Levetiracetam in the Prophylaxis of Migraine With Aura

Primary headache types in adult epilepsy patients

BACKGROUND

Headache is among the most common comorbidities in epilepsy. This study examined the distribution of different primary headache disorders in a large cohort of patients with diagnosed epilepsy. Headache types were analysed with regard to gender, type of epilepsy and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).

METHODS

In this prospective single-centre study, 500 patients with epilepsy (250 female, mean age: 45.52 ± 17.26 years) were evaluated with regards to primary headache types using a validated German headache questionnaire categorizing for migraine (MIG), tension-type headache (TTH) or trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TAC), their combinations and unclassifiable headache. Data regarding type of epilepsy, seizure-associated headache, AED treatment and seizure freedom were collected.

RESULTS

Of 500 patients with epilepsy, 163 (32.6%) patients (108 female and 55 male) reported suffering from headaches at least 1 day per month. MIG (without aura, with aura) and TTH were the most frequent headache type (MIG 33.1%, TTH 33.1%). Female epilepsy patients reported headaches significantly more often than male patients (x² = 8.20, p = 0.0042). In contrast, the type of epilepsy did not significantly affect headache distribution. Of 163 patients with headache, 66 (40.5%) patients reported seizure-associated headache and AEDs were used by 157 patients. Of importance, patients with AED monotherapy suffered from MIG less often when compared to patients on polytherapy (x² = 4.79, p = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

MIG and TTH are the most common headache types in epilepsy patients and headache is more frequent among female epilepsy patients. Monotherapy in AEDs might have a beneficial effect on the frequency of headache compared to polytherapy.

Preventive treatment response associated with migraine aura subtypes in a Thai population

Introduction

Some studies indicate a different response to treatment between migraine patients with and without aura.

Objectives

To determine whether aura, or simple or complex aura subtypes, are clinical markers predicting response to preventive treatment.

Methods

Conducted a retrospective cohort study at a headache clinic in a tertiary referral hospital. We included data from patients registered from 1 November 2014, to 30 June 2022, having migraine with or without aura, or with simple or complex aura, and who had received migraine preventive treatments with at least 3 months follow-up. The primary outcome was a response to preventive treatment defined as at least a 50% reduction from a baseline of monthly migraine or headache days (MMDs/MHDs). Secondary outcomes were improvement in quality of life and disability scores.

Results

For migraine patients with (45) and without (123) aura who took a migraine preventive with at least 3 months follow-up; except for median age, which was older for patients without aura, baseline sex, comorbidity, and migraine data were without significant difference including median history of migraine, chronic migraine subtype, chronic migraine with medication-overuse headache, median or mean MMDs/MHDs, number of preventive medications used, or migraine preventive medication inhibiting spreading depolarizations. Treatment outcomes at 3 and 6 months follow-up were not significantly different between migraine patients with and without aura, or with simple and complex aura, but tended to be greater in those with aura and those with complex aura. After adjustment for baseline comorbidity, migraine subtypes, aura subtypes, the number of preventives used, history of migraine, and MMDs/MHDs, we found no significant differences in 30% and 50% reduction from baseline of MMDs/MHDs in 3 or 6 months or most recent follow-up.

Conclusions

Preventive treatment response tended to be associated with migraine aura subtypes. We found preventive treatment response tended to have more favorable outcomes in those with aura, especially those with complex aura.

Evaluating migraine with typical aura with neuroimaging

Objective

To provide an up-to-date narrative literature review of imaging in migraine with typical aura, as a means to understand better migraine subtypes and aura biology.

Background

Characterizing subtypes of migraine with typical aura and appreciating possible biological differences between migraine with and without aura, are important to understanding the neurobiology of aura and trying to advance personalized therapeutics in this area through imaging biomarkers. One means of doing this over recent years has been the use of increasingly advanced neuroimaging techniques.

Methods

We conducted a literature review of neuroimaging studies in migraine with aura, using a PubMed search for terms 'imaging migraine', 'aura imaging', 'migraine with aura imaging', 'migraine functional imaging' and 'migraine structural imaging'. We collated the findings of the main studies, excluding small case reports and series with n < 6, and have summarized these and their implications for better understanding of aura mechanisms.

Results

Aura is likely mediated by widespread brain dysfunction in areas involving, but not limited to, visual cortex, somatosensory and insular cortex, and thalamus. Higher brain excitability in response to sensory stimulation and altered resting-state functional connectivity in migraine sufferers with aura could have a genetic component. Pure visual aura compared to visual aura with other sensory or speech symptoms as well, may involve different functional reorganization of brain networks and additional mitochondrial dysfunction mediating more aura symptoms.

