Prophylaxis of migraine headache

Efficacy of Desvenlafaxine in Reducing Migraine Frequency and Severity: A Retrospective Study

Background: Migraine is characterized by sudden acute episodes of pain, with a global prevalence of 18% among all age groups. It is the second leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Prophylactic treatment is important in managing migraine; however, its efficacy and safety are debated. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of desvenlafaxine in female patients with migraine. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational case study involving 10 women diagnosed with migraine who were treated with desvenlafaxine. We measured the number of migraine days per month, average headache duration in minutes, headache severity using a visual analog scale, use of acute medications, and frequency of acute medication use per week. Results: Desvenlafaxine significantly reduced the number of migraine days from 14.70 ± 3.68 at baseline to 2.50 ± 2.50 at follow-up (p < 0.05). The average headache duration dropped from 131.25 ± 32.81 min to 52.50 ± 44.64 min. Headache severity scores improved from 6.80 ± 1.49 at baseline to 0.80 ± 0.92 at follow up, the frequency of acute medication use per week reduced from 3.30 ± 1.49 at baseline to 0.80 ± 0.92, and the frequency of acute medication use decreased from 3.30 ± 1.49 times per week to 0.80 ± 0.92. Conclusions: Desvenlafaxine shows potential as an effective prophylactic therapy for migraine. Larger-scale studies are necessary to further explore its benefits.

Comparison of the efficacy of propranolol versus amitriptyline as monotherapy for prophylaxis of migraine

Background

Approximately 15% of migraine sufferers need preventative medicine because they have more than two episodes each month. Migraine is a regular, persistent condition that frequently makes victims helpless. Numerous drugs from various classes have so far been used in migraine prophylaxis. Their effectiveness is recurrently overshadowed by their side effects because they must be used for a long time, which occasionally necessitates stopping the drug.

Materials and Methods

In the tertiary care teaching hospital's department of medicine, a prospective, comparative, open-label study was initiated. Two groups of 80 patients were randomly chosen. For 3 months, the 40 patients in Group A were given a tablet of amitriptyline 10 mg once daily, whereas the 40 patients in Group B were given a tablet of propranolol 20 mg once a day. At the conclusion of the fourth, eighth, and twelfth weeks, the patients' own self-assessment migraine diary and a 4-point pain scale were used to grade the intensity of the headaches.

Results

As a result, in Group A, the mean migraine attack severity in periods 1 and 2 was 5.88 2.69 and 5.41 2.48, respectively. In Group B, the mean was 5.15 2.75 in period 1 and 5.66 2.78 in period 2, respectively. The average length of a migraine attack in Group A was 20.30 5.61 h in period 1 and 16.75 5.23 h in period 2. In Group B, the mean was 16.59 3.21 in period 1 and 18.78 5.14 in period 2. Between groups A and B, there was a statistically significant difference.

Conclusion

The average number of migraine attacks reduced in the amitriptyline and propranolol groups as the treatment duration increased. Amitriptyline is a popular medication with established effectiveness and manageable levels of negative side effects. It is the tricyclic antidepressant that is most frequently used to prevent headaches. When administered for migraine prevention, it generates a quick response within 3 months. Propranolol is less effective than amitriptyline at reducing the frequency, length, and severity of episodes.

Headache Management in Individuals with Brain Tumor

Headache occurs commonly in individuals diagnosed with cerebral neoplasm. Though the features of a brain tumor-associated headache may vary, a progressive nature of headache and a change in headache phenotype from a prior primary headache disorder often are identified. Pathophysiologic mechanisms proposed for headache associated with brain tumor include headache related to traction on pain-sensitive structures, activation of central and peripheral pain processes, and complications from surgical, chemotherapeutic and/or radiotherapy treatment(s). Optimization of headache management is important for an individual's quality of life. Treatments are based upon patient-specific goals of care and may include tumor-targeted medical and surgical interventions, as well as a multimodal headache treatment approach incorporating acute and preventive medications, nutraceuticals, neuromodulation devices, behavioral interventions, anesthetic nerve blocks, and lifestyles changes.

ACE inhibitors and their interaction with systems and molecules involved in metabolism

The main function of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is the regulation of blood pressure; therefore, researchers have focused on its study to treat cardiovascular and renal diseases. One of the most widely used treatments derived from the study of RAAS, is the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi). Since it was discovered, the main target of ACEi has been the cardiovascular and renal systems. However, being the RAAS expressed locally in several specialized tissues and cells such as pneumocytes, hepatocytes, spleenocytes, enterocytes, adipocytes, and neurons the effect of inhibitors has expanded, because it is expected that RAAS has a role in the specific function of those cells. Many chronic degenerative diseases compromise the correct function of those organs, and in most of them, the RAAS is overactivated. Therefore, the use of ACEi must exert a benefit on an impaired system. Accordingly, the objective of this review is to present a brief overview of the cardiovascular and renal actions of ACEi and its effects in organs that are not the classic targets of ACEi that carry on glucose and lipid metabolism.

Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of Add-on Alpha-Lipoic Acid on Migraine Prophylaxis in an Adolescent Population: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Nutraceuticals like alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) may have potential benefits as prophylactic agents for adolescent migraine, with fewer adverse events than existing medications. The present study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of add-on ALA for prophylaxis in adolescent migraine. A randomized, open-label, add-on clinical trial was conducted with 60 adolescent migraineurs, who were randomized to receive flunarizine or flunarizine with an add-on ALA. A clinical evaluation of the frequency and severity of migraine, responder rate, Pediatric Migraine Disability Assessment (PedMIDAS) scoring, serum thiol, and serum calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) was performed both at baseline and following 12 weeks of treatment. The frequency of acute attacks of migraine decreased significantly (P = .001) in the test group compared with the control group. The responder rate was found to be significantly higher (80%) in the test group than in the control group (33.3%) (P = .001). The mean monthly migraine headache days in the test group showed a significant reduction (-7.7 days, 95%CI -9.1 to -6.3 days; P = .010). The severity of acute migraine attacks (mild, moderate, severe) also showed a significant reduction in the test group (P = .001). PedMIDAS scores showed significant improvement in the test group (P = .021), in comparison with the control group. Serum thiol levels were significantly increased in the test group (18 mmol/L, 95%CI 13.5 to 36.1 mmol/L; P = .001). Serum CGRP levels showed a significant reduction with adjunctive ALA therapy (-122.4 pg/mL, 95%CI -142.3 to -89.0 pg/mL; P = .006). Add-on ALA with flunarizine as a prophylactic agent for migraine in adolescents can improve clinical outcomes by improving clinical and biochemical parameters.

Non-CGRP Antagonist/Non-Triptan Options for Migraine Disease Treatment: Clinical Considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although the association between CGRP and migraine disease is well-known and studied, therapies can target other pathways to minimize migraine symptoms. It is important to understand the role of these medications as options for migraine treatment and the varied mechanisms by which symptoms can be addressed. In the present investigation, the role of non-CGRP antagonist/non-triptan options for migraine disease therapy is reviewed, including NSAIDs, ß-blockers, calcium channel blockers, antidepressants, and antiepileptics. Pharmacologic therapies for both acute symptoms and prophylaxis are evaluated, and their adverse effects are compared.

RECENT FINDINGS

At present, the Food and Drug Association has approved the beta-blockers propranolol and timolol and the anti-epileptic drugs topiramate and divalproex sodium for migraine prevention. Clinicians have other options for evidence-based treatment of episodic migraine attacks. Treatment decisions should consider contraindications, the effectiveness of alternatives, and potential side effects. NSAIDs are effective for the acute treatment of migraine exacerbations with caution for adverse effects such as gastrointestinal upset and renal symptoms. Beta-blockers are effective for migraine attack prophylaxis but are associated with dizziness and fatigue and are contraindicated in patients with certain co-morbidities, including asthma, congestive heart failure, and abnormal cardiac rhythms. Calcium channel blockers do not show enough evidence to be recommended as migraine attack prophylactic therapy. The anti-epileptic drugs topiramate and divalproex sodium and antidepressants venlafaxine and amitriptyline are effective for migraine exacerbation prophylaxis but have associated side effects. The decision for pharmacologic management should ultimately be made following consideration of risk vs. benefit and discussion between patient and physician.

The sense of stopping migraine prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

Migraine prophylactic therapy has changed over recent years with the development and approval of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway. As new therapies emerged, leading headache societies have been providing guidelines on the initiation and escalation of such therapies. However, there is a lack of robust evidence looking at the duration of successful prophylaxis and the effects of therapy discontinuation. In this narrative review we explore both the biological and clinical rationale for prophylactic therapy discontinuation to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Three different literature search strategies were conducted for this narrative review. These include i) stopping rules in comorbidities of migraine in which overlapping preventives are prescribed, notably depression and epilepsy; ii) stopping rules of oral treatment and botox; iii) stopping rules of antibodies targeting the CGRP (receptor). Keywords were utilized in the following databases: Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core collection, Cochran Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar.

