Gastric stasis occurs in spontaneous, visually induced, and interictal migraine

Difference in Cyclic Versus Non-cyclic Symptom Patterns in Patients with the Symptoms of Gastroparesis Undergoing Bioelectric Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Patients with gastroparesis (Gp) have symptoms with or without a cyclic pattern. This retrospective study evaluates differences in cyclic vs. non-cyclic symptoms of Gp by analyzing mucosal electrogastrogram (mEG), familial dysautonomias, and response to gastric stimulation.

METHODS

37 patients with drug refractory Gp, 7 male and 30 female, with a mean age of 41.4 years, were studied. 18 had diabetes mellitus, 25 had cyclic (Cyc), and 12 had a non-cyclic (NoCyc) pattern of symptoms. Patients underwent temporary mucosal gastric stimulator (tGES) placement, which was done as a trial before permanent stimulator (GES) placement. Electrogastrogram (EGG) by mucosal (mEG) measures, including frequency, amplitude, and frequency-amplitude ratio (FAR), were pre- and post-tGES. Patients' history of personal and familial dysautonomias, quality of life, and symptom scores were recorded. Baseline vs. follow-ups were compared by paired t tests and McNemar's tests. T tests contrasted symptom scores, gastric emptying tests (GET), and mEG measures, while chi-squared tests deciphered comorbidity differences between two groups and univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

There were significantly more patients with diabetes in the Cyc group vs. the NoCyc group. Using a 1 point in symptom outcome, 18 patients did not improve and 19 did improve with tGES. Using univariable analysis, with the cyclic pattern as a predictor, patients exhibiting a cyclic pattern had an odds ratio of 0.22 (95% CI 0.05-0.81, p = 0.054) for achieving an improvement of at least one unit in vomiting at follow-up from baseline. The mucosal electrogastrogram frequency to amplitude ratio (FAR) for the "not Improved" group was 19.6 [3.5, 33.6], whereas, for the "Improved" group, it was 54.3 [25.6, 72.5] with a p-value of 0.049. For multivariate logistic regression, accounting for sex and age squared, patients exhibiting a cyclic pattern had an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.16 (95% CI 0.03-0.81, p = 0.027) for achieving an improvement of at least one unit in vomiting at follow-up from baseline. The two groups had no significant differences in the personal or inherited history of investigated familial patterns.

CONCLUSION

This study shows differences in Gp patients with Cyc vs. NoCyc symptoms in several areas. Larger studies are needed to elicit further differences between the two groups about cycles of symptoms, EGG, findings, familial patterns, and response to mucosal GES.

The Gut-brain Connection and Episodic Migraine: an Update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Historical evidence suggests a shared underlying etiology for migraine and gastrointestinal (GI) disorders that involves the gut-brain axis. Here we provide narrative review of recent literature on the gut-brain connection and migraine to emphasize the importance of tailoring treatment plans for patients with episodic migraine who experience GI comorbidities and symptoms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent population-based studies report the prevalence of migraine and GI disorders as comorbidities as well as overlapping symptomology. American Headache Society (AHS) guidelines have integrated GI symptoms as part of migraine diagnostic criteria and recommend nonoral therapies for patients with GI symptoms or conditions. Nasal delivery is a recommended nonoral alternative; however, it is important to understand potential adverse events that may cause or worsen GI symptoms in some patients due to the site of drug deposition within the nasal cavity with some nasal therapies. Lastly, clinical perspectives emphasize the importance of identifying GI symptoms and comorbidities in patients with episodic migraine to best individualize migraine management. Support for an association between the gut-brain axis and migraine continues to prevail in recent literature; however, the relationship remains complex and not well elucidated. The presence of GI comorbidities and symptoms must be carefully considered when making treatment decisions for patients with episodic migraine.