Conclusion

There is a suggestion of at least some distinct neurobiological differences between migraine with and without aura, despite the shared phenotypic similarity in headache and other migraine-associated symptoms. It is clear from the vast majority of aura phenotypes being visual that there is a particular predisposition of the occipital cortex to aura mechanisms. Why this is the case, along with the relationships between cortical spreading depression and headache, and the reasons why aura does not consistently present in affected individuals, are all important research questions for the future.

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.

Consensus of the Brazilian Headache Society (SBCe) for the Prophylactic Treatment of Episodic Migraine: part I

The Brazilian Headache Society (Sociedade Brasileira de Cefaleia, SBCe, in Portuguese) nominated a Committee of Authors with the aim of establishing a consensus with recommendations regarding prophylactic treatment for episodic migraine based on articles published in the worldwide literature, as well as personal experience. Migraine affects 1 billion people around the world and more than 30 million Brazilians. In addition, it is an underdiagnosed and undertreated disorder. It is well known within the medical community of neurologists, and especially among headache specialists, that there is a need to disseminate knowledge about prophylactic treatment for migraine. For this purpose, together with the need for drug updates and to expand knowledge of the disease itself (frequency, intensity, duration, impact and perhaps the progression of migraine), this Consensus was developed, following a full online methodology, by 12 groups who reviewed and wrote about the pharmacological categories of the drugs used and, at the end of the process, met to read and establish conclusions for this document. The drug classes studied were: anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, monoclonal anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) antibodies, beta-blockers, antihypertensives, calcium channel inhibitors, other antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, SSRIs, and dual-action antidepressants), other drugs, and polytherapy. Hormonal treatment and anti-inflammatories and triptans in minimum prophylaxis schemes (miniprophylaxis) will be covered in a specific chapter. The drug classes studied for part I of the Consensus were: anticonvulsants, tricyclic antidepressants, monoclonal anti-CGRP antibodies, and beta-blockers.

Levetiracetam in the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine: A prospective open label study

BACKGROUND

The prophylactic treatment of migraine includes anticonvulsant drugs such as valproic acid and topiramate. However, these substances are often poorly tolerated by migraine patients. So far levetiracetam has hardly been studied as an episodic migraine prophylactic agent in adults.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a prospective pilot study for the evaluation of the efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam in the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine.

METHODS

Fifty patients with episodic migraine were enrolled in this prospective, open label study. After a baseline period of four weeks, patients received 1,000 mg (starting dose 500 mg) bid levetiracetam for 12 weeks. Migraine frequency and accompanying symptoms were recorded in a headache diary. The primary endpoint was the comparison of attack frequency during the baseline with attack frequency during the last four weeks of treatment (treatment period 3).

RESULTS

In the Intent-To-Treat analysis, 46% of the patients had a migraine reduction of more than 50% in the third period as compared to the baseline period. The mean number of migraine attacks decreased from 5.2 +/- 2.1 (baseline) to 3.4 +/- 2.7 (period 3). The most frequently reported side effects were somnolence, nausea, and weight gain; all were mild and transient. In a post-hoc comparison, responders to levetiracetam had significantly less migraine attacks at baseline and had significantly more often migraine with aura.

CONCLUSION

The data suggest that levetiracetam has some potential in the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine which seems, however, to be not superior to that of other anticonvulsant drugs. Levetiracetam was well tolerated and showed better efficacy in patients with migraine with aura and in less affected migraine patients. A larger placebo-controlled, double-blind study in adults seems justified on the basis of these data.

Levetiracetam Mechanisms of Action: From Molecules to Systems

Epilepsy is a chronic disease that affects millions of people worldwide. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are used to control seizures. Even though parts of their mechanisms of action are known, there are still components that need to be studied. Therefore, the search for novel drugs, new molecular targets, and a better understanding of the mechanisms of action of existing drugs is still crucial. Levetiracetam (LEV) is an AED that has been shown to be effective in seizure control and is well-tolerable, with a novel mechanism of action through an interaction with the synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A). Moreover, LEV has other molecular targets that involve calcium homeostasis, the GABAergic system, and AMPA receptors among others, that might be integrated into a single mechanism of action that could explain the antiepileptogenic, anti-inflammatory, neuroprotective, and antioxidant properties of LEV. This puts it as a possible multitarget drug with clinical applications other than for epilepsy. According to the above, the objective of this work was to carry out a comprehensive and integrative review of LEV in relation to its clinical uses, structural properties, therapeutical targets, and different molecular, genetic, and systemic action mechanisms in order to consider LEV as a candidate for drug repurposing.

