransmitter in the central nervous system with a vasodilatory effect, histamine has a well-documented influence on the allergic response and could be involved in the pathophysiology of migraines. Histamine may influence hypothalamic activity, which may play a major role in migraines or may simply influence their severity. In both cases, antihistamine drugs could prove useful. This review examines whether the histaminergic system, particularly H3 and H4 receptors, may provide a mechanistic link between the pathophysiology of migraines and allergic disorders, two common and debilitating conditions. Identifying their connection could help identify novel therapeutic strategies.

Migraine Pharmacological Treatment and Cognitive Impairment: Risks and Benefits

Migraine is a common neurological disorder impairing the quality of life of patients. The condition requires, as an acute or prophylactic line of intervention, the frequent use of drugs acting on the central nervous system (CNS). The long-term impact of these medications on cognition and neurodegeneration has never been consistently assessed. The paper reviews pharmacological migraine treatments and discusses their biological and clinical effects on the CNS. The different anti-migraine drugs show distinct profiles concerning neurodegeneration and the risk of cognitive deficits. These features should be carefully evaluated when prescribing a pharmacological treatment as many migraineurs are of scholar or working age and their performances may be affected by drug misuse. Thus, a reconsideration of therapy guidelines is warranted. Furthermore, since conflicting results have emerged in the relationship between migraine and dementia, future studies must consider present and past pharmacological regimens as potential confounding factors.

The Pharmacological Treatment of Pediatric Vertigo

Vertigo in children is a challenging topic. The lack of dedicated trials, guidelines and papers causes inhomogeneity in the treatment of vertigo in children. Meniere’s disease, migraine equivalents, vestibular neuritis, paroxysmal positional benign vertigo (BPPV), persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) and motion sickness may affect children with various degrees of incidence and clinical severity compared to adults. Several drugs are proposed for the management of these conditions, even if their use is subordinated to the child’s age. In this review, we summarize the existing evidence related to the use of drugs for this clinical condition in children as a start point for new trials, stating the urgent need for international guidelines.

A comparative study on the efficacy of coenzyme Q10 and amitriptyline in the prophylactic treatment of migraine headaches in children: A randomized controlled trial

Background:

Materials and Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Retrospective Observational Study on Riboflavin Prophylaxis in Child and Adolescent Migraine

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the efficacy of riboflavin in pediatric migraineurs.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed on 42 patients (aged six to 18 years) with migraine who were evaluated from January to December 2019 at Dell Children's Medical Center in Austin, Texas. Weight-based dosing of riboflavin was recommended for migraine prevention. Descriptive statistics were used to study the population demographics. Nonparametric tests were used for inferential statistics to study the effect of riboflavin on headache frequency, intensity, and duration.

RESULTS

Patients treated with riboflavin had a significant reduction in headache days per month (frequency) at the first follow-up visit at 2 to 4 months (T1) (11.07 ± 10.52 days) compared with the baseline T0 (21.90 ± 9.85 days); P < 0.001 in regard to the primary outcome in 42 patients (mean age, 13.38 ± 3.38). Mean headache intensity decreased from 8.85 (±6.41; T0) to 2.30 (±2.51; T1); P < 0.001 on a 0 to 10 scale. The headache duration also reduced significantly from 18.23 ± 17.07 hours (T0) to 10.18 ± 10.49 hours (T1); P = 0.001. There was a positive correlation between riboflavin efficacy and reduced use of acute medications (r_s = 0.304; P = 0.05). Riboflavin was useful in reducing the frequency and intensity in two patients with new daily persistent headache.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with riboflavin had a reduction in headache frequency, use of acute medications, and days of school missed. Riboflavin prophylaxis also reduced migraine intensity and duration. Riboflavin is recommended as a safe, inexpensive, and effective nutraceutical in the treatment of pediatric migraine.