DISCUSSION

Reasons to guide decision-making in stopping prophylactic migraine therapies include adverse events, efficacy failure, drug holiday following long-term administration, and patient-specific reasons. Certain guidelines contain both positive and negative stopping rules. Following withdrawal of migraine prophylaxis, migraine burden may return to pre-treatment level, remain unchanged, or lie somewhere in-between. The current suggestion to discontinue CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after 6 to 12 months is based on expert opinion, as opposed to robust scientific evidence. Current guidelines advise the clinician to assess the success of CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after three months. Based on excellent tolerability data and the absence of scientific data, we propose if no other reasons apply, to stop the use of mAbs when the number of migraine days decreases to four or fewer migraine days per month. There is a higher likelihood of developing side effects with oral migraine preventatives, and so we suggest stopping these drugs according to the national guidelines if they are well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Translational and basic studies are warranted to investigate the long-term effects of a preventive drug after its discontinuation, starting from what is known about the biology of migraine. In addition, observational studies and, eventually, clinical trials focusing on the effect of discontinuation of migraine prophylactic therapies, are essential to substantiate evidence-based recommendations on stopping rules for both oral preventives and CGRP(-receptor) targeted therapies in migraine.

Tolerability of pharmacological agents in the treatment of headache following brain injury: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

While systematic reviews have examined medication effectiveness for post-traumatic headache (PTH), they have not assessed tolerability.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a scoping review to characterize the adverse effects of pharmacotherapy for PTH.

METHODS

CINAHL, CMA Infobase, Cochrane Library, Embase, Epistemonikos, MEDLINE, PEDro, PsycInfo, Scopus, SportDiscus, TRIP and the University of York Center for Reviews and Dissemination were searched. Studies meeting these criteria were included 1) English language, 2) involved humans with traumatic brain injury (TBI), 3) a medication for PTH was administered and 4) reported tolerability outcomes. Author(s), publication year, country of origin, study design, sample demographics, medication type, comparator, dose, treatment duration, adverse effect type and rate, discontinuation rate, and effectiveness outcomes were extracted.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2941 records; 11 studies were included (n = 324 subjects). All subjects had mild TBI except for one with moderate TBI. The following therapies were examined 1) abortive (dihydroergotamine N = 1; metoclopramide N = 1; indomethacin N = 3), 2) prophylactic (divalproex sodium N = 1; amantadine N = 1; erenumab N = 2; amitriptyline N = 2). No serious adverse effects occurred. Observed adverse effects overlap with common symptoms of TBI.

CONCLUSION

The unique needs of people with TBI must be considered when instituting pharmacotherapy. More studies specifically evaluating medication tolerability in PTH are needed.

Beneficial Extracardiac Effects of Cardiovascular Medications

Cardiovascular diseases are the most common cause of death worldwide, with cardiovascular medications being amongst the most common medications prescribed. These medications have diverse effects on the heart, vascular system, as well as other tissues and organ systems. The extra cardiovascular effects have been found to be of use in the treatment of non-cardiovascular diseases and pathologies. Minoxidil is used to manage systemic hypertension with its well-known side effect of hirsutism used to treat alopecia and baldness. Sildenafil was originally investigated as a treatment option for systemic hypertension; however, its side effect of penile erection led to it being widely used for erectile dysfunction. Alpha-1 blockers such as terazosin are indicated to treat systemic hypertension but are more commonly used for benign prostatic hyperplasia and post-traumatic stress disorder. Beta blockers are the mainstay treatment for congestive heart failure and systemic hypertension but have been found useful to help in patients with intention tremors as well as prophylaxis of migraines. Similarly, calcium channel blockers are indicated in medical expulsion therapy for ureteric calculi in addition to their cardiovascular indications. Thiazides are commonly used for treating systemic hypertension and as diuretics. Thiazides can cause hypocalciuria and hypercalcemia. This side effect has led to thiazides being used to treat idiopathic hypercalciuria and associated nephrolithiasis. Spironolactone is commonly utilized in treating heart failure and as a diuretic for edema. It's well described anti-androgen side effects have been used for acne vulgaris and hirsutism in polycystic ovarian syndrome. This review article discusses how the various extracardiovascular effects of commonly used cardiovascular medications are put to use in managing non-cardiovascular conditions.

Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or intracranial aneurysm? A case report

BACKGROUND

Mental disorders are a common finding among patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms.

CASE

The current case concerns a young man with an anterior communicating artery aneurysm who was misdiagnosed with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder due to his significant psychosis and mood episodes. Having undergone surgery on the unruptured intracranial aneurysm, the patient's psychiatric symptoms disappeared, and he maintained a stable mood during the 3-year postoperative period.