A link between gastrointestinal disorders and migraine: Insights into the gut-brain connection

Background

Migraine is a complex, multifaceted, and disabling headache disease that is often complicated by gastrointestinal (GI) conditions, such as gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, and cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). Functional dyspepsia and CVS are part of a spectrum of disorders newly classified as disorders of gut–brain interaction (DGBI). Gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia are both associated with delayed gastric emptying, while nausea and vomiting are prominent in CVS, which are also symptoms that commonly occur with migraine attacks. Furthermore, these gastric disorders are comorbidities frequently reported by patients with migraine. While very few studies assessing GI disorders in patients with migraine have been performed, they do demonstrate a physiological link between these conditions.

Objective

To summarize the available studies supporting a link between GI comorbidities and migraine, including historical and current scientific evidence, as well as provide evidence that symptoms of GI disorders are also observed outside of migraine attacks during the interictal period. Additionally, the importance of route of administration and formulation of migraine therapies for patients with GI symptoms will be discussed.

Methods

A literature search of PubMed for articles relating to the relationship between the gut and the brain with no restriction on the publication year was performed. Studies providing scientific support for associations of gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, and CVS with migraine and the impact these associations may have on migraine treatment were the primary focus. This is a narrative review of identified studies.

Results

Although the association between migraine and GI disorders has received very little attention in the literature, the existing evidence suggests that they may share a common etiology. In particular, the relationship between migraine, gastric motility, and vomiting has important clinical implications in the treatment of migraine, as delayed gastric emptying and vomiting may affect oral dosing compliance, and thus, the absorption and efficacy of oral migraine treatments.

Conclusions

There is evidence of a link between migraine and GI comorbidities, including those under the DGBI classification. Many patients do not find adequate relief with oral migraine therapies, which further necessitates increased recognition of GI disorders in patients with migraine by the headache community.

Consideration of Migraines Among Risk Factors for Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

The impact of migraine on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is controversial, and few studies have focused on their relationship. Thus, we investigated the impact of migraine, among other risk factors, on PONV in a large retrospective study. We analyzed 10 years of clinical data from the Smart Clinical Data Warehouse of Hallym University Medical Center. PONV was defined as nausea or vomiting within the first 24 h after surgery. Patients diagnosed by a neurologist and with a history of triptan use before surgery were enrolled into the migraine group. We enrolled 208,029 patients aged > 18 years who underwent general anesthesia (GA), among whom 19,786 developed PONV within 24 h after GA and 1982 had migraine. Before propensity score matching, the unadjusted and fully adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for PONV in subjects with versus without migraine were 1.52 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.34–1.72; p < 0.001) and 1.37 (95% CI, 1.21–1.56; p < 0.001), respectively. The OR for PONV in patients with migraine was also high (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.13–1.66; p = 0.001) after matching. Our findings suggest that migraine is a significant risk factor for PONV.

No Gastrointestinal Dysmotility in Transgenic Mouse Models of Migraine

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether transgenic mouse models of migraine exhibit upper gastrointestinal dysmotility comparable to those observed in migraine patients.

BACKGROUND

There is considerable evidence supporting the comorbidity of gastrointestinal dysmotility and migraine. Gastrointestinal motility, however, has never been investigated in transgenic mouse models of migraine.

METHODS

Three transgenic mouse strains that express pathogenic gene mutations linked to monogenic migraine-relevant phenotypes were studied: CADASIL (Notch3-Tg88), FASP (CSNK1D-T44A), and FHM1 (CACNA1A-S218L). Upper gastrointestinal motility was quantified by measuring gastric emptying and small intestinal transit in mutant and control animals. Gastrointestinal motility was measured at baseline and after pretreatment with 10 mg/kg nitroglycerin (NTG).

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed for gastric emptying or small intestinal transit at baseline for any of the 3 transgenic strains when compared to appropriate controls or after pretreatment with NTG when compared to vehicle.

CONCLUSIONS

We detected no evidence of upper gastrointestinal dysmotility in mice that express mutations in genes linked to monogenic migraine-relevant phenotypes. Future studies seeking to understand why humans with migraine experience delayed gastric emptying may benefit from pursuing other modifiers of gastrointestinal motility, such as epigenetic or microbiome-related factors.