Levetiracetam for the Prophylaxis of Migraine in Adults

Migraine is the second most common primary headache disorder after tension-type headache and is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Cortical spreading depression involves neuronal excitation and inhibition and is involved in pathophysiology of migraine. Many anti-epileptic drugs act by inhibiting Cortical Spreading Depression and block desensitization. Anti-convulsants are commonly used in Migraine prophylaxis and the ones being more effective than placebo include Sodium Valproate and Topiramate. Levetiracetam has unique mechanism as it targets hyper-excitable neurons by binding to synaptic vesicle protein. This results in inhibition of neurotransmitter release thus decreases hyper-excitability. Levetiracetam has minimal side effect profile (dizziness, somnolence and mood changes) and it can be well tolerated by patients. In this review, a total of seven studies were included (four open-label trials and three randomized-control trials) which evaluated the role of Levetiracetam in the prophylaxis of migraine in adult patients. On review of this evidence, Levetiracetam appears to be effective in treating migraine with and without aura and is considered safe because of its limited side effects. There was a significant reduction in the frequency, severity, and duration of migraine with a high responder rate. Levetiracetam was well tolerated with minimal side effects and no reported interactions. However, larger randomized controlled trials are needed and these studies should be done on special population to see the outcomes. In addition, studies for extended-release formulations should also be done.

Emergency Department and Inpatient Management of Headache in Adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews treatment options for patients presenting with headache in the emergency department (ED) and for inpatients, including red flags and status migrainosus (SM).

RECENT FINDINGS

Most patients presenting with headache in the ED will have migraine, but red flags must be reviewed to rule out secondary headaches. SM refractory to home treatment is a common reason for ED presentation or inpatient admission, but high-quality treatment evidence is lacking. Common treatments include intravenous fluids, anti-dopaminergic agents with diphenhydramine, steroids, divalproex, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intravenous dihydroergotamine, and nerve blocks. Other therapies (e.g., ketamine and lidocaine) are used with limited or inconsistent evidence. There is evidence for inpatient behavioral management therapy. This article details red flags to review in the workup of headache presentation in the ED and provides a step-wise approach to ED and inpatient management. However, more studies are needed to better optimize care.

Differences in treatment response between migraine with aura and migraine without aura: lessons from clinical practice and RCTs

Migraine is a major public health problem afflicting approximately 10% of the general population and is a leading cause of disability worldwide, yet our understanding of the basis mechanisms of migraine remains incomplete. About a third of migraine patients have attacks with aura, consisting of transient neurological symptoms that precede or accompany headache, or occur without headache. For patients, aura symptoms are alarming and may be transiently disabling. For clinicians and scientists, aura represents an intriguing neurophysiological event that may provide important insight into basic mechanisms of migraine. Several observations point toward important differences between migraine with and without aura. Compared with migraine without aura, migraine with aura has different heritability, greater association with different conditions including stroke, different alterations of brain structure and function as revealed by imaging studies. A number of studies also indicate that migraine with aura may respond differently to acute and preventive therapies as compared to migraine without aura. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of these differences in treatment responses, and to discuss the possibility of different therapeutic strategies for migraine with vs. without aura.

Current Status of Antiepileptic Drugs as Preventive Migraine Therapy

BACKGROUND

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are an important class of agents used in the treatment of migraine, a neurological disorder that imparts significant socioeconomic burden. It is important for neurologists to understand the rationale for AEDs in migraine-preventive treatment, as well as each agent's efficacy and tolerability profile, in order to best determine clinical care.

PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW

This article specifically provides the following: (1) a review of the mechanism of action, efficacy, and tolerability of topiramate and divalproex sodium/sodium valproate, the most widely used AEDs for migraine prevention, (2) a discussion on emerging evidence regarding the efficacy of zonisamide and levetiracetam, and (3) comments on gabapentin, pregabalin, carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, and lamotrigine, AEDs which have insufficient evidence for use in migraine prevention.

RECENT FINDINGS

The potential role for new extended-release formulations of topiramate in migraine prevention is discussed. There is substantial evidence supporting the use of AEDs in migraine prevention. Specific agents should be chosen based on their efficacy and tolerability profiles. Further studies are needed to determine the efficacy of the newer AEDs, zonisamide and levetiracetam, in migraine prevention and to clarify the role of gabapentinoids in headache management.

Treatment of migraine attacks and prevention of migraine: Guidelines by the German Migraine and Headache Society and the German Society of Neurology

In collaboration with some of the leading headache centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, we have established new guidelines for the treatment of migraine attacks and the prevention of migraine. A thorough literature research of the last 10 years has been the basis of the current recommendations. At the beginning, we present therapeutic novelties, followed by a summary of all recommendations. After an introduction, we cover topics like drug therapy and practical experience, non-effective medication, migraine prevention, interventional methods, non-medicational and psychological methods for prevention and therapies without proof of efficacy.

