Evaluation of the prophylactic efficacy of amitriptyline and citalopram, alone or in combination, in patients with comorbidity of depression, migraine, and tension-type headache

Consensus of the Brazilian Headache Society (SBCe) for prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine: part II

BACKGROUND

Migraine affects 1 billion people worldwide and > 30 million Brazilians; besides, it is an underdiagnosed and undertreated disorder.

OBJECTIVE

The need to disseminate knowledge about the prophylactic treatment of migraine is known, so the Brazilian Headache Society (SBCe, in the Portuguese acronym) appointed a committee of authors with the objective of establishing a consensus with recommendations on the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine based on articles from the world literature as well as from personal experience.

METHODS

Meetings were held entirely online, with the participation of 12 groups that reviewed and wrote about the pharmacological categories of drugs and, at the end, met to read and finish the document. The drug classes studied in part II of this Consensus were: antihypertensives, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, other drugs, and rational polytherapy.

RESULTS

From this list of drugs, only candesartan has been established as effective in controlling episodic migraine. Flunarizine, venlafaxine, duloxetine, and pizotifen were defined as likely to be effective, while lisinopril, enalapril, escitalopram, fluvoxamine, quetiapine, atorvastatin, simvastatin, cyproheptadine, and melatonin were possibly effective in prophylaxis of the disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an effort by the scientific community to find really effective drugs in the treatment of migraine, given the large number of drugs tested for this purpose, we still have few therapeutic options.

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.

Bioequivalence Study of Amitriptyline Hydrochloride Tablets in Healthy Chinese Volunteers Under Fasting and Fed Conditions

Purpose

This study compares the pharmacokinetic and safety profiles between a new generic and a branded reference formulation of amitriptyline hydrochloride tablets, and assesses the bioequivalence of the two products in healthy Chinese volunteers to obtain sufficient evidence for the marketing approval of the generic drug.

Materials and Methods

A randomized, open-label, two-period crossover study (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03646526) was conducted under both fasting and fed conditions in healthy Chinese volunteers (24 subjects/condition). Eligible subjects randomly received a single 25 mg dose of either the test or the reference formulation, followed by a 3-week washout period. Blood samples were collected until 144 h following administration. The pharmacokinetic parameters were acquired based on the concentration-time profiles, including the areas under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC_0-t, AUC_0-∞), the peak plasma concentration (C_max), the time to achieve C_max (T_max), and the elimination half-life (t_1/2). The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and the corresponding 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of amitriptyline were acquired for bioequivalence analysis, and values of these parameters for nortriptyline were used for comparison of therapeutic outcomes. Safety assessments included laboratory tests, physical examination, vital signs, and incidence of adverse events (AEs).

Results

The values of t_1/2 and T_max for amitriptyline were not significantly different between the test and reference products under both fasting and fed conditions (P > 0.05). The GMRs of C_max, AUC_0–t, and AUC_0-∞ between the two products, and corresponding 90% CIs, were all within the range of 80% to 125% under both fasting and fed conditions. The test and reference products were well tolerated and did not elicit serious adverse events.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that the generic and reference products were well tolerated by the subjects and bioequivalent, according to the rate and extent of the drug absorption.

Antidepressants for Preventive Treatment of Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes the pharmacology of each antidepressant class as it applies to migraine prevention, summarizes the evidence base for each medication, and describes relevant side effects and clinical considerations. Use of antidepressants for migraine prevention in clinical practice is also discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Antidepressants are commonly used as migraine preventives. Amitriptyline has the best evidence for use in migraine prevention. Nortriptyline is an alternative in patients who may not tolerate amitriptyline. The sedating effect of TCAs can be beneficial for patients with comorbid insomnia. SNRIs including venlafaxine and duloxetine also have evidence for efficacy and may be the most effective treatments in patients with comorbid depression and migraine. SSRIs including fluoxetine are not effective for most patients. The side effect burden of antidepressants can be substantial. Patients should be particularly counseled about the possibility of a withdrawal effect from SNRIs. Antidepressants are an important option for preventive treatment of migraine. Further research on the efficacy and tolerability of SNRIs as migraine preventives is needed.

