Placebo-controlled double-blind trial of pirprofen and an ergotamine tartrate compound in migraine attacks

NSAIDs in the Acute Treatment of Migraine: A Review of Clinical and Experimental Data

Migraine is a common disabling neurological disorder with a serious socio-economical burden. By blocking cyclooxygenase nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) decrease the synthesis of prostaglandins, which are involved in the pathophysiology of migraine headaches. Despite the introduction more than a decade ago of a new class of migraine-specific drugs with superior efficacy, the triptans, NSAIDs remain the most commonly used therapies for the migraine attack. This is in part due to their wide availability as over-the-counter drugs and their pharmaco-economic advantages, but also to a favorable efficacy/side effect profile at least in attacks of mild and moderate intensity. We summarize here both the experimental data showing that NSAIDs are able to influence several pathophysiological facets of the migraine headache and the clinical studies providing evidence for the therapeutic efficacy of various subclasses of NSAIDs in migraine therapy. Taken together these data indicate that there are several targets for NSAIDs in migraine pathophysiology and that on the spectrum of clinical potency acetaminophen is at the lower end while ibuprofen is among the most effective drugs. Acetaminophen and aspirin excluded, comparative trials between the other NSAIDs are missing. Since evidence-based criteria are scarce, the selection of an NSAID should take into account proof and degree of efficacy, rapid GI absorption, gastric ulcer risk and previous experience of each individual patient. If selected and prescribed wisely, NSAIDs are precious, safe and cost-efficient drugs for the treatment of migraine attacks.

Fixed drug combinations for the acute treatment of migraine : place in therapy

Fixed drug combinations (FDCs) combine standardised doses of two or more drugs in a single tablet, injection, nasal spray or suppository. FDCs may improve treatment compliance, efficacy or tolerability through a variety of mechanisms. At present, FDCs are commonly used in migraine treatment, and more are in development. This systematic review identified 43 prospective trials of FDCs in use for the acute treatment of migraine. Quantitative combination and analysis of the data were not possible, but results of the review support the following qualitative conclusions. First, many FDCs in use for the acute treatment of migraine are older drugs. In these cases, clinical trial evidence that the FDC is efficacious or has important advantages over its treatment components is lacking. The benefits assumed for some common FDC ingredients such as caffeine and metoclopramide are not clearly confirmed in these trials. Secondly, the use of barbiturate-containing FDCs for the acute treatment of migraine is not evidence based, and these drugs are frequently implicated in the development of dependence or medication-induced headache syndromes. Thirdly, studied opioid-containing FDCs are generally superior to placebo, but evidence regarding the safety and tolerability of their repeated use in the treatment of migraine is lacking; clinical experience dictates caution in the use of these agents. Fourthly, ergotamine-containing FDCs are generally superior to placebo, but perform poorly in comparison with single-agent selective serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists ('triptans'), NSAIDs or even isometheptene or opioid comparators, and are less well tolerated. Fifthly, the most consistent and impressive evidence of benefit is for NSAID-containing FDCs. These invariably outperform placebo and are equivalent or superior to active comparators. Finally, with renewed interest in the use of FDCs for the acute treatment of migraine, high-quality evidence of a benefit for such treatments is emerging. An FDC containing a triptan and NSAID seems most likely to provide efficacy and tolerability benefits in the acute treatment of migraine. Such an FDC is in development but not yet approved for use.

Ergotamine and dihydroergotamine: history, pharmacology, and efficacy

Ergotamine and dihydroergotamine share structural similarities with the adrenergic, dopaminergic, and serotonergic neurotransmitters. As a result, they have wide-ranging effects on the physiologic processes that they mediate. Ergotamine and dihydroergotamine are highly potent at the 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D antimigraine receptors and, as a consequence, the plasma concentrations that are necessary to produce the appropriate therapeutic and physiologic effects are very low. The broad spectrum of activity at other monoamine receptors is responsible for their side effect profile (dysphoria, nausea, emesis, unnecessary vascular effects). Both ergotamine and dihydroergotamine have sustained vasoconstrictor actions. In acute migraine treatment, their mechanisms of action involve constricting the pain-producing intracranial extracerebral blood vessels at the 5-HT1B receptors and inhibiting the trigeminal neurotransmission at the peripheral and central 5-HT1D receptors. The scientific evidence for efficacy is stronger for dihydroergotamine than for ergotamine. Their wide use is based on long-term experience.

Practical approaches to migraine management

Migraine is a recurrent clinical syndrome characterised by combinations of neurological, gastrointestinal and autonomic manifestations. The exact pathophysiological disturbances that occur with migraine have yet to be elucidated; however, cervico-trigemino-vascular dysfunctions appear to be the primary cause. Despite advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine and new effective treatment options, migraine remains an under-diagnosed, under-treated and poorly treated health condition. Most patients will unsuccessfully attempt to treat their headaches with over-the-counter medications. Few well designed, placebo-controlled studies are available to guide physicians in medication selection. Recently published evidence-based guidelines advocate migraine-specific drugs, such as serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) agonists (the 'triptans') and dihydroergotamine mesylate, for patients experiencing moderate to severe migraine attacks. Additional headache attack therapy options include other ergotamine derivatives, phenothiazines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and opioids. Preventative medication therapy is indicated for patients experiencing frequent and/or refractory attacks.

