Efficacy of Topiramate and Valproate in Chronic Migraine

Preventive drug treatments for adults with chronic migraine: a systematic review with economic modelling

Background

Chronic migraine is a disabling condition, affecting 2-4% of adults globally. With the introduction of expensive calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, it is timely to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preventive drugs for chronic migraine.

Objective

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medications used for chronic migraine through systematic reviews and economic modelling.

Eligibility criteria

Randomised controlled trials of drug treatments for efficacy with > 100 participants with chronic migraine per arm; for adverse events > 100 participants with episodic or chronic migraine per arm. Previous economic analyses of preventive drugs for chronic migraine.

Data sources

Eight databases.

Reviews methods

Systematic reviews, network meta-analysis and economic modelling.

Outcomes

Monthly headache days, monthly migraine days, headache-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness.

Results

We found 51 individual articles, reporting 11 randomised controlled trials, testing 6 drugs (topiramate, Botox, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab), versus placebo, on 7352 adults with chronic migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, Botox and topiramate reduced headache/migraine days by 2.0-2.5, just under two, or by less than 1.5 days per month, respectively. In the network meta-analysis, eptinezumab 300 mg and fremanezumab monthly ranked in first place in both monthly headache day and monthly migraine day analyses. The calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies were consistently the best choices for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life. Topiramate was very unlikely to be the best choice for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life when compared to calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies or Botox. We found no trials of the commonly used drugs, such as propranolol or amitriptyline, to include in the analysis. The adverse events review included 40 randomised controlled trials with 25,891 participants; 3 additional drugs, amitriptyline, atogepant and rimegepant, were included. There were very few serious adverse events - none of which were linked to the use of these medications. Adverse events were common. Most people using some calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies reported injection site issues; and people using topiramate or amitriptyline had nervous system or gastrointestinal issues. The cost-effectiveness review identified 16 studies evaluating chronic migraine medications in adults. The newer, injected drugs are more costly than the oral preventatives, but they were cost-effective. Our economic model showed that topiramate was the least costly option and had the fewest quality-adjusted life-year gains, whereas eptinezumab 300 mg was more costly but generated the most quality-adjusted life-year gains. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showed that topiramate was the most cost-effective medication if the decision maker is willing to pay up to £50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Our consensus workshop brought together people with chronic migraine and headache experts. Consensus was reached on the top three recommendations for future research on medications to prevent chronic migraine: (1) calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and Botox versus calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, (2) candesartan versus placebo and (3) flunarizine versus placebo.

Limitations

Topiramate was the only oral drug for which we were able to include data. We did not find sufficient quality evidence to support the use of other oral drugs.

Conclusions

We did not find evidence that the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies are more clinically and cost-effective when compared to topiramate or Botox. We identified directions for future research these drugs might take.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021265990, CRD42021265993 and CRD42021265995.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132803) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 63. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Effectiveness and safety of pharmacological prophylaxis for chronic migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) significantly impacts both the physical and mental health of patients. Current studies on the safety and effectiveness of different pharmacological prophylaxis interventions for CM are limited. To address this gap, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank the efficacy and safety of various drugs in preventing CM.

METHODS

Two independent researchers systematically searched four databases from their inception to August 1, 2023, to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Subsequently, they performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. A NMA was then performed. Continuous outcomes and binary outcomes were displayed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR), respectively, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank each intervention separately.

RESULTS

24 RCTs involving 8789 patients were included. Compared to placebo, Botulinum toxin A demonstrated the most significant effect in reducing the monthly migraine days for CM patients (MD = 3.88, 95% CI 0.48, 7.28); in terms of improving the response rate by a 50% reduction in monthly migraine days, Topiramate (RR = 50.06, 95% CI 3.18, 787.30) was the most effective; there was no statistically significant difference between all preventive drugs and placebo in improving the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score; in terms of the incidence of adverse events, Eptinezumab (RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.8, 1.54) exhibited the highest safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Among all the drugs for the preventive drugs for CM, Botulinum toxin A has the best efficacy and safety profile, closely followed by calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs).

The effect of lacosamide on calcitonin gene-related peptide serum level in episodic migraine patients: a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Migraine affects 11-15% of people worldwide, and the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is released during the migraine attack, producing pulsating pain of migraine. Also, lacosamide reacts with collapsin-response mediator protein 2, preventing its phosphorylation and leading to the inhibition of CGRP release in the trigeminal system.

OBJECTIVE

The primary outcome was the difference in the serum level of CGRP-LI after three months of treatment with either lacosamide and ibuprofen or ibuprofen alone in episodic migraine patients. The secondary outcomes were assessing safety and efficacy of lacosamide in episodic migraine patients.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial on episodic migraine patients aged 10-55 years diagnosed according to (ICHD-3) in Kafr El-Sheikh University Hospital, Egypt. We assessed serum levels of CGRP-LI before and three months after treatment in our two groups, the lacosamide, and the control groups. We also assessed the side effects of treatment in each group, the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the migraine monthly days (MMD) frequency and the percentage of patients who achieved pain freedom within 2 h in ≥ 4 of 5 attacks in each group.

RESULTS

200 episodic migraine patients completed the study. There was a statistically significantly higher reduction in the serum CGRP-LI level in the lacosamide group compared with the control group. In addition, lacosamide was well tolerated by patients. Also, the lacosamide group had statistically significant higher percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the migraine monthly days (MMD) frequency and pain freedom within two hours in ≥ 4 of 5 attacks with P-values 0.002, 0.02 respectively.

CONCLUSION

The daily use of lacosamide 50 mg Bid for three months in episodic migraine patients was associated with a significant reduction in serum CGRP-LI, better clinical outcomes regarding frequency and duration of migraine attacks, and was well tolerated by patients. These results were derived from an open-label pilot study that needed to be thoroughly investigated by a large-scale, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

 We registered our trial on ClinicalTrials.gov, named after "The Lacosamide's Effect on Calcitonin Gene-related Peptide in Migraine Patients," and with a clinical trial number (NCT05632133)-August 8, 2023.