Tricyclic and Tetracyclic Antidepressants for the Prevention of Frequent Episodic or Chronic Tension-Type Headache in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Tension-type headaches are a common source of pain and suffering. Our purpose was to assess the efficacy of tricyclic (TCA) and tetracyclic antidepressants in the prophylactic treatment of tension-type headache.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the ISI Web of Science, and clinical trial registries through 11 March 2017 for randomized controlled studies of TCA or tetracyclic antidepressants in the prevention of tension-type headache in adults. Data were pooled using a random effects approach.

KEY RESULTS

Among 22 randomized controlled trials, eight included a placebo comparison and 19 compared at least two active treatments. Eight studies compared TCAs to placebo, four compared TCAs to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and two trials compared TCAs to behavioral therapies. Two trials compared tetracyclics to placebo. Single trials compared TCAs to tetracyclics, buspirone, spinal manipulation, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, massage, and intra-oral orthotics. High-quality evidence suggests that TCAs were superior to placebo in reducing headache frequency (weighted mean differences (WMD): -4.8 headaches/month, 95% CI: -6.63 to -2.95) and number of analgesic medications consumed (WMD: -21.0 doses/month, 95% CI: -38.2 to -3.8). TCAs were more effective than SSRIs. Low-quality studies suggest that TCAs are superior to buspirone, but equivalent to behavioral therapy, spinal manipulation, intra-oral orthotics, and massage. Tetracyclics were no better than placebo for chronic tension-type headache.

CONCLUSIONS

Tricyclic antidepressants are modestly effective in reducing chronic tension-type headache and are superior to buspirone. In limited studies, tetracyclics appear to be ineffective in the prophylactic treatment of chronic tension-type headache.

Association Between Migraine and Suicidal Behaviors: A Nationwide Study in the USA

BACKGROUND

Recent studies show migraineurs are at an increased risk of developing suicidal behaviors, even after controlling for comorbid depression. However, previous research has not examined the impact of psychiatric mood disorders on suicidal behaviors in migraineurs within a nationally representative sample.

OBJECTIVE

A cross-sectional study was used to investigate the association between migraine and suicidal behaviors and determine whether psychiatric comorbidities modify this association in a nationwide inpatient cohort.

METHODS

We analyzed the Nationwide Inpatient Sample of hospitalizations compiled from USA billing data. Migraine, suicidal behaviors, and psychiatric disorders were identified based on the International Classification of Diseases, 9^th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes from hospitalization discharges (2007-2012). Weighted national estimates were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

156,172,826 hospitalizations were included, of which 1.4% had a migraine diagnosis and 1.6% had a diagnosis of suicidal behavior. Migraineurs had a 2.07-fold increased odds of suicidal behaviors (95%CI: 1.96-2.19) compared with non-migraineurs. We repeated analyses after stratifying by depression, anxiety, or posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Among hospitalizations with depression, migraine was associated with a 20% reduced odds of suicidal behaviors (95%CI: 0.76-0.85). Among hospitalizations without depression, migraine was associated with 2.35-fold increased odds of suicidal behaviors (95%CI: 2.20-2.51). In stratified analyses, we noted that among hospitalizations with anxiety, migraineurs had slightly increased odds of suicidal behaviors (OR: 1.07, 95%CI: 1.02-1.13). Among hospitalizations without anxiety, migraine was associated with a 2.06-fold increased odds of suicidal behaviors (95%CI: 1.94-2.20). Similarly, in analyses stratified by PTSD, migraine was not associated with an increased risk of suicidal behaviors (OR: 1.00, 95%CI: 0.94-1.07) among those with PTSD. However, the odds of suicidal behaviors were increased among hospitalizations without PTSD (OR: 1.95, 95%CI: 1.84-2.08).