Analgesics

Analgesics such as acetaminophen (paracetamol), acetylsalicyclic acid and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are effective in the treatment of migraine attacks. Comparative studies indicate that their efficacy is similar or slightly inferior to sumattriptan, a specific antimigraine drug. Few data on the efficacy of opioid drugs in the treatment of migraine are available. They seem to be effective but carry the risk of dependency and may cause drug-induced headache.

Therapy of Migraine Headache in Cancer Patients

This article reviews how to establish the diagnosis of migraine, the possible differential diagnoses, and the present state of the art of therapy. Emphasis is laid on nonsteroidal antiphlogistic drugs, serotonin receptor agonists (the so called triptans), and antiemetic drugs. The interval therapy consists of beta-blockers, calcium antagonists, antiepileptics, and serotonin receptor antagonists. The pathophysiology is based on the concept of sterile neurogenic inflammation, cortical spreading depression (CSD), and hyperexcitability of the central nervous system (CNS).

Comparative efficacy and safety of calcium carbasalate plus metoclopramide versus ergotamine tartrate plus caffeine in the treatment of acute migraine attacks

This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter, parallel-group study aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of calcium carbasalate (equivalent to 900 mg aspirin) plus metoclopramide 10 mg (CM) with ergotamine tartrate 1 mg plus caffeine 100 mg (EC) administered in the treatment of 2 acute migraine attacks. A total of 296 patients fulfilling the International Headache Society diagnostic criteria for migraine were enrolled. In total, one or two migraine attacks were treated in 268 and 235 patients, respectively. The primary endpoint for the first treated attack was headache relief, with intensity decreasing from moderate or severe to mild or absent 2 h after drug intake. Usual secondary efficacy endpoints were assessed. A superiority of CM over EC was observed for both treated attacks for the main endpoint: success in 54 versus 36%, p = 0.003 for the first attack and 60 versus 44%, p = 0.02 for the second attack. CM was also significantly superior to EC during the first attack for complete headache relief (20 vs. 8%, p = 0.006), nausea (42 vs. 63%, p = 0. 007) and willingness to take the drug again (90 vs. 80%, p = 0.043). The global efficacy evaluation, rated by the investigators, was significantly more favorable to CM for both attacks (p = 0.001 for the first attack and p = 0.02 for the second). The patients' evaluation was significant for the first attack (p = 0.002). The global incidence of adverse events was 45% higher with EC, though not significant (32 vs. 22%, p = 0.075). They were most often unspecific and mild to moderate in intensity. Gastrointestinal side effects were significantly less frequent with CM than EC (7 vs. 21%, p = 0.001). Thus, CM is more effective and has a better gastrointestinal safety than EC in the acute treatment of migraine attacks.

Side effects of ergotamine

Ergotamine has been used for many years in the treatment of migraine, although there is little formal clinical evidence that it is significantly more efficacious than placebo. A number of side effects associated with ergotamine have been reported in the literature, including myocardial infarction, ischaemia of limb extremities, and fibrotic changes. Long-term use has led to reported cases of ergotamine-induced headache, vascular reactivity, and subclinical ergotism. When the safety profile of this drug is considered, coupled with its debatable efficacy from a clinical review previously published, the resulting poor risk:benefit ratio brings into question the continued use of ergotamine as a migraine treatment and calls for better controlled trials of its efficacy, or lack of, in the acute treatment of migraine.

Placebo-controlled clinical trials with ergotamine in the acute treatment of migraine

Although oral ergotamine alone or in combination with caffeine is widely used for the acute treatment of migraine, there is little evidence that it is significantly more effective than placebo. There are no placebo-controlled data to support the use of aerosol or suppository formulations. In addition, the recommended doses of ergotamine cannot be justified. Each formulation of ergotamine now should be tested in clinical studies performed according to the IHS criteria for trial design and in migraine patients fulfilling the diagnostic criteria of the IHS. Until these clinical data are available, no clear recommendations can be given for the use of ergotamine in the acute treatment of migraine.

Effectiveness of oral diclofenac in the acute treatment of common migraine attacks: a double-blind study versus placebo

In a multicentre double-blind cross-over trial, oral diclofenac at a dose of 50 mg to 100 mg was compared to placebo in the acute treatment of migraine attacks. A hundred and seven patients suffering from migraine without aura were included, and 91 were analysed for efficacy; they had to treat four successive attacks--two with diclofenac and two with placebo. Diclofenac was significantly more effective than placebo (p less than 0.05) on the main judgement parameter, which was the number of attacks aborted within 2 h of drug intake, as well as on the following secondary parameters: the necessity for an escape medication and the evaluation of global efficacy. Diclofenac was well tolerated. This trial demonstrates the efficacy of diclofenac in the acute treatment of migraine attacks. It confirms the good clinical relevance of the main judgement parameter chosen, which is the one recommended by the International Headache Society, but appears to be a severe one in terms of successes.