Refining the Benefit/Risk Profile of Anti-Epileptic Drugs in Headache Disorders

Anti-epileptic drugs are among the most effective drugs for migraine prophylaxis, and will likely continue to have a role even as new therapies emerge. Topiramate and valproate are effective for the preventive treatment of migraine, and other medications such as gabapentin or lamotrigine may have a role in the treatment of those with allodynia or frequent aura, respectively. Oxcarbazepine, carbamazepine, phenytoin, gabapentin, and others may alleviate pain in trigeminal neuralgia. While many anti-epileptic drugs can be effective in those with migraine or other headaches, most of these agents can potentially cause serious side effects. In particular, valproate, topiramate, carbamazepine, and phenytoin may lead to adverse outcomes for infants of exposed mothers. Valproate should not be given to women of childbearing potential for migraine prevention.

Levetiracetam synergizes with gabapentin, pregabalin, duloxetine and selected antioxidants in a mouse diabetic painful neuropathy model

RATIONALE

We have reported that levetiracetam, a novel anticonvulsant with analgesic properties, synergizes with ibuprofen/aspirin/paracetamol in a model of diabetic painful neuropathy (DPN). Most guidelines recommend gabapentin, pregabalin, and duloxetine as first- or second-line agents for DPN.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the effects of combination treatment of first-/second-line analgesics with levetiracetam in a model of DPN. Additionally, the levetiracetam's combinations with antioxidants, low dose of aspirin, coenzyme Q10, or α-lipoic acid were evaluated.

METHODS

Diabetes was induced in C57BL/6 mice with a single high dose of streptozotocin. The antinociceptive effects of orally administered levetiracetam, gabapentin, pregabalin, duloxetine (acute treatment) and aspirin, coenzyme Q10, and α-lipoic acid (preventive 7-day treatment), as well as combinations of levetiracetam with individual drugs were examined in the tail-flick test. In combination experiments, the drugs were coadministered in fixed-dose fractions of single-drug ED₅₀; the type of interaction was determined by isobolographic analysis.

RESULTS

About 60-, 32-, 30-, 26-, 18-, and 6-fold reductions of doses of both drugs in levetiracetam combinations with pregabalin, gabapentin, coenzyme Q10, aspirin, duloxetine, and α-lipoic acid, respectively, were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Combinations of levetiracetam with gabapentin/pregabalin/duloxetine that target different mechanisms/sites of action involved in DPN, as well as combinations of levetiracetam and low-dose aspirin/coenzyme Q10/α-lipoic acid that target underlying causes of DPN, produce marked synergistic interactions in reducing nociception in diabetic mice. This suggests that these combination treatments might be of great benefit for diabetic patients and should be explored further in clinical trials.

Current Status of the New Antiepileptic Drugs in Chronic Pain

Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are extensively used worldwide to treat a wide range of disorders other than epilepsy, such as neuropathic pain, migraine, and bipolar disorder. Due to this situation more than 20 new third-generation AEDs have been introduced in the market recently. The future design of new AEDs must also have potential to help in the non-epileptic disorders. The wide acceptance of second generation AEDs for the management of various non-epileptic disorders has caused the emergence of generics in the market. The wide use of approved AEDs outside epilepsy is based on both economic and scientific reasons. Bipolar disorders, migraine prophylaxis, fibromyalgia, and neuropathic pain represent the most attractive indication expansion opportunities for anticonvulsant developers, providing blockbuster revenues. Strong growth in non-epilepsy conditions will see Pfizer's Lyrica become the market leading brand by 2018. In this review, we mainly focus on the current status of new AEDs in the treatment of chronic pain and migraine prophylaxis. AEDs have a strong analgesic potential and this is demonstrated by the wide use of carbamazepine in trigeminal neuralgia and sodium valproate in migraine prophylaxis. At present, data on the new AEDs for non-epileptic conditions are inconclusive. Not all AEDs are effective in the management of neuropathic pain and migraine. Only those AEDs whose mechanisms of action are match with pathophysiology of the disease, have potential to show efficacy in non-epileptic disorder. For this better understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease and mechanisms of action of new AEDs are essential requirement before initiating pre-clinical and clinical trials. Many new AEDs show good results in the animal model and open-label studies but fail to provide strong evidence at randomized, placebo-controlled trials. The final decision regarding the clinical efficacy of the particular AEDs in a specific non-epileptic disorder should be withdrawal from randomized placebo trials rather than open-label studies; otherwise this may lead to off-label uses of drug. The purpose of the present review is to relate the various mechanisms of action of new AEDs to pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical efficacy in neuropathic pain and migraine.