DISCUSSION

The case is indicative of the need to consider the possibility of organic brain lesions in patients with first episodes of psychiatric presentations.

Preventive Oral Treatment of Episodic Migraine: An Overview

Background

Migraine is a common primary headache disorder and Episodic migraine is characterized by the occurrence of up to 14 headache days in a month. The preventive treatment of migraine is useful in patients with frequent migraine attacks, impaired activities of daily living, failure of acute pain management, disabling aura and limitations in the use of acute treatment. It is aimed at reducing headache frequency and intensity, improve response to acute treatment of migraine and improve the quality of life.

Aim

To analyze the evidence for the efficacy and tolerability of preventive oral drugs used in the management of episodic migraine.

Methods

A narrative review of the references were reviewed by searching the literature for the articles published in PubMed in English language using all the following MeSH keywords "preventive treatment", "preventive oral treatment", AND "episodic migraine", "migraine".

Results

Out of articles identified in the search, 38 articles were reviewed for evidence and summarized. The various oral drugs used in the prevention of episodic migraine are antihypertensives (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers and Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/Angiotensin receptor blockers), antidepressants (tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors), antiepileptic drugs (valproic acid, topiramate, lamotrigine) and other miscellaneous agents. HURT questionnaire and HALT 30 index are useful in assessing response to treatment in the follow up of migraine patients.

Conclusion

An appropriately chosen oral drug is useful in the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. In patients, who fail to respond to the preventive treatment, it is essential to review the diagnosis of migraine, titrate the dosage and duration of preventive treatment and ensure patient compliance. In those patients who fail to respond to monotherapy, polytherapy is a useful option to be considered.

Does atorvastatin have augmentative effects with sodium valproate in prevention of migraine with aura attacks? A triple-blind controlled clinical trial

Background

Migraine is a painful and disabling nervous disorder which negatively affects the quality of life. Migraineurs may suffer from a generalized vasomotor dysfunction. Statins improve vasomotor and vascular function, with their pleiotropic effects. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of adding Atorvastatin to prophylactic regimen in better control of migraine with aura.

Methods

This triple-blind controlled clinical trial was on 68 patients with migraine with aura. An interval of at least 1 month was given to evaluate vitamin D3 level and eligibility. In patients with vitamin D3 deficiency, the correction with vitamin D supplementation was provided. The patients were randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin 20 mg plus sodium valproate 500 mg or placebo plus sodium valproate 500 mg once a day for 2 months. The patients were evaluated based for the number of attacks and pain severity based on Visual Analogue Scale.

Results

There was a significant (p = 0.0001) improvement in severity of pain and number of migraine attacks by adding Atorvastin to the prophylactic regimen of patients with migraine with aura. After controlling for variable parameters, the differences between two arms of the study was yet statistically significant (p = 0.0001). A significant number of participants in intervention group were satisfied by their treatment (p = 0.001) with no remarkable side effects (P = 0.315).

Conclusions

Adding atorvastatin to migraine with aura preventive regimen may help reduce the number of acute attacks and pain severity without causing considerable side effects and led to a better patient satisfaction.

Trial registration

IRCT20180106038242N1. Registered: 7 February 2018.

Sumatriptan as abortive treatment in cyclic vomiting syndrome: A cross-sectional study

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is characterized by episodic vomiting and shares similarities with migraine headache. Guidelines recommend using triptans as abortive therapy in CVS, but there are limited data on its efficacy. Methods: We thus sought to characterize sumatriptan use and performed a cross-sectional study of adults with CVS episodes within the previous 6 months. Questionnaires about demographics, clinical characteristics, and response to sumatriptan (defined as >50% reduction in symptoms) were administered via e-mail. We investigated differences between responders and nonresponders, using χ 2 and Student’s t test. Results: Of 101 participants (age 41 ± 15 years, 74% female, 83% Caucasian), 39 (38%) used sumatriptan during their last CVS attack. Most reported an improvement in nausea (55%), vomiting (59%), and abdominal pain (43%) within 2 h and at 24 h (67%, 73%, and 67%) respectively. Eighteen (46%) reported that sumatriptan helped them avoid emergency department visits and 20 (51%) avoided being hospitalized. Nonresponse to sumatriptan was associated with depression ( p = 0.01), current cannabis use ( p = 0.02), use of benzodiazepines ( p = 0.04), and opioids (0.02) during an episode. No serious side effects were noted. Conclusions: Sumatriptan use reduced symptoms of CVS but did not abort them. Prospective studies to determine its independent effects are needed.