Management of Chronic Migraine in Children and Adolescents: A Brief Discussion on Preventive Therapies

Pediatric migraine is a debilitating disease that affects about 10% of school-aged children. Like other pain disorders, migraines can be accompanied with sleep, mood, and cognitive difficulties, leading to interruptions in daily tasks required at both school and home. This paper serves as a review of the most current pharmacological treatments available for managing migraine in the pediatric population. Because the management of migraine is complex, we discuss the importance of multidisciplinary care involving pharmacological and non-pharmacological measures, behavioral modifications, and a shared treatment plan between the clinician, patient, and parent/care giver. A diverse group of medications are used to prevent migraine attacks including antiepileptics, antidepressants, antihistamines, and antihypertensive agents, in addition to newer classes of medications; yet there remains a serious lack of controlled studies in the pediatric population. Further clinical research is necessary to have Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medications readily available for migraine sufferers.

Cinnarizine as an alternative recommendation for migraine prophylaxis: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Despite the available prophylactic and acute drugs for migraine management, this disabling disorder remains undertreated especially among pediatrics. In this review, the authors aim at assessing the preventive role cinnarizine plays in treating migraine based on previously published studies.

AREAS COVERED

Randomized clinical trials, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized open-label trials, and retrospective studies concerning cinnarizine in migraine prevention in children and adults were reviewed. Especial attention was given to the response rate, migraine characteristics, and tolerability.

EXPERT OPINION

The majority of reviewed trials demonstrated that cinnarizine is comparable to the conventional drugs used in migraine prophylaxis. However, most of the reviewed studies were limited by a non-controlled open-label design. Due to poor planning and possibility of high placebo responses, particularly in children and adolescents, the interpretation of open-label studies' results should be done cautiously. The evidence shows that cinnarizine's effectiveness was more promising in pediatric migraineurs and adults with migraine-associated vertigo such as vestibular migraine. Therefore, while the efficacy of cinnarizine cannot be dismissed, before reaching a definite conclusion on its effectiveness, it is necessary to do further high-quality RCTs among both children and adults.

Efficacy, Safety, and Acceptability of Pharmacologic Treatments for Pediatric Migraine Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Migraine is one of the most common neurologic disorders in children and adolescents. However, a quantitative comparison of multiple preventive pharmacologic treatments in the pediatric population is lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether prophylactic pharmacologic treatments are more effective than placebo and whether there are differences between drugs regarding efficacy, safety, and acceptability.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, and PsycINFO published through July 2, 2018.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of prophylactic pharmacologic treatments in children and adolescents diagnosed as having episodic migraine were included. Abstract, title, and full-text screening were conducted independently by 4 reviewers.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis network meta-analysis guidelines. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Effect sizes, calculated as standardized mean differences for primary outcomes and risk ratios for discontinuation rates, were assessed in a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were efficacy (ie, migraine frequency, number of migraine days, number of headache days, headache frequency, or headache index), safety (ie, treatment discontinuation owing to adverse events), and acceptability (ie, treatment discontinuation for any reason).

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies (2217 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Prophylactic pharmacologic treatments included antiepileptics, antidepressants, calcium channel blockers, antihypertensive agents, and food supplements. In the short term (<5 months), propranolol (standard mean difference, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.03-1.17) and topiramate (standard mean difference, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.03-1.15) were significantly more effective than placebo. However, the 95% prediction intervals for these medications contained the null effect. No significant long-term effects for migraine prophylaxis relative to placebo were found for any intervention.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Prophylactic pharmacologic treatments have little evidence supporting efficacy in pediatric migraine. Future research could (1) identify factors associated with individual responses to pharmacologic prophylaxis, (2) analyze fluctuations of migraine attack frequency over time and determine the most clinically relevant length of probable prophylactic treatment, and (3) identify nonpharmacologic targets for migraine prophylaxis.

Cinnarizine and sodium valproate as the preventive agents of pediatric migraine: A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Few migraine preventive agents have been assessed in a pediatric population. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of cinnarizine and sodium valproate for migraine prophylaxis in children and adolescents.

METHODS

We carried out a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial in the Children's Medical Center and Sina hospital, Tehran, Iran. Eligible participants were randomly assigned in 1:1:1 ratio via interactive web response system to receive either cinnarizine, sodium valproate, or placebo. The primary endpoints were the mean change in frequency and intensity of migraine attacks from baseline to the last 4 weeks of trial. The secondary endpoint was the efficacy of each drug in the prevention of migraine. The drug was considered effective if it decreased migraine frequency by more than 50% in the double-blind phase compared with the baseline. Safety endpoint was adverse effects that were reported by children or their parents.