In-vitro and in-vivo respiratory deposition of a developed metered dose inhaler formulation of an anti-migraine drug

Enhancement of zolmitriptan bioavailability through development of micronized zolmitriptan pressurized metered dose inhaler (MDI) as an alternative to its traditional drug delivery systems. A reversed phase HPLC method for zolmitriptan determination was developed and evaluated. Micronized zolmitriptan MDI formulations were prepared using two different propellants. The prepared formulations were evaluated for mean shot weight, drug content, and leakage rate in addition to in-vitro deposition using next generation impactor where mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD), geometric standard deviation (GSD), fine particle dose, fine particle fraction (FPF), emitted dose (ED), and dispersibility were determined. The selected formulation was evaluated for in-vivo bronchial absorption in rats. The physicochemical characters of the prepared formulations were found to be dependent mainly on the vapor pressure of the used propellant. MDI formulation prepared with HFA 134a propellant was found to have the lowest MMAD (3.47 ± 0.65) with GSD of 2.3 ± 0.4. It also had the highest FPF (41.9), ED (89.26 ± 2.35) with dispersibility of 46.9%. This formulation, when applied to rats, resulted in faster Tmax (27 ± 5 min) with higher Cmax (1236 ± 116 ng/mL) and AUC(0-12) (3375 ± 482 ng/mL·h) over the oral tablet. Its relative bioavailability was 72.7% which was 1.25 times higher than the oral tablet relative bioavailability. Zolmitriptan MDI formulation was developed using micronized zolmitriptan powder without further modification or particle engineering. The developed formulation using HFA 134a propellant could be favorable alternative, with enhanced bioavailability, to zolmitriptan oral tablet for acute migraine treatment.

Pharmacokinetics of DFN-15, a Novel Oral Solution of Celecoxib, Versus Celecoxib 400-mg Capsules: A Randomized Crossover Study in Fasting Healthy Volunteers

Background

COX-2 inhibitors can be effective for acute migraine, but none is supplied in a rapidly absorbed, ready-to-use oral liquid formulation. DFN-15, a novel oral liquid formulation of celecoxib, is being developed for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura. Clinical studies with this formulation are ongoing.

Objectives

The objectives of the present study were to compare the bioavailability of DFN-15 with that of the commercial formulation of celecoxib 400-mg oral capsules (Celebrex^®) and to determine the dose proportionality of DFN-15 in healthy fasted volunteers.

Methods

This single-dose randomized crossover study in 16 healthy fasted volunteers evaluated the pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of DFN-15 at doses of 120, 180, and 240 mg against the commercial formulation of celecoxib 400-mg oral capsules and determined the dose proportionality of DFN-15.

Results

The maximum observed plasma concentrations (C_max) of celecoxib after the administration of DFN-15 120, 180, and 240 mg (1062–1933 ng/ml) were higher than for the 400-mg oral capsules (611 ng/ml). The median time to peak concentration (T_max) was within 1 h for DFN-15 and 2.5 h for the oral capsules. The pharmacokinetics of DFN-15 were dose proportional from 120 to 240 mg. Partial area under the plasma concentration–time curves (AUCs) from 15 min to 2 h for DFN-15 120 mg were at least threefold higher than for the oral capsules, and the relative bioavailability of DFN-15 was approximately 140% that of the oral capsules. DFN-15 was well tolerated, with no new or unexpected adverse events.

Conclusions

Based on a faster rate of absorption and increased bioavailability, DFN-15 is being evaluated as an abortive medication for acute treatment in patients with migraine.