CONCLUSION

Chronic conditions that do not affect the current hospitalization may not have been reported. The presence of psychiatric diagnoses influences associations of suicidal behaviors with migraine in a national inpatient sample. Migraineurs with diagnosed comorbid psychiatric disorders may be receiving care that mitigates their risk for suicidal behaviors.

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.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for the prevention of tension-type headache in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane review published in 2005 on selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for preventing migraine and tension-type headache. The original review has been split in two parts and this review now only regards tension-type headache prevention. Another updated review covers migraine. Tension-type headache is the second most common disorder worldwide and has high social and economic relevance. As serotonin and other neurotransmitters may have a role in pain mechanisms, SSRIs and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) have been evaluated for the prevention of tension-type headache.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs and SNRIs compared to placebo and other active interventions in the prevention of episodic and chronic tension-type headache in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2003, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2004), EMBASE (1994 to May 2003), and Headache Quarterly (1990 to 2003). For this update, we revised the original search strategy to reflect the broader type of intervention (SSRIs and SNRIs). We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 10) on the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to November 2014), EMBASE (1980 to November 2014), and PsycINFO (1987 to November 2014). We also checked the reference lists of retrieved articles and searched trial registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing SSRIs or SNRIs with any type of control intervention in participants 18 years and older, of either sex, with tension-type headache.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data (headache frequency, index, intensity, and duration; use of symptomatic/analgesic medication; quality of life; and withdrawals) and assessed the risk of bias of trials. The primary outcome is tension-type headache frequency, measured by the number of headache attacks or the number of days with headache per evaluation period.

MAIN RESULTS

The original review included six studies on tension-type headache. We now include eight studies with a total of 412 participants with chronic forms of tension-type headache. These studies evaluated five SSRIs (citalopram, sertraline, fluoxetine, paroxetine, fluvoxamine) and one SNRI (venlafaxine). The two new studies included in this update are placebo controlled trials, one evaluated sertraline and one venlafaxine. Six studies, already included in the previous version of this review, compared SSRIs to other antidepressants (amitriptyline, desipramine, sulpiride, mianserin). Most of the included studies had methodological and/or reporting shortcomings and lacked adequate power. Follow-up ranged between two and four months.Six studies explored the effect of SSRIs or SNRIs on tension-type headache frequency, the primary endpoint. At eight weeks of follow-up, we found no difference when compared to placebo (two studies, N = 127; mean difference (MD) -0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.95 to 2.03; I(2)= 0%) or amitriptyline (two studies, N = 152; MD 0.76, 95% CI -2.05 to 3.57; I(2)= 44%).When considering secondary outcomes, SSRIs reduce the symptomatic/analgesic medication use for acute headache attacks compared to placebo (two studies, N = 118; MD -1.87, 95% CI -2.09 to -1.65; I(2)= 0%). However, amitriptyline appeared to reduce the intake of analgesic more efficiently than SSRIs (MD 4.98, 95% CI 1.12 to 8.84; I(2)= 0%). The studies supporting these findings were considered at unclear risk of bias. We found no differences compared to placebo or other antidepressants in headache duration and intensity.SSRIs or SNRI were generally more tolerable than tricyclics. However, the two groups did not differ in terms of number of participants who withdrew due to adverse events or for other reasons (four studies, N = 257; odds ratio (OR) 1.04; 95% CI 0.41 to 2.60; I(2)= 25% and OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.38; I(2)= 0%).We did not find any study comparing SSRIs or SNRIs with pharmacological treatments other than antidepressants (e.g. botulinum toxin) or non-drug therapies (e.g. psycho-behavioural treatments, manual therapy, acupuncture).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, the new included studies have not added high quality evidence to support the use of SSRIs or venlafaxine (a SNRI) as preventive drugs for tension-type headache. Over two months of treatment, SSRIs or venlafaxine are no more effective than placebo or amitriptyline in reducing headache frequency in patients with chronic tension-type headache. SSRIs seem to be less effective than tricyclic antidepressants in terms of intake of analgesic medications. Tricyclic antidepressants are associated with more adverse events; however, this did not cause a greater number of withdrawals. No reliable information is available at longer follow-up. Our conclusion is that the use of SSRIs and venlafaxine for the prevention of chronic tension-type headache is not supported by evidence.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) for the prevention of migraine in adults