RESULTS

A total of 158 children participated. The frequency of migraine attacks significantly reduced compared to baseline in cinnarizine (difference: -8.0; 95% confidence interval (CI): -9.3 to -6.6), sodium valproate (difference: -8.3; 95% confidence interval: -9.3 to -7.2), and placebo (difference: -4.4; 95% confidence interval: -5.4 to -3.4) arms. The decrease was statistically greater in cinnarizine (difference: -3.6; 95% confidence interval: -5.5 to -1.6) and sodium valproate (difference: -3.9; 95% confidence interval: -5.8 to -1.9) arms, compared to placebo group. Children in all groups had significant reduction in intensity of episodes compared to baseline (cinnarizine: -4.6; 95% confidence interval: -5.2 to -4.0; sodium valproate: -4.0; 95% confidence interval: -4.8 to -3.3; placebo: -2.6; 95% confidence interval: -3.4 to -1.8). The decrease was statistically greater in cinnarizine (difference: -2.0; 95% confidence interval: -3.2 to -0.8) and sodium valproate (difference: -1.5; 95% confidence interval: -2.7 to -0.3) arms, compared to the placebo group. Seventy-one percent of individuals in the cinnarizine group, 66% of cases in the sodium valproate group, and 42% of people in the placebo arm reported more than 50% reduction in episodes at the end of the trial. The odds ratio for >50% responder rate was 3.5 (98.3% confidence interval: 1.3 to 9.3) for cinnarizine versus placebo and 2.7 (98.3% confidence interval: 1.0 to 6.9) for sodium valproate versus placebo. Nine individuals reported adverse effects (three in cinnarizine, five in sodium valproate, and one in the placebo group) and one case in the sodium valproate group discontinued the therapy due to severe sedation.

CONCLUSION

Cinnarizine and sodium valproate could be useful in migraine prophylaxis in children and adolescents. Trial registration: IRCT201206306907N4.

Practice guideline update summary: Pharmacologic treatment for pediatric migraine prevention: Report of the Guideline Development, Dissemination, and Implementation Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for migraine prevention using pharmacologic treatment with or without cognitive behavioral therapy in the pediatric population.

METHODS

The authors systematically reviewed literature from January 2003 to August 2017 and developed practice recommendations using the American Academy of Neurology 2011 process, as amended.

RESULTS

Fifteen Class I-III studies on migraine prevention in children and adolescents met inclusion criteria. There is insufficient evidence to determine if children and adolescents receiving divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine, or flunarizine are more or less likely than those receiving placebo to have a reduction in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving propranolol are possibly more likely than those receiving placebo to have an at least 50% reduction in headache frequency. Children and adolescents receiving topiramate and cinnarizine are probably more likely than those receiving placebo to have a decrease in headache frequency. Children with migraine receiving amitriptyline plus cognitive behavioral therapy are more likely than those receiving amitriptyline plus headache education to have a reduction in headache frequency.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The majority of randomized controlled trials studying the efficacy of preventive medications for pediatric migraine fail to demonstrate superiority to placebo. Recommendations for the prevention of migraine in children include counseling on lifestyle and behavioral factors that influence headache frequency and assessment and management of comorbid disorders associated with headache persistence. Clinicians should engage in shared decision-making with patients and caregivers regarding the use of preventive treatments for migraine, including discussion of the limitations in the evidence to support pharmacologic treatments.

Histamine and migraine revisited: mechanisms and possible drug targets

OBJECTIVE

To review the existing literature on histamine and migraine with a focus on the molecule, its receptors, its use in inducing migraine, and antihistamines in the treatment of migraine.

BACKGROUND

Histamine has been known to cause a vascular type headache for almost a hundred years. Research has focused on antihistamines as a possible treatment and histamine as a migraine provoking agent but there has been little interest in this field for the last 25 years. In recent years two additional histamine (H3 and H4) receptors have been discovered and a series of non-sedating antihistamines have been developed. It is therefore timely to review the field again.