Levetiracetam synergises with common analgesics in producing antinociception in a mouse model of painful diabetic neuropathy

Painful diabetic neuropathy is difficult to treat. Single analgesics often have insufficient efficacy and poor tolerability. Combination therapy may therefore be of particular benefit, because it might provide optimal analgesia with fewer adverse effects. This study aimed to examine the type of interaction between levetiracetam, a novel anticonvulsant with analgesic properties, and commonly used analgesics (ibuprofen, aspirin and paracetamol) in a mouse model of painful diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes was induced in C57BL/6 mice with a single high dose of streptozotocin, applied intraperitoneally (150 mg/kg). Thermal (tail-flick test) and mechanical (electronic von Frey test) nociceptive thresholds were measured before and three weeks after diabetes induction. The antinociceptive effects of orally administered levetiracetam, analgesics, and their combinations were examined in diabetic mice that developed thermal/mechanical hypersensitivity. In combination experiments, the drugs were co-administered in fixed-dose fractions of single drug ED50 and the type of interaction was determined by isobolographic analysis. Levetiracetam (10-100 mg/kg), ibuprofen (2-50 mg/kg), aspirin (5-75 mg/kg), paracetamol (5-100 mg/kg), and levetiracetam-analgesic combinations produced significant, dose-dependent antinociceptive effects in diabetic mice in both tests. In the tail-flick test, isobolographic analysis revealed 15-, and 19-fold reduction of doses of both drugs in the combination of levetiracetam with aspirin/ibuprofen, and paracetamol, respectively. In the von Frey test, approximately 7- and 9-fold reduction of doses of both drugs was detected in levetiracetam-ibuprofen and levetiracetam-aspirin/levetiracetam-paracetamol combinations, respectively. These results show synergism between levetiracetam and ibuprofen/aspirin/paracetamol in a model of painful diabetic neuropathy and might provide a useful approach to the treatment of patients suffering from painful diabetic neuropathy.

Comparison of Levetiracetam and sodium Valproate in migraine prophylaxis: A randomized placebo-controlled study

Background:

Migraine is a chronic and disabling disorder. Treatment of migraine often comprises of symptomatic (abortive) and preventive (prophylactic) treatment. The current drugs used in migraine prophylaxis include antidepressant drugs (Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Tricyclic antidepressants), and anti-epileptic drugs (valproate, gabapentin, etc).

Objective:

The objective of our study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam in adult migraine prophylaxis, compared to valproate and placebo.

Materials and Methods:

We conducted a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study. A total of 85 patients were randomized to receive levetiracetam 500 mg/d (n = 27), valproate 500 mg/d (n = 32) or placebo (n = 26). The patients were evaluated for treatment efficacy after 6 months. Efficacy was assessed as a more than 50% decrease in headache frequency.

Results:

In levetiracetam group, 17 (63.0%) patients experienced a more than 50% decrease in headache frequency, while this efficacy number was 21 (65.6%) for valproate group and 4 (15.4%) for placebo group. The difference was not statistically significant between levetiracetam and valproate, while it was significant when comparing either levetiracetam or valproate to placebo.

Conclusion:

Compared to placebo, levetiracetam offers improvement in headache frequency in patients with migraine. The efficacy of levetiracetam in migraine prophylaxis is comparable to currently used drugs such as valproate.

The visual system in migraine: from the bench side to the office

BACKGROUND

Throughout history, migraine-associated visual symptoms have puzzled patients, doctors, and neuroscientists. The visual aspects of migraine extend far beyond the aura phenomena, and have several clinical implications.

METHODS

A narrative review was conducted, beginning with migraine mechanisms, then followed by pertinent aspects of the anatomy of visual pathways, clinical features, implications of the visual system on therapy, migraine on visually impaired populations, treatment of visual auras and ocular (retinal) migraine, effect of prophylactic migraine treatments on visual aura, visual symptoms induced by anti-migraine or anti-headache drugs, and differential diagnosis.

RESULTS

A comprehensive narrative review from both basic and clinical standpoints on the visual aspects of migraine was attained; however, the results were biased to provide any useful information for the clinician.

CONCLUSION

This paper achieved its goals of addressing and condensing information on the pathophysiology of the visual aspects of migraine and its clinical aspects, especially with regards to therapy, making it useful not only for those unfamiliar to the theme but to experienced physicians as well.

Late-life migraine accompaniments: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Migraine is one of the most common chronic neurological disorders. In 1980, C. Miller Fisher described late-life migraine accompaniments as transient neurological episodes in older individuals that mimic transient ischemic attacks. There has not been an update on the underlying nature and etiology of late-life migraine accompanimentsd since the original description.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive and extensive review of the late-life migraine accompaniments including the epidemiology, clinical characteristics, differential diagnosis, and treatment.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE®, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases for publications from 1941 to July 2014. The search terms "Migraine accompaniments," "Late life migraine," "Migraine with aura," "Typical aura without headache," "Migraine equivalents," "Acephalic migraine," "Elderly migraine," and "Transient neurological episodes" were used.