Non-headache symptoms in migraine patients

Migraine is one of the most common neurological disorders. In addition to severe headaches, non-headache symptoms associated with migraine attacks as well as co-morbid disorders frequently aggravate the disabling of migraine patients. Some of these symptoms are related to poor outcomes. In this review, we update the advances of studies on certain non-headache symptoms, including visual disturbance, gastrointestinal symptoms, allodynia, vestibular symptoms, and symptoms of co-morbid restless legs syndrome and psychiatric disorders.

A multicenter, open-label, long-term safety and tolerability study of DFN-02, an intranasal spray of sumatriptan 10 mg plus permeation enhancer DDM, for the acute treatment of episodic migraine

BACKGROUND

DFN-02 is a novel intranasal spray formulation composed of sumatriptan 10 mg and a permeation-enhancing excipient comprised of 0.2% 1-O-n-Dodecyl-β-D-Maltopyranoside (DDM). This composition of DFN-02 allows sumatriptan to be rapidly absorbed into the systemic circulation and exhibit pharmacokinetics comparable to subcutaneously administered sumatriptan. Rapid rate of absorption is suggested to be important for optimal efficacy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of DFN-02 (10 mg) in the acute treatment of episodic migraine with and without aura over a 6-month period based on the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and the evaluation of results of clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, physical examination, and electrocardiograms.

METHODS

This was a multi-center, open-label, repeat-dose safety study in adults with episodic migraine with and without aura. Subjects diagnosed with migraine with or without aura according to the criteria set forth in the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition, who experienced 2 to 6 attacks per month with fewer than 15 headache days per month and at least 48 headache-free hours between attacks, used DFN-02 to treat their migraine attacks acutely over the course of 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 173 subjects was enrolled, 167 (96.5%) subjects used at least 1 dose of study medication and were evaluable for safety, and 134 (77.5%) subjects completed the 6-month study. A total of 2211 migraine attacks was reported, and 3292 doses of DFN-02 were administered; mean per subject monthly use of DFN-02 was 3.6 doses. Adverse events were those expected for triptans, as well as for nasally administered compounds. No new safety signals emerged. Dysgeusia and application site pain were the most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events over 6 months (21% and 30.5%, respectively). Most of the treatment-emergent adverse events were mild. There were 5 serious adverse events, all considered unrelated to the study medication; the early discontinuation rate was 22.5% over the 6-month treatment period.

CONCLUSION

DFN-02 was shown to be well tolerated when used over 6 months to treat episodic migraine acutely.

[Clinical significance of nausea in migraine]

AIM

To study the prevalence and intensity of nausea in pain, prodromal and postdromal phases of migraine paroxysm, and in between the paroxysms in migraine patients, depending on the type of migraine paroxysm and frequency of pain days, and to evaluate an effect of nausea on the course of migraine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred and four patients with migraine, aged from 18 to 60 years, were examined. The intensity of nausea was evaluated by a 5-point verbal analogue scale, and its intensity in between the paroxysms by the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale. All of the patients underwent a complex examination of the gastrointestinal tract.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Paroxysms with accompanying nausea were found in 90% patients. Acute nausea was associated with older age, earlier onset and longer experience of migraine. In a group of patients with acute nausea, the frequency and intensity of migraine paroxysms, probability of reoccuring pain in the first day and the severity of social disability were higher. Development of nausea in between the paroxysms and its intensity was significantly higher in patients with high intensity of nausea in migraine paroxysms. Nausea in the prodrome was significantly associated with migraine without aura and chronicity of the disorder. Patients with nausea in the prodrome also had a longer painful phase and more severe social disability. No relationship between organic diseases of the digestive tract and nausea was found. Nausea can have its own pathological mechanisms not related to concomitant diseases of the digestive tract that should be taken into account in therapeutic interventions aimed at improving quality of life of the patients.

Post Hoc Subanalysis of Two Randomized, Controlled Phase 3 Trials Evaluating Diclofenac Potassium for Oral Solution: Impact of Migraine-Associated Nausea and Prior Triptan Use on Efficacy

Objective

To determine whether baseline nausea or prior triptan treatment for migraine impact the effectiveness of diclofenac potassium for oral solution in treating acute migraine.