METHODS

For this review the PubMed/MEDLINE database was searched for eligible studies. We searched carefully for all articles on histamine, antihistamines and histamine receptors in relation to migraine and the nervous system. The following search terms were used: histamine, migraine disorders, migraine, headache, antihistamines, histamine antagonists, clinical trials, induced headache, histamine H3 receptor, histamine H4 receptor and pharmacology. Four hundred thirty-six titles were read, 135 abstracts were read, 112 articles were read in full and 53 articles were used in this review. Review process resulted in 12 articles added to a total of 65.

FINDINGS

Early studies of H1 and H2 antihistamines lack scientific strength and show conflicting results. Most of the antihistaminic drugs used in these trials bind also to other receptors which makes it difficult to conclude on the antihistaminic effect. Histamine is an efficient inducer of migraine attacks in migraine patients by an H1 mechanism most likely extracerebrally. These findings merit further investigation of antihistamines in clinical drug trials. The H3 and H4 receptors are found in primarily in CNS and immune tissues, respectively. H3 is likely to be involved in antinociception and has been linked with cognitive, neurodegenerative and sleep disorders. The only marketed H3 agent, pitolisant, is a brain penetrant H3 antagonist/inverse agonist which increases central histamine and causes headache. The experimental H3 agonist Nα-methylhistamine has shown promising results as a migraine preventative in studies of uncertain quality. With the current limited knowledge of the H4 receptor it is questionable whether or not the receptor is involved in migraine.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient support for first generation antihistamines (both H1 and H2) as preventive migraine medications and sedation and weight gain are unacceptable side effects. Non-sedating H1 antihistamines need to be appropriately tested. Central H3 receptors seem to have a role in migraine that merit further investigation. The histaminergic system may be a goal for novel migraine drugs.

Prophylactic effect of riboflavin on pediatric migraine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background and aim

Riboflavin may have an acceptable effect on migraine among children. This study was carried out to determine the prophylactic effect of riboflavin on migraine in children.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial study was performed at Shahid Beheshti Hospital in Kashan, Iran from December 2012 to February 2015. Ninety children with migraine were allocated randomly into 3 groups (placebo, low-dose and high-dose riboflavin). The outcomes (frequency, intensity and duration of headaches) were measured at baseline and 12 weeks of medication in each group, and the decrease of them were compared. SPSS software version 16 was used for analysis of the data. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square, Fisher's exact and t-test were used for statistical analyses.

Results

There was a significant decrease of migraine frequency (p=0.000) and mean duration (p=0.000) in the high-dose group compared with the placebo group. No significant reduction of frequency and mean duration of attacks were reported in the low-dose group compared to the placebo group (p=0.49 and p=0.69 respectively). There was no significant reduction of migraine intensity in the low-dose and high-dose groups compared to the placebo group (p=0.71 and p=0.74 respectively).

Conclusion

High-dose riboflavin is a safe, well tolerated, cost-effective method of prophylaxis for children with migraine.

Trial registration

The trial was registered at the Iranian Clinical Trial Registry with number IRCT2013020412361N1.

Funding

The study was supported by the Deputy of Research, Kashan University of Medical Sciences (grant number 91073).

Histamine and Migraine

BACKGROUND

Histamine is an ancient "tissue amine" preceding multicellular organisms. In the central nervous system (CNS), its fibers originate solely from the tuberomammillary nucleus and travel throughout the brain. It is mainly responsible for wakefulness, energy homeostasis, and memory consolidation. Recently, several studies suggest a potential role of histamine in migraine pathogenesis and management.

METHODS

Narrative review of current literature regarding histamine and migraine.