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in 2005 on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) for preventing migraine and tension-type headache. The original review has been split in two parts and this review now only regards migraine prevention. Another updated review is under development to cover tension-type headache.Migraine is a common disorder. The chronic forms are associated with disability and have a high economic impact. In view of discoveries about the role of serotonin and other neurotransmitters in pain mechanisms, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) have been evaluated for the prevention of migraine.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs and SNRIs compared to placebo and other active interventions in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review, we searched MEDLINE (1966 to January 2004), EMBASE (1994 to May 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2003, Issue 4), and Headache Quarterly (1990 to 2003). For this update, we applied a revised search strategy to reflect the broader type of intervention (SSRIs and SNRIs). We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 10), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2014), EMBASE (1980 to November 2014), and PsycINFO (1987 to November 2014). We also checked the reference lists of retrieved articles and searched trial registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing SSRIs or SNRIs with any type of control intervention in participants 18 years and older of either sex with migraine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data (migraine frequency, index, intensity, and duration; use of symptomatic/analgesic medication; days off work; quality of life; mood improvement; cost-effectiveness; and adverse events) and assessed the risk of bias of trials. The primary outcome of this updated review is migraine frequency.

MAIN RESULTS

The original review included eight studies on migraine. Overall, we now include 11 studies on five SSRIs and one SNRI with a total of 585 participants. Six studies were placebo-controlled, four compared a SSRI or SNRI to amitriptyline, and one was a head-to-head comparison (escitalopram versus venlafaxine). Most studies had methodological or reporting shortcomings (or both): all studies were at unclear risk of selection and reporting bias. Follow-up rarely extended beyond three months. The lack of adequate power of most of the studies is also a major concern.Few studies explored the effect of SSRIs or SNRIs on migraine frequency, the primary endpoint. Two studies with unclear reporting compared SSRIs and SNRIs to placebo, suggesting a lack of evidence for a difference. Two studies compared SSRIs or SNRIs versus amitriptyline and found no evidence for a difference in terms of migraine frequency (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.72 to 0.80; I(2) = 72%), or other secondary outcomes such as migraine intensity and duration.SSRIs or SNRIs were generally more tolerable than tricyclics. However, the two groups did not differ in terms of the number of participants who withdrew due to adverse advents or for other reasons (one study, odds ratio (OR) 0.39, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.50 and OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.34).We did not find studies comparing SSRIs or SNRIs with pharmacological treatments other than antidepressants (e.g. antiepileptics and anti-hypertensives).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Since the last version of this review, the new included studies have not added high quality evidence to support the use of SSRIs or venlafaxine as preventive drugs for migraine. There is no evidence to consider SSRIs or venlafaxine as more effective than placebo or amitriptyline in reducing migraine frequency, intensity, and duration over two to three months of treatment. No reliable information is available at longer-term follow-up. Our conclusion is that the use of SSRIs and SNRIs for migraine prophylaxis is not supported by evidence.

Polytherapy for migraine prophylaxis

Migraine is a chronic neurological disorder with episodic manifestations, progressive in some individuals. Preventive treatment is recommended for patients with frequent or disabling attacks. A sizeable proportion of migraineurs in need of preventive treatment does not significantly benefit from monotherapy. This short review evaluates the role of pharmacological polytherapy in migraine prevention.

Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Systematic reviews have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants. Citalopram, one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) introduced in the market, is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics, heterocyclics, other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to February 2012. No language restriction was applied. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to citalopram versus any other antidepressants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), patient acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials compared citalopram with other antidepressants (such as tricyclics, heterocyclics, SSRIs and other antidepressants, either conventional ones, such as mirtazapine, venlafaxine and reboxetine, or non-conventional, like hypericum). Citalopram was shown to be significantly less effective than escitalopram in achieving acute response (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 2.02), but more effective than paroxetine (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.96) and reboxetine (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91). Significantly fewer patients allocated to citalopram withdrew from trials due to adverse events compared with patients allocated to tricyclics (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.78) and fewer patients allocated to citalopram reported at least one side effect than reboxetine or venlafaxine (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.97 and OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.88, respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy, tolerability and acceptability. Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics, reboxetine and venlafaxine, however, it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram. As with most systematic reviews in psychopharmacology, the potential for overestimation of treatment effect due to sponsorship bias and publication bias should be borne in mind when interpreting review findings. Economic analyses were not reported in the included studies, however, cost effectiveness information is needed in the field of antidepressant trials.

Amitriptyline in the prophylactic treatment of migraine and chronic daily headache

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND

Amitriptyline is one of the most commonly used medications in migraine prophylaxis. There have been relatively few placebo-controlled studies of amitriptyline in migraine prophylaxis or in treatment of chronic daily headache (CDH). This report deals with a large placebo-controlled trial of amitriptyline vs placebo of 20 weeks duration that included subjects with intermittent migraine (IM) as well as CDH. The study was carried out between 1976 and 1979; however, results have never been fully reported.

METHODS

Patients with a history of migraine as defined by the 1962 Ad Hoc Committee report were recruited for this study. Subjects had at least 2 headaches per month, and no limit was placed on the number of headaches per month that could be experienced. The study format included a 4-week baseline period (Period A) in which all subjects received placebo in a dose of 2 pills per day for one week, 3 pills per day for one week and then 4 pills per day for 2 weeks. Subjects with at least 2 migraine headaches in this period were then entered into Period B and randomized into either amitriptyline or placebo tracks. Medication consisted of identical tablets containing either 25 mg amitriptyline or placebo. Period B was 4 weeks in duration with dose titration identical to Period A. The dose could be reduced if necessary to reduce side effects. The minimum dose was one pill per day. Period C was a 12-week maintenance or stabilization period in which the patient continued the dose established by week 8 with visits at weeks 12, 16, and 20. Patients kept a headache calendar that was used for data collection. Headache frequency (per month), severity, and duration (hours) were the primary measurement parameters employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

For the entire group, 391 subjects were entered into Period A, 338 were randomized into Period B, 317 (81%) subjects completed the first post-randomization visit (8 weeks), 255 (65%) completed week 12, 210 (54%) completed week 16, and 186 (48%) completed week 20. Using headache frequency and evaluating parameters of (a) improvement, (b) no change, or (c) worsening relative to baseline, there was a significant improvement in headache frequency for amitriptyline over placebo at 8 weeks (P = .018) but not at 12, 16, or 20 weeks. When amitriptyline and placebo patients were compared for headache frequency at 8, 12, 16, and 20 weeks to their own placebo stabilization period at 4 weeks, statistically significant improvement vs worsening was seen in headache frequency at each evaluation point for both amitriptyline and placebo groups (P ≤ .01) reaching 50% reporting a decrease in frequency in each group and approximately 10% reporting worsening by week 20. There were no significant differences in headache severity or duration between amitriptyline and placebo groups at anytime during the study. Within the study sample, there were 36 amitriptyline and 22 placebo subjects who had headaches ≥ 17 days/month that fit the current definition of CDH by the Silberstein-Lipton criteria. These were analyzed separately as a subgroup for comparison of amitriptyline vs placebo using a metric of (1) no change or worsening; (2) up to a 50% improvement; and (3) ≥ 50% improvement in headache frequency. Amitriptyline was superior to placebo in number with improvement in frequency of ≥ 50% at 8 weeks (25% vs 5% [P = .031]) and at 16 weeks (46% vs 9% [P = .043]). There was a trend for amitriptyline to be superior to placebo at 12 and 20 weeks but this did not reach significance.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, using headache frequency as the primary metric, for the entire group, amitriptyline was superior to placebo in migraine prophylaxis at 8 weeks but, because of a robust placebo response, not at subsequent time points. For the subgroup with CDH, amitriptyline was statistically significantly superior to placebo at 8 weeks and 16 weeks with a similar but nonsignificant trend at 12 and 20 weeks. Compared with placebo amitriptyline is effective in CDH. Amitriptyline was also significantly effective in IM compared intragroup to its own baseline; however, placebo was equally effective in the same analysis. The reason for the robust placebo response in the IM group is not clear, but has been occasionally reported.