Antiseizure Medications for the Prophylaxis of Migraine during the Anti- CGRP Drugs Era

Migraine and epilepsy are fundamentally distinct disorders that can frequently coexist in the same patient. These two conditions significantly differ in diagnosis and therapy but share some widely- used preventive treatments. Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are the mainstay of therapy for epilepsy, and about thirty different ASMs are available to date. ASMs are widely prescribed for other neurological and non-neurological conditions, including migraine. However, only topiramate and valproic acid/valproate currently have an indication for migraine prophylaxis supported by high-quality evidence. Although without specifically approved indications and with a low level of evidence or recommendation, several other ASMs are used for migraine prophylaxis. Understanding ASM antimigraine mechanisms, including their ability to affect the pro-migraine calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) signaling pathway and other pathways, may be instrumental in identifying the specific targets of their antimigraine efficacy and may increase awareness of the neurobiological differences between epilepsy and migraine. Several new ASMs are under clinical testing or have been approved for epilepsy in recent years, providing novel potential drugs for migraine prevention to enrich the treatment armamentarium and drugs that inhibit the CGRP pathway.

Efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment of topiramate and greater occipital nerve block versus topiramate monotherapy for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment of topiramate and greater occipital nerve block to topiramate monotherapy in adult chronic migraine patients.

BACKGROUND

Options for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine are limited and costly. Combination treatments do not have an evidence base yet.

METHODS

This was a parallel group, 3 arms with 1:1:1 allocation ratio randomized controlled study in consecutive adult chronic migraine patients attending Headache Clinic in a tertiary care hospital. Patients received either topiramate monotherapy 100 mg/day (group A), or topiramate plus greater occipital nerve block with 40 mg lidocaine (2%) and 80mg (2 ml) methylprednisolone as the first injection followed by monthly injections of lidocaine for the next 2 months (group B) or topiramate plus greater occipital nerve block with 40 mg lidocaine (2%) injections monthly for 3 months (group C). The primary endpoint was the mean change in monthly migraine days at Month 3. Multiple secondary endpoints were assessed that included among others, achievement of ≥50% reduction in mean monthly headache days compared to baseline at Month 3 and assessment for any adverse events.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five patients were randomized; 41 to group A, 44 to group B, and 40 to group C. Efficacy assessments were done for 121 patients. Patients receiving combination treatment of topiramate and greater occipital nerve block with steroids and lidocaine and greater occipital nerve block with only lidocaine compared to topiramate monotherapy showed greater reductions in monthly migraine days at Month 3 (-9.6 vs -7.3 days; p = 0.003) and (-10.1 vs -7.3 days; p < 0.001) respectively. Greater proportion of patients in both the combination treatment groups (added greater occipital nerve block with and without steroid) achieved ≥50% reduction in mean monthly headache days [71.4% vs 39%; OR (95% CI) 3.9(1.6-9.8); p = 0.004] and [62.4% vs 39%; OR (95% CI) 2.7(1.1-6.7); p = 0.034] respectively, compared to those receiving topiramate monotherapy. Adverse effects between the groups were comparable although patients receiving combination treatment with added greater occipital nerve block reported transient adverse effects like post-injection dizziness, local site swelling, and pain. No serious adverse event was reported.

CONCLUSION

Combination treatments of topiramate with monthly injections of greater occipital nerve block were more effective in reducing monthly migraine days in chronic migraine than topiramate monotherapy at Month 3. Combination treatments were well tolerated.

Chronic Migraine Pathophysiology and Treatment: A Review of Current Perspectives

Chronic migraine is a disabling neurological disorder that imposes a considerable burden on individual and socioeconomic outcomes. Chronic migraine is defined as headaches occurring on at least 15 days per month with at least eight of these fulfilling the criteria for migraine. Chronic migraine typically evolves from episodic migraine as a result of increasing attack frequency and/or several other risk factors that have been implicated with migraine chronification. Despite this evolution, chronic migraine likely develops into its own distinct clinical entity, with unique features and pathophysiology separating it from episodic migraine. Furthermore, chronic migraine is characterized with higher disability and incidence of comorbidities in comparison to episodic migraine. While existing migraine studies primarily focus on episodic migraine, less is known about chronic migraine pathophysiology. Mounting evidence on aberrant alterations suggest that pronounced functional and structural brain changes, central sensitization and neuroinflammation may underlie chronic migraine mechanisms. Current treatment options for chronic migraine include risk factor modification, acute and prophylactic therapies, evidence-based treatments such as onabotulinumtoxinA, topiramate and newly approved calcitonin gene-related peptide or receptor targeted monoclonal antibodies. Unfortunately, treatments are still predominantly ineffective in aborting migraine attacks and decreasing intensity and frequency, and poor adherence and compliance with preventative medications remains a significant challenge. Novel emerging chronic migraine treatments such as neuromodulation offer promising therapeutic approaches that warrant further investigation. The aim of this narrative review is to provide an update of current knowledge and perspectives regarding chronic migraine background, pathophysiology, current and emerging treatment options with the intention of facilitating future research into this debilitating and largely indeterminant disorder.

Craniofacial Autonomic Dysfunction in Migraine: Implications for Treatment and Prognosis

BACKGROUND

Craniofacial autonomic signs and symptoms (CASS) are relatively underrecognized in the evaluation of migraine headache. Yet, these features provide insight into diagnostic criterion, therapeutic approaches, and overarching disease burden.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This review aims to summarize relevant literature evaluating autonomic dysfunction, with focus on CASS, in migraine through targeted literature searches in PubMed. Full articles of original data published between 1974 and 2019 were identified using MeSH terms with no search limits.

RESULTS

Although CASS are typically clinically evaluated by subjective patient report, investigational measures of cranial autonomic function have identified marked distinctions between headache attack and attack-free intervals. The presence of CASS during an attack does not differ based on age, sex, or presence of aura. Unilateral CASS may be predictive of longer, more frequent, and/or severe attacks and often co-occur with sensory dysfunction such as allodynia and photophobia. Although limited research has been performed to evaluate targeted therapeutics for migraine with CASS, triptans and onabotulinumtoxinA may demonstrate greater effects in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine remains a debilitating disorder with significant community-wide impacts, necessitating continued evaluation of contributing features. Consideration of CASS provides important insight into potential treatment approaches and the effectiveness of novel therapeutic interventions aimed at improving overall disease burden. However, further investigation is needed to fully understand primary craniofacial features in migraine, and how these might inform individualized treatment decisions.