Background

A great deal of variability exists in patients' response to migraine medications. Migraine‐associated nausea is common and debilitating and can reduce the effectiveness of oral medications. It may cause patients to delay taking oral medications, which is known to diminish therapeutic outcomes, or to avoid taking them altogether. Gastroparesis, which may be associated with nausea, also inhibits drug absorption, resulting in lower bioavailability. Studies have shown that having nausea at the time of drug administration predicts a poorer response to triptan treatment. It is of interest to understand how effective other migraine medications are in patients with a poor response to triptans.

Methods

Data from two randomized, double‐blind, placebo controlled trials were pooled and post hoc subgroup analyses were performed in patients with and without nausea at baseline, and in patients with and without prior triptan treatment. Efficacy assessments included the percentage of patients who, at 2 hours postdosing, were headache pain‐free (2hPF, primary endpoint), without photophobia, without phonophobia, without nausea, or without a severe degree of disability. A Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel test, stratified by analysis center was used to evaluate treatment effect. Effects of nausea or prior triptan use were determined using logistic regression with factors of treatment group, analysis center, nausea or prior triptan use at time of dosing, and interaction of treatment group by nausea or prior triptan use at time of dosing.

Results

The modified intent to treat population consisted of 1272 patients, 644 on active drug and 628 on placebo. The majority of patients (85%) were female. At the time of dosing, 783 (62%) patients reported nausea with the treated attack. Prior triptan use was recorded in 570 (45%). For headache pain, nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia, patients in the active treatment group had a statistically significantly better response than those receiving placebo, regardless of whether they had nausea at baseline. In logistic regression analysis only treatment group predicted a response for these parameters with no detectable group interaction. Baseline nausea, as well as treatment group, predicted whether patients recorded severe disability at 2 hours. While patients in the active treatment group were significantly more likely to be headache pain‐free at 2 hours after dosing, whether or not they had previously been treated with triptan, more triptan‐naïve patients (30%) than triptan‐experienced patients (20%) were headache pain‐free. Interestingly, in the placebo groups, triptan‐naïve patients were also more likely to be PF (14% vs 7%). In the logistic regression analysis, treatment group predicted a headache pain response, triptan use predicted a lack of response, and there was no interaction between the two. Prior triptan use did not predict any of the other outcome measures.

Conclusions

Nausea at the time of dosing does not diminish the effectiveness of diclofenac potassium for oral solution. The rapid absorption profile may enhance the effectiveness in patients with nausea. Prior triptan use predicted poorer headache response at 2 hours postdose, suggesting the possibility of a subset of patients who are more likely to be refractory to both triptans and diclofenac. Diclofenac potassium for oral solution is effective in triptan‐naïve patients but no reliable inference can be made from this study as to about how to order treatment.

Gastrointestinal disorders associated with migraine: A comprehensive review

Migraine is a recurrent and commonly disabling primary headache disorder that affects over 17% of women and 5%-8% of men. Migraine susceptibility is multifactorial with genetic, hormonal and environmental factors all playing an important role. The physiopathology of migraine is complex and still not fully understood. Many different neuropeptides, neurotransmitters and brain pathways have been implicated. In connection with the myriad mechanisms and pathways implicated in migraine, a variety of multisystemic comorbidities (e.g., cardiovascular, psychiatric and other neurological conditions) have been found to be closely associated with migraine. Recent reports demonstrate an increased frequency of gastrointestinal (GI) disorders in patients with migraine compared with the general population. Helicobacter pylori infection, irritable bowel syndrome, gastroparesis, hepatobiliary disorders, celiac disease and alterations in the microbiota have been linked to the occurrence of migraine. Several mechanisms involving the gut-brain axis, such as a chronic inflammatory response with inflammatory and vasoactive mediators passing to the circulatory system, intestinal microbiota modulation of the enteric immunological milieu and dysfunction of the autonomic and enteric nervous system, have been postulated to explain these associations. However, the precise mechanisms and pathways related to the gut-brain axis in migraine need to be fully elucidated. In this review, we survey the available literature linking migraine with GI disorders. We discuss the possible physiopathological mechanisms, and clinical implications as well as several future areas of interest for research.