CONCLUSION

Late-life onset of migraine with aura is not rare in clinical practice and can occur without headache, especially in elderly individuals. Visual symptoms are the most common presentation, followed respectively by sensory, aphasic, and motor symptoms. Gradual evolution, the march of transient neurological deficits over several minutes and serial progression from one symptom to another in succession are typical clinical features for late-life migraine accompaniments. Transient neurological disturbances in migraine aura can mimic other serious conditions and can be easily misdiagnosed. Careful clinical correlation and appropriate investigations are essential to exclude secondary causes. Treatments are limited and still inconsistent.

Efficacy and mechanism of anticonvulsant drugs in migraine

Anticonvulsants represent one of the main substance classes used for the preventive treatment of migraine. Efficacy has been demonstrated in randomized placebo-controlled trials for topiramate and valproic acid including divalproex sodium. In the case of topiramate, efficacy has recently been proven for chronic migraine and even medication overuse headache, questioning the established concept of medication withdrawal. However, preventive treatment with anticonvulsants is frequently hampered by side effects that occasionally require treatment discontinuation. In addition, these data indicate that some anticonvulsant drugs are effective in migraine, while a number are clearly not useful. Effective anticonvulsants, such as topiramate and valproate, target nociceptive trigeminovascular and trigeminothalamic dural pathways or mechanisms involved in cortical spreading depression. Dissecting out how the anticonvulsants that do not work differ mechanistically from those that do will almost certainly provide avenues through which one can develop new treatments to bring to patients with migraine.

Links between headaches and epilepsy: current knowledge and terminology

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Headaches (including migraines) and epilepsy have a high level of comorbidity and may be confused during diagnosis. Although physicians have known for centuries that these two conditions are somehow linked, their relationship remains poorly understood. Herein we describe the known associations between them, their underlying physiopathologic and genetic mechanisms, and the treatments recommended for them.

METHOD

We have reviewed the most relevant publication of headache/migraine and epilepsy by using the PubMed data base.

DESCRIPTION

An individual can suffer both from headaches (either migraine and/or other type of headache) and epilepsy, either by chance or because of a common underlying pathology. In these cases, the headache usually occurs at a different moment than the seizure ("interictal headache"). However, headaches sometimes occur simultaneously with, or very close in time to, the seizure: one that occurs at the same time as an epileptic seizure is known as an "ictal epileptic headache" or as "hemicrania epileptica"; one that precedes a seizure is known as a "pre-ictal headache"; and one that follows a seizure is known as a "post-ictal headache". There is a particular type of pre-ictal headache, known as "migralepsy", which occurs during or just after a migraine aura.

CONCLUSIONS

The terminology and concepts employed to describe possible associations between headaches (mainly migraines) and epilepsy have evolved over time with increasing clinical and physiopathogenic knowledge. Some researchers have suggested eliminating the term migralepsy and using the terms ictal epileptic headache and hemicrania epileptica exclusively and uniformly in all classification systems.

Management of vestibular migraine

Vestibular migraine is considered to be the second most common cause of vertigo and the most common cause of spontaneous episodic vertigo. The duration of attacks varies from seconds to days, usually lasting minutes to hours, and they mostly occur independently of headaches. Long-lasting individual attacks are treated with generic antivertiginous and antiemetic drugs. Specific antimigraine drugs are unlikely to be very effective for rescue. The mainstay of the management of vestibular migraine is prophylactic medication. To date, there are no controlled trials available; the body of knowledge builds on case series and retrospective or observational studies. Most drugs are also used for the prevention of migraine headaches. The choice of medication should be guided by its side effect profile and the comorbidities of patients. Betablockers such as propanolol or metoprolol are preferred in patients with hypertension but in the absence of asthma. Anticonvulsants include topiramate when patients are obese, valproic acid and lamotrigine. Lamotrigine is preferred if vertigo is more frequent than headaches. Calcium antagonists include verapamil and flunarizine. If patients have anxiety, tricyclic antidepressants such as amitryptiline or nortryptiline or SSRIs and benzodiazepines such as clonazepam are recommended. Acetazolamide is effective in rare genetic disorders related to migraine-like episodic ataxia; however, its place in vestibular migraine is still to be established. Nonpharmacological measures such as diet, sleep, hygiene and avoidance of triggers are recommended as they are for migraine. Vestibular rehabilitation might be useful when there are complications such as loss of confidence in balance or visual dependence.

Efficacy and tolerability of pregabalin versus topiramate in the prophylaxis of chronic daily headache with analgesic overuse: an open-label prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Medication-overuse headache is one of the most disabling headaches. Antiepileptic drugs have been considered a promising strategy as prophylactic treatment in these patients, even if their use often has been limited by low tolerability or safety. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pregabalin compared with topiramate for the prophylaxis of chronic daily headache with medication overuse using an open-label prospective study.