Topiramate, acupuncture, and BoNT-A for chronic migraine: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) was the primary choice for preventive treatment of chronic migraine. Topiramate and acupuncture showed promising effect for chronic migraine, but their effectiveness relative to BoNT-A was rarely studied. We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and acceptability between topiramate, acupuncture, and BoNT-A.

METHODS

We searched OVID Medline, Embase, the Cochrane register of controlled trials (CENTRAL), the Chinese Clinical Trial Register, and clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared topiramate, acupuncture, and BoNT-A with any of them or placebo in the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. A network meta-analysis was performed by using a frequentist approach and a random-effects model. The primary outcomes were reduction in monthly headache days and monthly migraine days at week 12. Acceptability was defined as the number of dropouts owing to adverse events.

RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs (n = 2545). Eleven RCTs were at low risk of bias. The network meta-analyses (n = 2061) showed that acupuncture (2061 participants; standardized mean difference [SMD] -1.61, 95% CI: -2.35 to -0.87) and topiramate (582 participants; SMD -0.4, 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.04) ranked the most effective in the reduction of monthly headache days and migraine days, respectively; but they were not significantly superior over BoNT-A. Topiramate caused the most treatment-related adverse events and the highest rate of dropouts owing to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Topiramate and acupuncture were not superior over BoNT-A; BoNT-A was still the primary preventive treatment of chronic migraine. Large-scale RCTs with direct comparison of these three treatments are warranted to verified the findings.

Comprehensive management of adults with chronic migraine: Clinical practice guidelines in Mexico

Introduction:

Migraine is a polygenic multifactorial disorder with a neuronal initiation of a cascade of neurochemical processes leading to incapacitating headaches. Headaches are generally unilateral, throbbing, 4–72 h in duration, and associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and sonophobia. Chronic migraine (CM) is the presence of a headache at least 15 days per month for ≥3 months and has a high global impact on health and economy, and therapeutic guidelines are lacking.

Methods:

Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system, we conducted a search in MEDLINE and Cochrane to investigate the current evidence and generate recommendations of clinical practice on the identification of risk factors and treatment of CM in adults.

Results:

We recommend avoiding overmedication of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); ergotamine; caffeine; opioids; barbiturates; and initiating individualized prophylactic treatment with topiramate eptinezumab, galcanezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, or botulinum toxin. We highlight the necessity of managing comorbidities initially. In the acute management, we recommend NSAIDs, triptans, lasmiditan, and gepants alone or with metoclopramide if nausea or vomiting. Non-pharmacological measures include neurostimulation.

Conclusions:

We have identified the risk factors and treatments available for the management of CM based on a grading system, which facilitates selection for individualized management.

Enhanced mindfulness-based stress reduction in episodic migraine: a randomized clinical trial with magnetic resonance imaging outcomes

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of an enhanced mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR+) vs stress management for headache (SMH). We performed a randomized, assessor-blind, clinical trial of 98 adults with episodic migraine recruited at a single academic center comparing MBSR+ (n = 50) with SMH (n = 48). MBSR+ and SMH were delivered weekly by group for 8 weeks, then biweekly for another 8 weeks. The primary clinical outcome was reduction in headache days from baseline to 20 weeks. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes included activity of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and cognitive task network during cognitive challenge, resting state connectivity of right dorsal anterior insula to DLPFC and cognitive task network, and gray matter volume of DLPFC, dorsal anterior insula, and anterior midcingulate. Secondary outcomes were headache-related disability, pain severity, response to treatment, migraine days, and MRI whole-brain analyses. Reduction in headache days from baseline to 20 weeks was greater for MBSR+ (7.8 [95% CI, 6.9-8.8] to 4.6 [95% CI, 3.7-5.6]) than for SMH (7.7 [95% CI 6.7-8.7] to 6.0 [95% CI, 4.9-7.0]) (P = 0.04). Fifty-two percent of the MBSR+ group showed a response to treatment (50% reduction in headache days) compared with 23% in the SMH group (P = 0.004). Reduction in headache-related disability was greater for MBSR+ (59.6 [95% CI, 57.9-61.3] to 54.6 [95% CI, 52.9-56.4]) than SMH (59.6 [95% CI, 57.7-61.5] to 57.5 [95% CI, 55.5-59.4]) (P = 0.02). There were no differences in clinical outcomes at 52 weeks or MRI outcomes at 20 weeks, although changes related to cognitive networks with MBSR+ were observed. Enhanced mindfulness-based stress reduction is an effective treatment option for episodic migraine.

Antiepileptic drug use and mortality among community-dwelling persons with Alzheimer disease

Objective

To evaluate the risk of death in relation to incident antiepileptic drug (AED) use compared with nonuse in people with Alzheimer disease (AD) through the assessment in terms of duration of use, specific drugs, and main causes of death.

Methods

The MEDALZ (Medication Use and Alzheimer Disease) cohort study includes all Finnish persons who received a clinically verified AD diagnosis (n = 70,718) in 2005–2011. Incident AED users were identified with 1-year washout period. For each incident AED user (n = 5,638), 1 nonuser was matched according to sex, age, and time since AD diagnosis. Analyses were conducted with Cox proportional regression models and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).

Results

Nearly 50% discontinued AEDs within 6 months. Compared with nonusers, AED users had an increased relative risk of death (IPTW hazard ratio [HR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–1.36). This was mainly due to deaths from dementia (IPTW HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.42–1.86). There was no difference in cardiovascular and cerebrovascular deaths (IPTW HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.67–1.44). The overall mortality was highest during the first 90 days of AED use (IPTW HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.91–3.03). Among users of older AEDs, relative risk of death was greater compared to users of newer AEDs (IPTW HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.52–2.16).

Conclusion

In older vulnerable patients with a cognitive disorder, careful consideration of AED initiation and close adverse events monitoring are needed.