What the Gut Can Teach Us About Migraine

During gestation, cells of the brain and gut develop almost simultaneously into the central nervous system (CNS) and enteric nervous system (ENS), respectively. They remain connected via the vagal nerve lifelong. While it is well known that the brain sends signal to the gut, communication is in fact bidirectional. Just as the brain can modulate gut functioning, the gut, and likely what we ingest, can in fact influence our brain functioning. We will first review both gastrointestinal (GI) function and migraine pathophysiology and then discuss evidence linking the migraine brain to various GI disorders. Lastly, we discuss the effects of gut microbiota on brain functioning and speculate how the gut and particularly diet may affect migraine.

The iontophoretic transdermal system formulation of sumatriptan as a new option in the acute treatment of migraine: a perspective

An iontophoretic transdermal system (ITS) (skin patch) formulation of sumatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine attacks was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in January 2013. This transdermal system bypasses the gastrointestinal tract, as it uses low electrical current to move sumatriptan transdermally into the subcutaneous tissue. Randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trials have demonstrated minimal triptan-related side effects and superior efficacy versus placebo, comparable with other sumatriptan formulations. Sumatriptan ITS can be applied successfully during a mild or severe migraine attack. According to pharmacokinetic properties and clinical data, sumatriptan ITS may be a good choice for people with migraine and severe nausea, vomiting or gastroparesis, those with intolerable triptan-related adverse events and those not responding optimally to oral medications.

Why does vomiting stop a migraine attack?

Migraine is commonly associated with nausea and vomiting, though, interestingly, vomiting has also been reported by some patients to be therapeutic, and may actually stop a migraine attack. In this review, we will first discuss the epidemiology of nausea and vomiting in migraine. Further, we will briefly review the connections between the enteric nervous system, the autonomic nervous system, and the central nervous system as they pertain to understanding the question of "Why does vomiting stop a migraine attack?"

Improved pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan with Breath Powered™ nasal delivery of sumatriptan powder

Objectives.—

The purpose of this study was to directly compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of 22-mg sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a novel Breath Powered™ device (11 mg in each nostril) vs a 20-mg sumatriptan liquid nasal spray, a 100-mg oral tablet, and a 6-mg subcutaneous injection.

Background.—

A prior PK study found that low doses of sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a Breath Powered device were efficiently and rapidly absorbed. An early phase clinical trial with the same device and doses found excellent tolerability with high response rates and rapid onset of pain relief, approaching the benefits of injection despite significantly lower predicted drug levels.

Methods.—

An open-label, cross-over, comparative bioavailability study was conducted in 20 healthy subjects at a single center in the USA. Following randomization, fasted subjects received a single dose of each of the 4 treatments separated by a 7-day washout. Blood samples were taken pre-dose and serially over 14 hours post-dose for PK analysis.

Results.—

Quantitative measurement of residuals in used Breath Powered devices demonstrated that the devices delivered 8 ± 0.9 mg (mean ± standard deviation) of sumatriptan powder in each nostril (total dose 16 mg). Although the extent of systemic exposure over 14 hours was similar following Breath Powered delivery of 16-mg sumatriptan powder and 20-mg liquid nasal spray (area under the curve [AUC]0-∞ 64.9 ng*hour/mL vs 61.1 ng*hour/mL), sumatriptan powder, despite a 20% lower dose, produced 27% higher peak exposure (Cmax 20.8 ng/mL vs 16.4 ng/mL) and 61% higher exposure in the first 30 minutes compared with the nasal spray (AUC0-30 minutes 5.8 ng*hour/mL vs 3.6 ng*hour/mL). The magnitude of difference is larger on a per-milligram basis. The absorption profile following standard nasal spray demonstrated bimodal peaks, consistent with lower early followed by higher later absorptions. In contrast, the profile following Breath Powered delivery showed higher early and lower late absorptions. Relative to the 100-mg oral tablet (Cmax 70.2 ng/mL, AUC0-∞, 308.8 ng*hour/mL) and 6-mg injection (Cmax 111.6 ng/mL, AUC0-∞ 128.2 ng*hour/mL), the peak and overall exposure following Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder was substantially lower.