METHODS

After a 2-month baseline period (T0), 100 consecutive patients with medication overuse headache were assigned to receive 150 mg/d pregabalin or 100 mg/d topiramate. After a titration period of 4 weeks, a follow-up visit was scheduled every 2 months (T1 and T2) to evaluate headache frequency, the amount of rescue medication intake, and disability.

RESULTS

Of the 46 pregabalin-treated patients, the mean monthly headache frequency significantly decreased from 21.8 ± 4.8 (T0) to 5.1 ± 3.8 (T2), and the monthly number of days with medication intake decreased from 15.1 ± 4.8 (T0) to 2.9 ± 1.9 (T2). Similarly, of the 42 topiramate-treated patients, the mean monthly headache frequency decreased from 21.8 ± 4.9 (T0) to 5.3 ± 3.5 (T2), and the mean monthly number of days with medication intake decreased from 15.1 ± 3.7 (T0) to 2.6 ± 1.5 (T2). A significant improvement of disability score was reported in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to topiramate, pregabalin seems to be an effective and well-tolerated preventive therapy in chronic headache and a new option in the management of withdrawal from abused drugs in patients with analgesic overuse, a difficult-to-treat population.

Levetiracetam in chronic daily headache: a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled study. (The Australian KEPPRA Headache Trial [AUS-KHT])

INTRODUCTION

Chronic daily headache (CDH) represents a temporal profile of headache (15+ days/month; 4+ hours/day; >6 months). We report the first comprehensive and largest levetiracetam (LEV) trial in CDH.

METHODS

A 27-week, multi-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled, cross-over, phase III B study assessed efficacy of a target of 3 g/day LEV of 6 placebo tablets/day in CDH. Primary efficacy was headache-free rate (HFR) while secondary parameters were loss of diagnostic criteria; severity; duration; disability; associated features; pain; and quality of life.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients were recruited (baseline HFR 10.4 ± 14.6%; median 0%). At onset of history 73 (74.1%) had migraine +/- aura and 35 (36.5%) had tension-type headache (TTH). Over the six months preceding recruitment 54 (56.3%) had migraine and 42 (43.8%) had TTH. Headache history was 22.6 ± 15.0 years (median 20.0). Eighty-eight received placebo and 89 received LEV with >80 receiving stable dose in either arm. LEV achieved 3.9% increased HFR over placebo, showing a trend but not significance. There was 9.9% increase in loss of CDH diagnostic criteria re: headache days/month for LEV over placebo (p = .0325), reduced disability (p = .0487) and reduced pain severity for LEV (p = .0162). The Short-Form Quality of Life assessment instrument (SF-36) showed impaired mental health on LEV (p = .001).

DISCUSSION

These findings conflict with reports of LEV efficacy, mandating placebo control in headache trials. Primary efficacy equated to one extra headache-free day/month with reduced disability and pain intensity. Mental health was reduced on LEV. The 10% loss of diagnostic criteria, decreased intensity and disability suggest a subpopulation with CDH where LEV remains a therapeutic option.

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.

New drugs for migraine

After the triptans, a calcitonin gene-related peptide blocker (telcagepant) is the first acute medicine that has been developed primarily for treatment of acute migraine. Otherwise, the new drugs have been developed first for other purposes, like anticonvulsants, antihypertensives and antidepressants used for migraine prophylaxis. For acute attacks, a new way to administer a traditional drug like dihydroergotamine is under way, and documentation of efficacy in migraine has been gained for some commonly used painkillers and anti-inflammatory drugs, and for some herbal extracts. Based on insights into the basic pathophysiological mechanisms of the disorder, some drugs have been developed which seem promising in early phase II studies (NOS inhibitors and 5HT1F-receptor agonists). In the future, development and enhancements of existing medicines must be accompanied by increased efforts to develop truly new migraine drugs based on knowledge of the pathophysiology if one wishes to reduce substantially the great burden migraine poses on patients and society.

Spreading depression: from serendipity to targeted therapy in migraine prophylaxis

Despite the relatively well-characterized headache mechanisms in migraine, upstream events triggering individual attacks are poorly understood. This lack of mechanistic insight has hampered a rational approach to prophylactic drug discovery. Unlike targeted abortive and analgesic interventions, mainstream migraine prophylaxis has been largely based on serendipitous observations (e.g. propranolol) and presumed class effects (e.g. anticonvulsants). Recent studies suggest that spreading depression is the final common pathophysiological target for several established or investigational migraine prophylactic drugs. Building on these observations, spreading depression can now be explored for its predictive utility as a preclinical drug screening paradigm in migraine prophylaxis.