Flunarizine versus topiramate for chronic migraine prophylaxis: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

Chronic migraine (CM) is a prevalent and devastating disorder with limited therapeutic options. This study explored the efficacy of 10 mg/d flunarizine for CM prophylaxis as compared with 50 mg/d topiramate.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial. Patients with CM were randomized to flunarizine and topiramate treatment. The primary outcomes assessed were the reductions in the total numbers of headache days and migraine days after 8 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes were reductions in the numbers of days of acute abortive medication intake and acute abortive medication tablets taken, and the 50% responder rate.

RESULTS

Sixty-two subjects were randomized (n=31/group). Patients treated with flunarizine showed significant reductions in the numbers of total headache days (-4.9 vs -2.3, P=.012) and migraine days (-4.3 vs -1.4, P=.001) compared with those treated with topiramate. Patients treated with flunarizine also showed significant reductions in the numbers of days of acute abortive medication intake (-2.3 vs -0.2, P=.005) and acute abortive medication tablets taken (-4.6 vs -0.5, P=.005) and had a higher 50% responder rate in terms of total headache days (58.6% vs 25.9%, P=.013) and migraine days (75.9% vs 29.6%, P=.001), compared with topiramate-treated patients. Flunarizine was generally well tolerated and had a safety profile comparable to that of topiramate.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that, in an 8-week study, 10 mg/d flunarizine is more effective than 50 mg/d topiramate for CM prophylaxis.

General lack of use of placebo in prophylactic, randomised, controlled trials in adult migraine. A systematic review

Background

The Clinical Trials Subcommittee of the International Headache Society (IHS) recommends that a placebo arm is included in comparative randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of multiple prophylactic drugs due to the highly variable placebo response in migraine prophylaxis studies. The use of placebo control in such trials has not been systematically assessed.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of all comparative RCTs of prophylactic drug treatment of migraine published in English from 2002 to 2014. PubMed was searched using the Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy for identifying reports of RCTs.

Results

A placebo arm was used in <10% (three of 31) of prophylactic RCTs in migraine. In only 7.1% (two of 28) of the comparative RCTs without placebo was one drug superior to another drug. Thus in 26 RCTs, including one study requiring more than 75,000 patient days, no difference was identified across treatment arms and conclusions regarding drug superiority could not be drawn.

Conclusions

The majority of comparative, prophylactic migraine RCTs do not include a placebo arm. Failure to include a placebo arm may result in failure to demonstrate efficacy of potentially effective migraine-prophylactic agents. In order to benefit current and future patients, the current strong tendency to omit placebo-controls in these RCTs should be replaced by adherence to the guidelines of the IHS.

WITHDRAWN: Anticonvulsant drugs for migraine prophylaxis

July 2015: This review has been split and updated in a series of four new reviews (Linde 2013a; Linde 2013b; Linde 2013c; Linde 2013d). Readers are referred to those reviews for updated results. This review will not be updated.

May 2016: This review has now been withdrawn as it has been replaced by the four new titles listed above.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Integrated care for chronic migraine patients: epidemiology, burden, diagnosis and treatment options

Migraine is a common neurological disorder, characterised by severe headaches. Epidemiological studies in the USA and Europe have identified a subgroup of migraine patients with chronic migraine. Chronic migraine is defined as ≥15 headache days per month for ≥3 months, in which ≥8 days of the month meet criteria for migraine with or without aura, or respond to treatment specifically for migraine. Chronic migraine is associated with a higher burden of disease, more severe psychiatric comorbidity, greater use of healthcare resources, and higher overall costs than episodic migraine (<15 headache days per month). There is a strong need to improve diagnosis and therapeutic treatment of chronic migraine. Primary care physicians, as well as hospital-based physicians, are integral to the identification and treatment of these patients. The latest epidemiological data, as well as treatment options for chronic migraine patients, are reviewed here.

A Comparative Effectiveness Meta-Analysis of Drugs for the Prophylaxis of Migraine Headache

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and side effects of migraine prophylactic medications.

DESIGN

We performed a network meta-analysis. Data were extracted independently in duplicate and quality was assessed using both the JADAD and Cochrane Risk of Bias instruments. Data were pooled and network meta-analysis performed using random effects models.

DATA SOURCES

PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Trial Registry, bibliography of retrieved articles through 18 May 2014.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included randomized controlled trials of adults with migraine headaches of at least 4 weeks in duration.

RESULTS

Placebo controlled trials included alpha blockers (n = 9), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (n = 3), angiotensin receptor blockers (n = 3), anticonvulsants (n = 32), beta-blockers (n = 39), calcium channel blockers (n = 12), flunarizine (n = 7), serotonin reuptake inhibitors (n = 6), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (n = 1) serotonin agonists (n = 9) and tricyclic antidepressants (n = 11). In addition there were 53 trials comparing different drugs. Drugs with at least 3 trials that were more effective than placebo for episodic migraines included amitriptyline (SMD: -1.2, 95% CI: -1.7 to -0.82), -flunarizine (-1.1 headaches/month (ha/month), 95% CI: -1.6 to -0.67), fluoxetine (SMD: -0.57, 95% CI: -0.97 to -0.17), metoprolol (-0.94 ha/month, 95% CI: -1.4 to -0.46), pizotifen (-0.43 ha/month, 95% CI: -0.6 to -0.21), propranolol (-1.3 ha/month, 95% CI: -2.0 to -0.62), topiramate (-1.1 ha/month, 95% CI: -1.9 to -0.73) and valproate (-1.5 ha/month, 95% CI: -2.1 to -0.8). Several effective drugs with less than 3 trials included: 3 ace inhibitors (enalapril, lisinopril, captopril), two angiotensin receptor blockers (candesartan, telmisartan), two anticonvulsants (lamotrigine, levetiracetam), and several beta-blockers (atenolol, bisoprolol, timolol). Network meta-analysis found amitriptyline to be better than several other medications including candesartan, fluoxetine, propranolol, topiramate and valproate and no different than atenolol, flunarizine, clomipramine or metoprolol.