Tricyclic antidepressants and headaches: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and relative adverse effects of tricyclic antidepressants in the treatment of migraine, tension-type, and mixed headaches.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Trials Registry, and PsycLIT. Studies reviewed Randomised trials of adults receiving tricyclics as only treatment for a minimum of four weeks.

DATA EXTRACTION

Frequency of headaches (number of headache attacks for migraine and number of days with headache for tension-type headaches), intensity of headache, and headache index.

RESULTS

37 studies met the inclusion criteria. Tricyclics significantly reduced the number of days with tension-type headache and number of headache attacks from migraine than placebo (average standardised mean difference -1.29, 95% confidence interval -2.18 to -0.39 and -0.70, -0.93 to -0.48) but not compared with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (-0.80, -2.63 to 0.02 and -0.20, -0.60 to 0.19). The effect of tricyclics increased with longer duration of treatment (β=-0.11, 95% confidence interval -0.63 to -0.15; P<0.0005). Tricyclics were also more likely to reduce the intensity of headaches by at least 50% than either placebo (tension-type: relative risk 1.41, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.89; migraine: 1.80, 1.24 to 2.62) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (1.73, 1.34 to 2.22 and 1.72, 1.15 to 2.55). Tricyclics were more likely to cause adverse effects than placebo (1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.11 to 2.12) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (2.22, 1.52 to 3.32), including dry mouth (P<0.0005 for both), drowsiness (P<0.0005 for both), and weight gain (P<0.001 for both), but did not increase dropout rates (placebo: 1.22, 0.83 to 1.80, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: 1.16, 0.81 to 2.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Tricyclic antidepressants are effective in preventing migraine and tension-type headaches and are more effective than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, although with greater adverse effects. The effectiveness of tricyclics seems to increase over time.

The use of antidepressants for headache prophylaxis

The focus of this review is on the efficacy of antidepressants as preventive treatments for migraine and chronic tension-type headache (TTH). Pharmacologic prophylaxis may be indicated for patients with frequent headaches, who respond insufficiently to acute therapies, or for whom medication overuse is a concern. The well-documented efficacy of the tricyclic antidepressant amitriptyline, both for migraine and chronic TTH, has been followed by widespread use of other antidepressants for headache prophylaxis. Although antidepressants in general share comparable efficacy for the treatment of depressive disorders, their efficacy as headache preventives varies widely. Evidence supporting use of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors as headache preventives is poor; their use should be reserved for treating comorbid depression in a patient who also has a headache disorder. Small randomized trials of venlafaxine indicate preliminary efficacy both for migraine and tension-type headache. Evidence for other antidepressants is lacking. Although antidepressants are often prescribed to headache patients under the assumption that the prescribed agent also will be effective in reducing symptoms of comorbid depression, the majority of studies have failed to find a strong relationship between depression symptoms and headache improvement. Suggestions for future research are discussed.

Lack of benefit for prophylactic drugs of tension-type headache in adults: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of prophylactic drugs for chronic tension-type headache (TTH) in adults.