Weight change associated with the use of migraine-preventive medications

BACKGROUND

Medications administered long term, such as those used for migraine prophylaxis, are often associated with weight change as a side effect. Such effects may compromise general health status, exacerbate coexisting medical conditions, and affect medication adherence. Weight gain should be of particular concern in patients with migraine, as there is evidence that overweight and obese patients with migraine are at risk for an increased frequency and severity of migraine attacks.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews weight-change data from recent clinical studies of migraine-preventive medications in children, adolescents, and adults with migraine.

METHODS

A PubMed search was conducted for English-language articles published between January 1970 and November 2007. Among the search terms were migraine prevention, migraine prophylaxis, migraine treatment, antidepressant drug, beta-adrenergic-receptor blockers, antiepileptic drug, anticonvulsant drug, weight gain, and weight loss. Studies that reported weight-change data (gain, loss, or neutral) were included. When available, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were selected for review. Open-label, retrospective or prospective trials may also have been included.

RESULTS

Most of the migraine-preventive medications classified by the United States Headache Consortium as group 1 based on the high level of evidence for their efficacy--for instance, amitriptyline, propranolol, and divalproex sodium-have been associated with varying degrees of weight gain. The exceptions are timolol, which is weight neutral, and topiramate, which is associated with weight loss. Among the drugs that have been associated with weight gain, a higher incidence of weight gain was observed with amitriptyline and divalproex sodium than with propranolol.

CONCLUSION

Weight-change effects require careful consideration when selecting migraine-preventive medications, and weight should be monitored carefully over the course of any migraine treatment plan.

Antiepileptic Drugs on Calcium Currents Recorded from Cortical and PAG Neurons: Therapeutic Implications for Migraine

Cortex and periaqueductal grey (PAG) play a major role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) influence the activity of these structures by modulating high-voltage-activated (HVA) Ca2+ channels and are effective in migraine prevention. The aim of the present study was to investigate the expression of total HVA Ca2+ channels in cortical and PAG neurons and to study the differential action of AEDs on these channels. Isolated neurons were visually identified based on morphological criteria. HVA currents were recorded by whole-cell patch-clamp technique. The distribution ratio of L-, N-, P-, Q- and R-type HVA Ca2+ channels was different between cortical and PAG neurons. In particular, we found that P- and Q-type HVA Ca2+ channels were more expressed in PAG neurons than in cortical cells, whereas L- and R-type HVA Ca2+ channels showed an opposite distribution. Interestingly, N-type HVA Ca2+ channels were equally distributed in these two neuronal populations. A differential sensitivity to AEDs of HVA Ca2+ channels located on cortical and PAG neurons was observed for topiramate (TPM), but not for lamotrigine (LTG) or levetiracetam (LEV). In fact, whereas both LTG and LEV were equally effective and potent in inhibiting HVA Ca2+ currents in the two neuronal populations, TPM showed a much higher potency and efficacy in blocking these currents in PAG neurons than in cortical pyramidal cells. TPM, in fact, inhibited N-, P- and L-type channels in PAG neurons, whereas in cortical neurons this AED modulated only P- and L-type channels. Unlike the other AEDs investigated, valproic acid did not affect HVA Ca2+ currents in cortical and PAG neurons. The negative modulation of specific subtypes of HVA Ca2+ channels by various AEDs can restore normal electrical activity in target brain areas such as cortex and PAG, providing interesting therapeutic approaches in migraine prevention.

Modern Management of the Migraine Headache

Migraine headache is a debilitating disorder that affects millions of people in the United States and worldwide. The diagnosis of migraine can significantly affect quality of life, health care costs, and daily productivity. Hundreds of trials and many guidelines have documented various approaches to migraine management, whether via acute treatment or chronic migraine prophylaxis. Acute or abortive migraine management encompasses specific and nonspecific migraine therapeutics, including nonopioid and opioid analgesics, triptans, and ergotamines. Prophylactic migraine management data span the pharmacological spectrum from antiepileptic and antihypertensive agents to botulinum toxin type A. Special considerations for migraine management also must be applied in various populations, including children, pregnant women, and the elderly. The following review serves as an introduction to current therapeutic approaches for acute migraine treatment and provides an overview of available literature for pharmacological prophylaxis.

Migraine prophylaxis

There is a wide array of options for migraine prophylaxis; many of the available drugs are clearly proven to be effective and yet are underused in Australia. "New" drugs which are gaining favour for migraine prophylaxis include topiramate, candesartan, gabapentin and botulinum toxin. The evidence for efficacy is excellent for topiramate and reasonably good but limited for candesartan and gabapentin. The use of botulinum toxin is controversial and has gained substantial popularity through anecdotal experience rather than convincing published evidence. Transformed or chronic migraine with medication overuse is a particularly difficult problem. New strategies to aid in medication withdrawal are reviewed. The approach to menstrual migraine and migraine with prominent aura may differ from that for typical migraine. Novel approaches are being explored for these problems.