CONCLUSION

Several drugs good evidence supporting efficacy. There is weak evidence supporting amitriptyline's superiority over some drugs. Selection of prophylactic medication should be tailored according to patient preferences, characteristics and side effect profiles.

Unmet clinical needs in chronic migraine: Rationale for study and design of COMPEL, an open-label, multicenter study of the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA for headache prophylaxis in adults with chronic migraine

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine is a neurological condition with a large individual and socioeconomic burden of disease. The recently completed Phase III REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) clinical development program established the efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA as a prophylactic treatment for chronic migraine patients. However, clinical questions remain. A long-term evaluation study of onabotulinumtoxinA aims to address some of the remaining questions in the treatment of chronic migraine. The clinical rationale, study design, and treatment plan of this ongoing study are reviewed in this paper.

METHODS/DESIGN

The Chronic migraine OnabotulinuMtoxinA Prolonged Efficacy open Label (COMPEL) study will enroll approximately 500 adult patients with chronic migraine at international sites. Patients will be evaluated over 108 weeks, following a 4-week baseline period. Qualified subjects will receive 155 U of onabotulinumtoxinA every 12 weeks for 9 open-label cycles. The primary endpoint will be mean change from baseline in frequency of headache days at 108 weeks. Other endpoints will include additional assessments of the efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA and the effect of onabotulinumtoxinA on quality-of-life measures, disability, and health economic outcomes. The impact of onabotulinumtoxinA on common comorbidities (eg, sleep, anxiety, and fatigue) will also be assessed.

DISCUSSION

Recruitment and enrollment are ongoing. Post-approval, open-label studies are often designed to more closely resemble clinical practice and provide an opportunity to continue the evaluation of the efficacy and safety of approved treatments. By creating a large database and analyzing a variety of outcome measures over an extended time frame, the COMPEL study will seek to contribute substantially to the existing knowledge of the chronic migraine population and the long-term management of this debilitating disorder.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01516892.

Glutamate receptor antagonists in the management of migraine

Migraine is a neurovascular disorder that is associated with severe headache and neurologic symptoms. The pathogenesis of migraine is believed to involve trigeminovascular system activation with the primary dysfunction located in brainstem. Glutamate, the major excitatory neurotransmitter in the central nervous system, and its receptors have since long been suggested in migraine pathophysiology. Different preclinical studies have confirmed their potential role in migraine. Moreover, several glutamate receptor modulators have been studied in clinical studies, some with promising results. In this review, we will give an overview of what is known about the role of glutamate in the pathogenesis of migraine, which will be followed by an overview of available efficacy, safety and tolerability data for glutamate receptor inhibitors in clinical development for the treatment of migraine.

A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Duliang Soft Capsule in Patients with Chronic Daily Headache

Objective. To investigate the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicine Duliang soft capsule (DSC) in prophylactic treatment for patients with chronic daily headache (CDH). Methods. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical study was conducted at 18 Chinese clinical centers. The participants received either DSC or placebo for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was headache-free rate (HFR) in a 4-week period between the pretreatment and posttreatment stages. The secondary efficacy measures were the decrease of headache days, the duration of headache attacks, the frequency of analgesic usage, quality of life, disability, and the headache severity (VAS scores). The accompanying symptoms and adverse events were also assessed. Results. Of 584 CDH patients assessed, 468 eligible patients were randomized. 338 patients received DSC, while 111 patients were assigned in the placebo group. Following treatment, there was a 16.56% difference in HFR favoring DSC over placebo (P < 0.01). Significant differences were also observed between DSC and placebo groups in the secondary measures. However, no statistical difference was found between the two groups in the associated symptoms. No severe adverse effects were observed in the study. Conclusions. DSC might be an effective and well-tolerated option for the prophylactic treatment of patients with CDH.

Best practices for patients with chronic migraine: burden, diagnosis, and management in primary care

Headache and migraine are common medical complaints among patients visiting primary care physicians (PCPs). A number of these patients may have chronic migraine, which is more difficult to diagnose and manage than many other headache disorders. Identification of those at risk, correct diagnosis, and establishment of a comprehensive management plan for patients with chronic migraine will require a joint effort between the PCP and the headache specialist. Together, the PCP and headache specialist will need to assess the patient for modifiable exacerbating factors and comorbidities while managing prophylactic and as-needed therapies. Herein, we provide a review of chronic migraine for the PCP and describe tools for improving patient care.

Topiramate-associated urinary incontinence: a case verified by rechallenge

Topiramate is an anticonvulsant that has been widely used in psychiatric conditions. The most common treatment-related adverse effects of topiramate were diarrhea, nausea, loss of appetite, fatigue, paresthesia, cognitive impairment, and metabolic acidosis. The following is a case report intended to draw attention to a rarely reported adverse effect of topiramate. A male patient treated with topiramate developed urinary incontinence that was considered drug associated because of the temporal relationship between its appearance and the commencement of topiramate, its resolution upon topiramate discontinuation, and its recurrence with topiramate rechallenge. Urinary incontinence, although not life threatening, can be a distressing problem with a profound impact on quality of life. This case reminds that physicians prescribing topiramate should be aware of this possible adverse effect and communicate it to patients and their caregivers.

Management of medication-overuse headache

Medication-overuse headache (MOH) has developed into the third most common type of headache after tension-type headache and migraine. The prevalence reaches approximately 1% of the world's population and shows an increasing trend. Many important studies on MOH have been published in the last year, some of which investigated the pathophysiology of headache chronicity, with others focusing on the evaluation of risk factors. The International Headache Society revised its classification criteria on MOH. Several large population-based longitudinal studies clearly demonstrated that overuse of any kind of acute headache medication is the main risk factor leading to the development of chronic headache. Management of MOH remains difficult; the only effective treatment concept is consequent withdrawal therapy.