RESULTS

Histamine plays a crucial role in migraine pathogenesis: sustaining the neurogenic inflammation pathway. Interaction between mast cells (MC) and calcitonin-gene related protein (CGRP) results in sensitization of trigeminal afferents and trigeminal ganglia (TG). Histamine binds with differing affinities to four different histaminergic G-protein coupled receptors, activating protein kinases, or triggering calcium release with subsequent mode of actions. Histamine 1 receptor (H₁ R) and histamine 2 receptor (H₂ R) antagonists are frequently used for the treatment of allergy and gastric acid secretion, respectively, but their antagonism is probably ineffective for migraine. Histamine 3 receptor (H₃ R) and histamine 4 receptor (H₄ R) have a threefold higher affinity than H₁ R/H₂ R for histamine and are found almost exclusively on neurons and immune tissues, respectively. H₃ R acts as an autoreceptor or as a heteroreceptor, lowering the release of histamine and other neurotransmitters. This is a potential target for anti-nociception and anti-neurogenic inflammation. To date, several small clinical trials using low dose histamine or N^α -methylhistamine have demonstrated migraine prophylactic efficacy, probably via H₃ R or other undetermined pathways.

CONCLUSION

The histamine system interacts with multiple regions in the CNS and may hypothetically modulate the migraine response. Low dose histamine may be a promising option for migraine prevention.

Kappa opioid receptor antagonists: A possible new class of therapeutics for migraine prevention

Background Stress is the most commonly reported migraine trigger. Dynorphin, an endogenous opioid peptide acting preferentially at kappa opioid receptors (KORs), is a key mediator of stress responses. The aim of this study was to use an injury-free rat model of functional cephalic pain with features of migraine and medication overuse headache (MOH) to test the possible preventive benefit of KOR blockade on stress-induced cephalic pain. Methods Following sumatriptan priming to model MOH, rats were hyper-responsive to environmental stress, demonstrating delayed cephalic and extracephalic allodynia and increased levels of CGRP in the jugular blood, consistent with commonly observed clinical outcomes during migraine. Nor-binaltorphimine (nor-BNI), a long-acting KOR antagonist or CYM51317, a novel short-acting KOR antagonist, were given systemically either during sumatriptan priming or immediately before environmental stress challenge. The effects of KOR blockade in the amygdala on stress-induced allodynia was determined by administration of nor-BNI into the right or left central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA). Results KOR blockade prevented both stress-induced allodynia and increased plasma CGRP. Stress increased dynorphin content and phosphorylated KOR in both the left and right CeA in sumatriptan-primed rats. However, KOR blockade only in the right CeA prevented stress-induced cephalic allodynia as well as extracephalic allodynia, measured in either the right or left hindpaws. U69,593, a KOR agonist, given into the right, but not the left, CeA, produced allodynia selectively in sumatriptan-primed rats. Both stress and U69,593-induced allodynia were prevented by right CeA U0126, a mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor, presumably acting downstream of KOR. Conclusions Our data reveal a novel lateralized KOR circuit that mediated stress-induced cutaneous allodynia and increased plasma CGRP in an injury-free model of functional cephalic pain with features of migraine and medication overuse headache. Selective, small molecule, orally available, and reversible KOR antagonists are currently in development and may represent a novel class of preventive therapeutics for migraine.

Assessment of the Mechanistic Role of Cinnarizine in Modulating Experimentally-Induced Bronchial Asthma in Rats

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Calcium influx, inflammatory infiltration, cytokine production, immunoglobulin E activation and oxidative stress play coordinated roles in bronchial asthma pathogenesis. We aim to assess the protective effect of cinnarizine against experimentally induced bronchial asthma.

METHODS

Bronchial asthma was induced by ovalbumin sensitization and challenge. Rats were allocated into a normal control, an asthma control, a dexamethasone (standard) treatment, and 2 cinnarizine treatment groups. The respiratory functions tidal volume (TV) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), the inflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-5 (IL-5) in lung tissue, the allergic immunoglobulin IgE in serum, the absolute eosinophil count (AEC) in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF), as well as the oxidative and nitrosative markers glutathione reduced (GSH) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) in lung tissue and nitric oxide end products (NOx) in BALF were assessed, followed by a histopathological study.

RESULTS

Cinnarizine administration significantly restored TV, PEFR, TNF-α, IL-5, IgE, AEC, GSH, SOD and NOx values back to normal levels, and significantly decreased perivascular and peribronchiolar inflammatory scores.

CONCLUSION

Cinnarizine may protect against experimental bronchial asthma. Suppressant effect of cinnarizine on pro-inflammatory cytokines release, IgE antibody production, eosinophil infiltration as well as oxidative and nitrosative stress may explain its anti-asthmatic potential.