METHODS

We searched several databases from inception to August 2009. We selected randomized trials that reported the effects of prophylactic drugs in patients with TTH, with a pain measure (intensity, frequency, duration, improvement or index) as outcome measure. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data from the original reports. A data synthesis was carried out according to the type of medication.

RESULTS

We included 44 trials (3399 patients), of which 15 (34.1%) were considered to be of low risk of bias. Main types of medications studied were antidepressants, muscle relaxants, benzodiazepines and vasodilator agents. Overall, antidepressants were no more effective than placebo, and there were no significant differences between different types of antidepressants. There was conflicting evidence about the effectiveness of benzodiazepines and vasodilator agents compared with placebo. Furthermore, there was limited evidence that propranolol had negative effects on depression in TTH patients, when compared with placebo or biofeedback. There was no evidence concerning the effectiveness of muscle relaxants alone or 5-HT receptor agonist compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, antidepressants were no more effective on headache intensity or frequency and analgesic use than placebo. Propranolol seemed to have negative effects on depression in TTH patients when compared with placebo or biofeedback. No evidence was found for the use of muscle relaxants alone or 5-HT receptor agonist.

Whites and African-Americans in Headache Specialty Clinics Respond Equally Well to Treatment

This study sought to determine if Whites and African-Americans respond similarly to headache treatment administered in ‘real-world’ headache specialty treatment clinics. Using a naturalistic, longitudinal design, 284 patients receiving treatment for headache disorders completed 30–day daily diaries that assessed headache frequency and severity at pretreatment and 6–month follow-up and also provided data on their headache disability and quality of life at pretreatment and 1–, 2– and 6–month follow-up. Controlling for socioeconomic status and psychiatric comorbidity, hierarchical linear models found that African-Americans and Whites reported significant reductions in headache frequency and disability and improvements in life quality over the 6–month treatment period. African-Americans, unlike Whites, also reported significant decreases in headache severity. Nevertheless, Africans-Americans had significantly more frequent and disabling headaches and lower quality of life after treatment relative to Whites. Although Whites and African Americans responded favourably to headache treatments, more efficacious treatments are needed given the elevated level of headache frequency that remained in both racial groups following treatment.

Pharmacotherapy and Lifestyle Interventions for Tension-Type Headaches

The objective of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacotherapy and lifestyle interventions for tension-type headaches. Literature was obtained through a MEDLINE (1966 to April 2008) search and a bibliographic review of published articles. Key terms searched included tension-type headaches, chronic tension-type headaches, pharmacotherapy, and lifestyle therapy. The search was further limited to the English language. Tension-type headaches are the most common and least studied primary headache disorder. These headaches are characterized by mild to moderate bilateral pain that is described as dull, aching, and bandlike. Episodic tension-type headaches may be treated with mild analgesics such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen; although treatment should be individualized, data suggest that NSAIDs may be considered first line. Chronic and frequent episodic tension-type headaches often require prophylactic therapy. Although tricyclic antidepressants are considered the drugs of choice for chronic tension-type headaches, preliminary trials with venlafaxine, mirtazapine, tizanidine, and topiramate have shown promise. Lifestyle interventions such as physical therapy, behavioral therapy, and acupuncture are often employed, despite the lack of sound clinical evidence to support their use. Preliminary data support the combination of a tricyclic antidepressant and behavioral therapy for chronic tension-type headache.

Optimizing prophylactic treatment of migraine: Subtypes and patient matching

Advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine have resulted in important breakthroughs in treatment. For example, understanding of the role of serotonin in the cerebrovascular circulation has led to the development of triptans for the acute relief of migraine headaches, and the identification of cortical spreading depression as an early central event associated wih migraine has brought renewed interest in antiepileptic drugs for migraine prophylaxis. However, migraine still remains inadequately treated. Indeed, it is apparent that migraine is not a single disease but rather a syndrome that can manifest itself in a variety of pathological conditions. The consequences of this may be that treatment needs to be matched to particular patients. Clinical research needs to be devoted to identifying which sort of patients benefit best from which treatments, particularly in the field of prophylaxis. We propose four patterns of precipitating factors (adrenergic, serotoninergic, menstrual, and muscular) which may be used to structure migraine prophylaxis. Finally, little is known about long-term outcome in treated migraine. It is possible that appropriate early prophylaxis may modify the long-term course of the disease and avoid late complications.