Amitriptyline vs divalproate in migraine prophylaxis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study compares efficacy and safety of divalproate extended release (DVA-ER) and amitriptyline (AMT) in migraine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three hundred migraineurs having >4 attacks monthly were randomized into DVA-ER or AMT. The primary end points were >50% reduction in frequency, ≥1 grade improvement in the severity, and >50% improvement in a visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary end points were functional disability, rescue medication, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The median age was 32 years, and 241 were women. 150 patients each received DVA-ER and AMT. At 3 months, 74.7% in DVA-ER and 62% patients in AMT group improved in headache frequency (P = 0.02) and at 6 months, 65.3% and 54%, respectively (P = 0.90). At 3 months, the VAS score improved by >50% in 80.7% in DVA-ER and 64% in AMT (P = 0.005). At 6 months, there was no significant difference between the two groups in VAS score (69.3% vs 56%; P = 0.47) and other outcome parameters. The composite side effects were also not different between the two groups (68% vs 81%); however, hair fall, menstrual irregularity, polycystic ovary, and weight gain were commoner in DVA-ER group.

CONCLUSION

Divalproate extended release is more effective at 3 months than AMT; however, at 6 months, both are equally effective in migraine prophylaxis.

Topiramate for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine in adults

BACKGROUND

Some antiepileptic drugs but not others are useful in clinical practice for the prophylaxis of migraine. This might be explained by the variety of actions of these drugs in the central nervous system. The present review is part of an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated (conclusions not changed) in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To describe and assess the evidence from controlled trials on the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate for preventing migraine attacks in adult patients with episodic migraine.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), PubMed/MEDLINE (1966 to 15 January 2013), MEDLINE In-Process (current week, 15 January 2013), and EMBASE (1974 to 15 January 2013) and handsearched Headache and Cephalalgia through January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were required to be prospective, controlled trials of topiramate taken regularly to prevent the occurrence of migraine attacks, to improve migraine-related quality of life, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. For headache frequency data, we calculated mean differences (MDs) between topiramate and comparator (placebo, active control, or topiramate in a different dose) for individual studies and pooled these across studies. For dichotomous data on responders (patients with ≥ 50% reduction in headache frequency), we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and, in select cases, risk ratios (RRs); we also calculated numbers needed to treat (NNTs). We calculated MDs for selected quality of life instruments. Finally, we summarised data on adverse events from placebo-controlled trials and calculated risk differences (RDs) and numbers needed to harm (NNHs).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty papers describing 17 unique trials met the inclusion criteria. Analysis of data from nine trials (1737 participants) showed that topiramate reduced headache frequency by about 1.2 attacks per 28 days as compared to placebo (MD -1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.59 to -0.80). Data from nine trials (1190 participants) show that topiramate approximately doubled the proportion of responders relative to placebo (RR 2.02; 95% CI 1.57 to 2.60; NNT 4; 95% CI 3 to 6). Separate analysis of different topiramate doses produced similar MDs versus placebo at 50 mg (-0.95; 95% CI -1.95 to 0.04; three studies; 520 participants), 100 mg (-1.15; 95% CI -1.58 to -0.71; six studies; 1620 participants), and 200 mg (-0.94; 95% CI -1.53 to -0.36; five studies; 804 participants). All three doses significantly increased the proportion of responders relative to placebo; ORs were as follows: for 50 mg, 2.35 (95% CI 1.60 to 3.44; three studies; 519 participants); for 100 mg, 3.49 (95% CI 2.23 to 5.45; five studies; 852 participants); and for 200 mg, 2.49 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.87; six studies; 1025 participants). All three doses also significantly improved three or more domains of quality of life as compared to placebo. Meta-analysis of the three studies that included more than one dose of topiramate suggests that 200 mg is no more effective than 100 mg. With regard to mean headache frequency and/or responder rate, seven trials using active comparators found (a) no significant difference between topiramate and amitriptyline (one study, 330 participants); (b) no significant difference between topiramate and flunarizine (one study, 83 participants); (c) no significant difference between topiramate and propranolol (two studies, 342 participants); (d) no significant difference between topiramate and relaxation (one study, 61 participants); but (e) a slight significant advantage of topiramate over valproate (two studies, 120 participants). Relaxation improved migraine-specific quality of life significantly more than topiramate. In trials of topiramate against placebo, seven adverse events (AEs) were reported by at least three studies. These were usually mild and of a non-serious nature. Except for taste disturbance and weight loss, there were no significant differences in the frequency of AEs in general, or of the seven specific AEs, between placebo and topiramate 50 mg. AEs in general and all of the specific AEs except nausea were significantly more common on topiramate 100 mg than on placebo, with NNHs varying from 3 to 25, and the RDs versus placebo were even higher for topiramate 200 mg, with NNHs varying from 2 to 17.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis demonstrates that topiramate in a 100 mg/day dosage is effective in reducing headache frequency and reasonably well-tolerated in adult patients with episodic migraine. This provides good evidence to support its use in routine clinical management. More studies designed specifically to compare the efficacy or safety of topiramate versus other interventions with proven efficacy in the prophylaxis of migraine are needed.

Valproate (valproic acid or sodium valproate or a combination of the two) for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine in adults

BACKGROUND

Some antiepileptic drugs but not others are useful in clinical practice for the prophylaxis of migraine. This might be explained by the variety of actions of these drugs in the central nervous system. The present review is part of an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2004, and previously updated (conclusions not changed) in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To describe and assess the evidence from controlled trials on the efficacy and tolerability of valproate (valproic acid or sodium valproate or a combination of the two) for preventing migraine attacks in adult patients with episodic migraine.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), PubMed/MEDLINE (1966 to 15 January 2013), MEDLINE In-Process (current week, 15 January 2013), and EMBASE (1974 to 15 January 2013) and handsearched Headache and Cephalalgia through January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were required to be prospective, controlled trials of valproate taken regularly to prevent the occurrence of migraine attacks, to improve migraine-related quality of life, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. For headache frequency data, we calculated mean differences (MDs) between valproate and comparator (placebo, active control, or valproate in a different dose) for individual studies and pooled these across studies. For dichotomous data on responders (patients with ≥ 50% reduction in headache frequency), we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and, in select cases, risk ratios (RRs); we also calculated numbers needed to treat (NNTs). We calculated MDs for Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scores. We also summarised data on adverse events from placebo-controlled trials and calculated risk differences (RDs) and numbers needed to harm (NNHs).