Conclusions.—

Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder is a more efficient form of drug delivery, producing a higher peak and earlier exposure with a lower delivered dose than nasal spray and faster absorption than either nasal spray or oral administration. It also produces a significantly lower peak and total systemic exposure than oral tablet or subcutaneous injection.

Gastric stasis in migraineurs: etiology, characteristics, and clinical and therapeutic implications

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a disabling neurological disorder often complicated by gastrointestinal conditions such as gastric stasis. The association between migraine and gastric stasis has received very little attention in the literature, but the existing evidence suggests that they may share a common etiology.

RESULTS

Patients with migraine and those with gastric stasis exhibit abnormal autonomic nervous system function. Furthermore, empirical studies demonstrate that migraineurs experience significant delays in gastric emptying, both during and outside of attacks, when compared to non-migrainous controls.

CONCLUSION

More research is needed to establish the relationship between gastric stasis and migraine burden and to determine the impact of gastric stasis on migraine treatment.

Metabolic syndrome and migraine

Migraine and metabolic syndrome are highly prevalent and costly conditions. The two conditions coexist, but it is unclear what relationship may exist between the two processes. Metabolic syndrome involves a number of findings, including insulin resistance, systemic hypertension, obesity, a proinflammatory state, and a prothrombotic state. Only one study addresses migraine in metabolic syndrome, finding significant differences in the presentation of metabolic syndrome in migraineurs. However, controversy exists regarding the contribution of each individual risk factor to migraine pathogenesis and prevalence. It is unclear what treatment implications, if any, exist as a result of the concomitant diagnosis of migraine and metabolic syndrome. The cornerstone of migraine and metabolic syndrome treatments is prevention, relying heavily on diet modification, sleep hygiene, medication use, and exercise.

Gastric emptying in migraine: a comparison with functional dyspepsia

Background/Aims

Gastric stasis in migraineurs remains controversial. The aim of this study is to investigate gastric emptying (GE) time, and any associations between GE parameters and dyspeptic symptoms among patients with functional dyspepsia (FD) and migraine without any gastrointestinal symptoms during the interictal period.

Methods

We enrolled 27 migraine patients, 32 FD patients and 12 healthy people as controls, and performed GE scintigraphy as gastric function test. Gastrointestinal symptoms were evaluated in the FD and migraine.

Results

The age-adjusted mean gastric half-emptying time in FD (125.51 ± 52.55 minutes) patients was longer than in migraineurs (100.82 ± 23.94 minutes, P = 0.035) and controls (95.25 ± 23.29 minutes, P = 0.021). The percentage of gastric retention was higher in FD than in migraine. However, migraineurs did not show an obvious delayed gastric emptying or an increase of gastric retention when compared to the normal controls. The association between each dyspeptic symptom and GE parameters was not significant, but postprandial fullness and early satiety showed a tendency of delayed GE. In migraineurs, GE time did not show significant association with nausea and vomiting during interictal periods.

Conclusions

Delayed GE does not appear to be a mechanism that patients with FD and migraine have in common. Migraineurs without dyspepsia during interictal period had normal GE, and further study for association with FD should be investigated.