A double-blind randomized controlled trial of topiramate and amitriptyline either alone or in combination for the prevention of migraine

OBJECTIVE

Effectiveness of antidepressants and antiepileptic drugs has already been demonstrated for migraine prophylaxis as monotherapy. In the present study, the efficacy and tolerability of amitriptyline and topiramate combination is examined in the prevention of migraine attacks, in comparison to the monotherapy of each drug.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients with migraine headache with or without aura are included in this single-center, double-blind, randomized, and controlled trial. Patients were assigned to receive topiramate alone, amitriptyline alone or a combination of these drugs. Frequency, duration and severity of migraine attacks, accompanied symptoms, depressive state, consumption of medications, side effects and patient satisfaction were evaluated.

RESULTS

All treatments resulted in significant improvements in all efficacy measures (p<0.001 for all comparisons). However, patients receiving combination treatment had higher patient satisfaction compared with other groups both at 8 and 12 weeks (p=0.006 and p<0.001, respectively). Patients receiving amitriptyline and combination treatments had better depression scores compared with the topiramate group. Combination group had fewer side effects with a less amount of amitriptyline consumption.

CONCLUSION

Amitriptyline and topiramate combination may be beneficial for patients with migraine and comorbid depression, particularly in terms of side effects and associated displeasure due to monotherapy.

Pharmacological approaches to managing migraine and associated comorbidities--clinical considerations for monotherapy versus polytherapy

Comorbidity is defined as an illness that occurs more frequently in association with a specific disorder than would be found as a coincidental association in the general population. Conditions that are frequently comorbid with migraine include depression, anxiety, stroke, epilepsy, sleep disorders, and other pain disorders. In addition, many common illnesses occur concomitantly (at the same time) with migraine and influence the treatment choice. Migraine management, and especially migraine prevention, can be challenging when patients have comorbid or concomitant illnesses. The objectives of this initiative are to review the literature on managing patients who have migraine and common comorbidities, present additional clinical approaches for care of these difficult patients, and evaluate the areas in which research is needed to establish evidence-based guidelines for the management of migraine with associated comorbid conditions.

Pharmacokinetics and interactions of headache medications, part II: prophylactic treatments

The present part II review highlights pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (excluding those of minor severity) of medications used in prophylactic treatment of the main primary headaches (migraine, tension-type and cluster headache). The principles of pharmacokinetics and metabolism, and the interactions of medications for acute treatment are examined in part I. The overall goal of this series of two reviews is to increase the awareness of physicians, primary care providers and specialists regarding pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of headache medications. The aim of prophylactic treatment is to reduce the frequency of headache attacks using beta-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, antidepressants, antiepileptics, lithium, serotonin antagonists, corticosteroids and muscle relaxants, which must be taken daily for long periods. During treatment the patient often continues to take symptomatic drugs for the attack, and may need other medications for associated or new-onset illnesses. DDIs can, therefore, occur. As a whole, DDIs of clinical relevance concerning prophylactic drugs are a limited number. Their effects can be prevented by starting the treatment with low dosages, which should be gradually increased depending on response and side effects, while frequently monitoring the patient and plasma levels of other possible coadministered drugs with a narrow therapeutic range. Most headache medications are substrates of CYP2D6 (e.g., beta-blockers, antidepressants) or CYP3A4 (e.g., calcium-channel blockers, selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, corticosteroids). The inducers and, especially, the inhibitors of these isoenzymes should be carefully coadministered.