MAIN RESULTS

Ten papers describing 10 unique trials met the inclusion criteria. Analysis of data from two trials (63 participants) showed that sodium valproate reduced headache frequency by approximately four headaches per 28 days as compared to placebo (MD -4.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.32 to -0.30). Data from four trials (542 participants) showed that divalproex sodium (a stable combination of sodium valproate and valproic acid in a 1:1 molar ratio) more than doubled the proportion of responders relative to placebo (RR 2.18; 95% CI 1.28 to 3.72; NNT 4; 95% CI 2 to 11). One study of sodium valproate (34 participants) versus placebo supported the latter findings (RR for responders 2.83; 95% CI 1.27 to 6.31; NNT 3; 95% CI 2 to 9). There was no significant difference in the proportion of responders between sodium valproate versus flunarizine (one trial, 41 participants) or between divalproex sodium versus propranolol (one trial, 32 participants). Pooled analysis of post-treatment mean headache frequencies in two trials (88 participants) demonstrates a slight but significant advantage for topiramate 50 mg over valproate 400 mg (MD -0.90; 95% CI -1.58 to -0.22). For placebo-controlled trials of sodium valproate and divalproex sodium, NNHs for clinically important adverse events ranged from 7 to 14.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Valproate is effective in reducing headache frequency and is reasonably well tolerated in adult patients with episodic migraine.

Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of propranolol added to topiramate in chronic migraine

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of adding propranolol to topiramate in chronic migraine subjects inadequately controlled with topiramate alone.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted through the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Clinical Research Collaboration, expected to randomize 250 chronic migraine subjects inadequately controlled (≥10 headaches/month) with topiramate (50-100 mg/day) to either propranolol LA (long acting) (240 mg/day) or placebo. Primary outcome was 28-day moderate to severe headache rate reduction at 6 months (weeks 16 to 24) compared with baseline (weeks -4 to 0).

RESULTS

A planned interim analysis was performed after 48 sites randomized 171 subjects. The data and safety monitoring board recommended ending the trial after determining that it would be highly unlikely for the combination to result in a significant reduction in 28-day headache rate compared with topiramate alone if all 250 subjects were randomized. No safety concerns were identified. At study closure, 191 subjects were randomized. The 6-month reduction in moderate to severe 28-day headache rate and total 28-day headache rate for combination therapy vs topiramate alone was not significantly different: 4.0 vs 4.5 days (moderate to severe 28-day headache rate; p = 0.57) and 6.2 vs 6.1 days (total 28-day headache rate; p = 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

This study does not provide evidence that the addition of propranolol LA to topiramate adds benefit when chronic migraine is inadequately controlled with topiramate alone.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class II evidence that propranolol LA, added to topiramate, is ineffective in chronic migraine patients who fail topiramate monotherapy.

Detoxification for medication overuse headache is not necessary

BACKGROUND

Current textbook knowledge states that patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse should be withdrawn from acute medication before initiating preventive drug therapy.

OVERVIEW

This recommendation is based on the clinical impression that patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse are refractory to preventive therapy. Recently, however, four randomised trials, two with topiramate and two with onabotulinum toxin A, showed that about half of patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse will respond to these treatments and show both a reduction in migraine days and intake of acute medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Therefore, we propose to educate patients on the mechanisms of medication overuse and motivate them to reduce intake frequency. Patients who fail should be offered either topiramate or onabotulinum toxin A in combination with behavioural therapy and regular exercise. If this approach fails, patients should be offered withdrawal therapy.

Acupuncture versus topiramate in chronic migraine prophylaxis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of acupuncture compared with topiramate treatment in chronic migraine (CM) prophylaxis.

METHODS

A total of 66 consecutive and prospective CM patients were randomly divided into two treatment arms: 1) acupuncture group: acupuncture administered in 24 sessions over 12 weeks (n = 33); and 2) topiramate group: a 4-week titration, initiated at 25 mg/day and increased by 25 mg/day weekly to a maximum of 100 mg/day followed by an 8-week maintenance period (n = 33).

RESULTS

A significantly larger decrease in the mean monthly number of moderate/severe headache days (primary end point) from 20.2 ± 1.5 days to 9.8 ± 2.8 days was observed in the acupuncture group compared with 19.8 ± 1.7 days to 12.0 ± 4.1 days in the topiramate group (p < .01) Significant differences favoring acupuncture were also observed for all secondary efficacy variables. These significant differences still existed when we focused on those patients who were overusing acute medication. Adverse events occurred in 6% of acupuncture group and 66% of topiramate group.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that acupuncture could be considered a treatment option for CM patients willing to undergo this prophylactic treatment, even for those patients with medication overuse.

Clinical pharmacology of topiramate in migraine prevention

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a widespread disorder. Migraine patients experience worse health-related quality of life than the general population. The availability of effective and tolerable treatments for this disorder is an important medical need. This narrative review focuses on the clinical pharmacology of topiramate, an antiepileptic drug that was approved for the prophylaxis of migraine where it should act as a neuromodulator.

AREAS COVERED

A PubMed database search (from 2000 to 24 January 2011) and a review of the human studies published on topiramate and migraine was conducted.

EXPERT OPINION

Topiramate is an important option for the prophylaxis of migraine and is of proven efficacy and tolerability. It has also been studied in chronic migraine with encouraging results, even in patients with medication overuse. However, in migraine prevention its efficacy is comparable to the other first-line drugs and there are no published trials with a superiority design which can establish topiramate's role in the available therapeutic armamentarium.

Chronic daily headache in the pediatric population

Very limited long-term follow-up data exist for the population of children and adolescents with chronic daily headache (CDH). One abstracted report discusses short-term follow-up on 24 adolescents (peak age 13 years) with CDH; in a 6-month follow-up, more than 50% experienced a reduction of 75% or more in headache frequency, and one third showed an improvement of greater than 90% in headache frequency. A wide variety of preventive agents were used, but amitriptyline and topiramate provided the largest percentage of successful outcomes. With an improving classification scheme, we have the possibility of using multicenter studies to elucidate whether the clinical patterns seen by experienced observers translate into rational differentiation of treatment approaches. If the entities of CDH are, indeed, different, then therapeutic, prophylactic, and behavioral trials could guide us in offering a more evidence-based approach to the treatment of this fascinating, yet sometimes debilitating condition.