Innovative delivery systems for migraine: the clinical utility of a transdermal patch for the acute treatment of migraine

Migraine is a disabling, painful primary headache disorder that is associated with various combinations of neurological, gastrointestinal, autonomic and pain symptoms. Gastrointestinal disturbances associated with migraine, including nausea and vomiting, affect a majority of migraineurs and often result in a delay in taking or avoidance of pharmacological intervention. Gastric stasis and vomiting may lead to delayed or inconsistent absorption of orally administered medications. Many migraineurs awake early in the morning with their attack progressing and already associated with nausea and vomiting. As a result, there is a need for a novel, non-invasive, non-oral delivery system for fast and effective acute treatment of migraine. There are two non-oral delivery systems currently available in the US for the acute treatment of migraine: three nasal sprays and two injectable formulations. Although nasal sprays depend partially on nasal mucosal absorption, a significant amount of drug is swallowed, transits the stomach and is absorbed in the small intestine, which is not as rapid or effective a route of delivery for those migraineurs with gastric stasis. Sumatriptan is rapidly absorbed by subcutaneous injection with or without a needle, but the invasiveness and discomfort of the delivery, the high incidence of adverse events and the high recurrence rate all limit its use for many patients. Iontophoretic delivery of medication is a non-invasive transdermal approach that uses small amounts of electrical current to promote rapid movement of the ionized drug through the skin and into the systemic circulation. This delivery bypasses hepatic first-pass metabolism and also avoids gastric transit delay and slowing of small intestinal absorption associated with gastrointestinal stasis in migraineurs. Two pharmacokinetic studies have demonstrated that iontophoretic transdermal delivery of sumatriptan results in rapid and consistent achievement of therapeutic plasma concentrations. These studies also suggest that, by avoiding patient exposure to a rapid rise in and high plasma concentrations of sumatriptan as seen with injectable sumatriptan, transdermal delivery using iontophoresis may significantly reduce typical triptan-related adverse events. A large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre clinical trial showed statistically significant efficacy, good tolerability and virtually no triptan-related adverse events. Iontophoretic delivery of sumatriptan, with a novel transdermal patch device, offers patients a migraine-specific medication that is non-invasive and non-oral. Clinically, transdermal delivery provides rapid and effective relief of migraine while bypassing the gastrointestinal tract, with minimal classic triptan-related adverse effects. This unique approach facilitates the rapid absorption of this migraine-specific triptan, which should improve the chances of consistently achieving a therapeutic plasma concentration of sumatriptan, resulting in effective migraine relief.

Why pharmacokinetic differences among oral triptans have little clinical importance: a comment

Triptans, selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists, are specific drugs for the acute treatment of migraine that have the same mechanism of action. Here, it is discussed why the differences among kinetic parameters of oral triptans have proved not to be very important in clinical practice. There are three main reasons: (1) the differences among the kinetic parameters of oral triptans are smaller than what appears from their average values; (2) there is a large inter-subject, gender-dependent, and intra-subject (outside/during the attack) variability of kinetic parameters related to the rate and extent of absorption, i.e., those which are considered as critical for the response; (3) no dose-concentration–response curves have been defined and it is, therefore, impossible both to compare the kinetics of triptans, and to verify the objective importance of kinetic differences; (4) the importance of kinetic differences is outweighed by non-kinetic factors of variability of response to triptans. If no oral formulations are found that can allow more predictable pharmacokinetics, the same problems will probably also arise with new classes of drugs for the acute treatment of migraine.

Meeting acute migraine treatment needs through novel treatment formulations

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

Diagnosis and management of the primary headache disorders in the emergency department setting

Headache continues to be a frequent cause of emergency department (ED) use, accounting for 2% of all visits. Most of these headaches prove to be benign but painful exacerbations of chronic headache disorders, such as migraine, tension-type, and cluster. The goal of ED management is to provide rapid and quick relief of benign headache, without causing undue side effects, and to recognize headaches with malignant course. Although these headaches have distinct epidemiologies and clinical phenotypes, there is overlapping response to therapy; nonsteroidals, triptans, dihydroergotamine, and the antiemetic dopamine antagonists may play a therapeutic role for each of these acute headaches. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria and management strategies for the primary headache disorders.