Are the current IHS guidelines for migraine drug trials being followed?

In 2000, the Clinical Trials Subcommittee of the International Headache Society (IHS) published the second edition of its guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine. The purpose of this publication was to improve the quality of such trials by increasing the awareness amongst investigators of the methodological issues specific to this particular illness. Until now the adherence to these guidelines has not been systematically assessed. We reviewed all published controlled trials of drugs in migraine from 2002 to 2008. Eligible trials were scored for compliance with the IHS guidelines by using grading scales based on the most essential recommendations of the guidelines. The primary efficacy measure of each trial was also recorded. A total of 145 trials of acute treatment and 52 trials of prophylactic treatment were eligible for review. Of the randomized, double-blind trials, acute trials scored an average of 4.7 out of 7 while prophylactic trials scored an average of 5.6 out of 9 for compliance. Thirty-one percent of acute trials and 72% of prophylactic trials used the recommended primary efficacy measure. Fourteen percent of the reviewed trials were either not randomized or not double-blinded. Adherence to international guidelines like these of IHS is important to ensure that only high-quality trials are performed, and to provide the consensus that is required for meta analyses. The primary efficacy measure for trials of acute treatment should be “pain free” and not “headache relief”. Open-label or non-randomized trials generally have no place in the study of migraine drugs.

New drugs in migraine treatment and prophylaxis: telcagepant and topiramate

Although the triptan drugs provide effective relief from migraine for many patients, a substantial number of affected individuals are unresponsive to these compounds, and such therapy can also lead to a range of adverse effects. Telcagepant represents a new class of antimigraine drug-the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor blockers. This compound exerts its effects by blocking receptors for the calcitonin-gene-related peptide at several sites in the trigeminal and central nervous systems, resulting in pain relief. Telcagepant does not cause vasoconstriction, a major limitation in the use of triptans. Comparisons with triptans in clinical trials for acute treatment of migraine attacks revealed clinical effects similar to those of triptans but better than those of placebo. Telcagepant might provide hope for those who have a poor response to, or are unable to use, older drugs. In patients who need prophylaxis because of frequent attacks of migraine, topiramate is a first-line drug for migraine prevention in many countries; it is generally safe and reasonably well tolerated. Data suggest that topiramate could aid reversion of chronic migraine to episodic migraine.

Topiramate in the prevention and treatment of migraine: efficacy, safety and patient preference

Migraine is a very common disorder characterized by the combination of typical headache with associated autonomic symptoms and/or the presence of aura. Considerable advances have been made in recent years to understand the pathophysiology of migraine, which has led to improved treatment options for the acute migraine attack as well as migraine prophylaxis. Unfortunately, preventive treatment is often insufficient to decrease migraine frequency substantially or is not well tolerated. Topiramate is an antipileptic drug with a complex mode of action which has proven its efficacy and safety in the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine in a number of randomized controlled clinical trials. Topiramate is also effective in treating patients with chronic migraine. It has little pharmacological interaction with other drugs and is generally well tolerated by patients.

Role of antiepileptic drugs as preventive agents for migraine

Migraine is a common neurological disease affecting about 12% of the population in Western Europe and North America, and causing a considerable burden both to migraineurs and to society. Severe, frequent and disabling migraine attacks, as well as those poorly responsive to acute care medication, require preventive treatment, which is often under-utilized. Antiepileptic drugs are used in the prevention of migraine. We performed a literature search of PubMed through June 2008 for controlled trials of antiepileptic drugs in the prevention of migraine. The search identified 70 papers for a full-text review. The majority of these papers referred to valproate and topiramate, and showed that these drugs are effective and well tolerated in migraine prevention and are suitable for first-line clinical use. On the other hand, acetazolamide, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine and vigabatrin have been shown to be not effective and gabapentin requires further evaluation. For the rest of the antiepileptic drugs, no data from controlled trials are available.

Topiramate in migraine progression

Increasing evidence shows that migraine, typically considered as an episodic disease, is a chronic and, in some patients, progressive disorder. Among neuromodulators used for migraine prevention, topiramate has a high level of evidence-based efficacy. Through its wide range of mechanisms of action topiramate increases the activation threshold resulting in neuronal stabilization and thereby reducing cortical neurons hyperexcitability, which is believed to be an important electrophysiological feature underlying the pathogenesis of epilepsy and migraine. Recent studies show that migraineurs have subclinical structural brain changes and persistent alteration of pain perception, in some cases correlated with the duration of the disease and the frequency of attacks that might play a role in the transformation of episodic migraine to chronic forms. An early and prolonged preventive treatment might reduce the risk of such transformation. Recent evidence suggests that topiramate, by reducing migraine frequency and use of acute medication, may prevent the negative progression of migraine. Furthermore, two recently completed multicenter, randomised, placebo-controlled trials have shown that treatment with topiramate 100 mg/day is effective and well tolerated in patients already progressed to chronic migraine and difficult to treat conditions associated with medication-overuse. Topiramate seems to be a preventive treatment, which might be able to act at different levels of the migraine cycle: reduction of frequency in episodic migraine, prevention, and treatment of chronic migraine.

Epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment of chronic migraine: a focus on topiramate

The term chronic daily headache refers to a heterogeneous group of headache disorders characterized by a frequency of headaches on > or = 15 days per month. Chronic migraine is a subtype of chronic daily headache. The prevalence of chronic migraine is approximately 1%. Baseline attack frequency and acute medication overuse have been identified as potential risk factors for the progression of migraine from an episodic disorder to a chronic condition. There is an unmet patient need for effective and safe treatments for patients with chronic migraine, but data from rigorous controlled trials are limited. Previous studies have demonstrated that topiramate is an effective and safe preventive treatment for episodic migraine. In addition, pilot studies have suggested the utility of topiramate for the prevention of chronic migraine. Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trials investigating the efficacy and safety of topiramate in the treatment of patients with chronic migraine have recently been completed. This review presents comparative data from these 2 clinical trials, which suggest that topiramate at a dose of 100 mg daily is effective and generally well tolerated in chronic migraine.