Pharmacological options for the treatment of chronic migraine pain

Migraine is a debilitating neurological condition with symptoms typically consisting of unilateral and pulsating headache, sensitivity to sensory stimuli, nausea, and vomiting. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that migraine is the third most prevalent medical disorder and second most disabling neurological condition in the world. There are several options for preventive migraine treatments that include, but are not limited to, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, botulinum toxins, NSAIDs, riboflavin, and magnesium. Patients may also benefit from adjunct nonpharmacological options in the comprehensive prevention of migraines, such as cognitive behavior therapy, relaxation therapies, biofeedback, lifestyle guidance, and education. Preventative therapies are an essential component of the overall approach to the pharmacological treatment of migraine. Comparative studies of newer therapies are needed to help patients receive the best treatment option for chronic migraine pain.

The Role of Magnesium in Pathophysiology and Migraine Treatment

Migraine is one of the most common recurrent types of headache and is the seventh cause of disability. This neurological disorder is characterized by having pain in head and other various symptoms such as nausea, emesis, photophobia, phonophobia, and sometimes visual sensory disorders. Magnesium (Mg) is a necessary ion for human body and has a crucial role in health and life maintenance. One of the main roles of Mg is to conserve neurons electric potential. Therefore, magnesium deficiency can cause neurological complications. Migraine is usually related to low amounts of Mg in serum and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Deficits in magnesium have significant role in the pathogenesis of migraine. Mg has been extensively used in migraine prophylaxis and treatment. This review summarizes the role of Mg in migraine pathogenesis and the potential utilizations of Mg in the prevention and treatment of migraine with the emphasis on transdermal magnesium delivery.

Beta-blockers for the prevention of headache in adults, a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Headaches are a common source of pain and suffering. The study's purpose was to assess beta-blockers efficacy in preventing migraine and tension-type headache.

METHODS

Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials; MEDLINE; EMBASE; ISI Web of Science, clinical trial registries, CNKI, Wanfang and CQVIP were searched through 21 August 2018, for randomized trials in which at least one comparison was a beta-blocker for the prevention of migraine or tension-type headache in adults. The primary outcome, headache frequency per month, was extracted in duplicate and pooled using random effects models.

DATA SYNTHESIS

This study included 108 randomized controlled trials, 50 placebo-controlled and 58 comparative effectiveness trials. Compared to placebo, propranolol reduced episodic migraine headaches by 1.5 headaches/month at 8 weeks (95% CI: -2.3 to -0.65) and was more likely to reduce headaches by 50% (RR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1-1.7). Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) found that these outcomes were unlikely to be due to a Type I error. A network analysis suggested that beta-blocker's benefit for episodic migraines may be a class effect. Trials comparing beta-blockers to other interventions were largely single, underpowered trials. Propranolol was comparable to other medications known to be effective including flunarizine, topiramate and valproate. For chronic migraine, propranolol was more likely to reduce headaches by at least 50% (RR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.0-4.3). There was only one trial of beta-blockers for tension-type headache.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high quality evidence that propranolol is better than placebo for episodic migraine headache. Other comparisons were underpowered, rated as low-quality based on only including single trials, making definitive conclusions about comparative effectiveness impossible. There were few trials examining beta-blocker effectiveness for chronic migraine or tension-type headache though there was limited evidence of benefit.

REGISTRATION

Prospero (ID: CRD42017050335).

Opportunities and pitfalls in clinical proof-of-concept: principles and examples

Clinical proof-of-concept trials crucially inform major resource deployment decisions. This paper discusses several mechanisms for enhancing their rigour and efficiency. The importance of careful consideration when using a surrogate endpoint is illustrated; situational effectiveness of run-in patient enrichment is explored; a versatile tool is introduced to ensure a strong pharmacological underpinning; the benefits of dose-titration are revealed by simulation; and the importance of adequately scheduled observations is shown. The general process of model-based trial design and analysis is described and several examples demonstrate the value in historical data, simulation-guided design, model-based analysis and trial adaptation informed by interim analysis.

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.

[Role of antihypertensive drugs in the treatment of migraine]

The treatment of migraine depends on the frequency, severity and concomitant diseases. There are several specific drugs developed for migraine prevention in addition to the additive antimigraine effects of some other non-specific drugs. The aim of this literature-based review is to summarize the possible antimigraine properties of different antihypertensive agents (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, etc.) focusing on the possible side effects (avoidance of beta blockers in the absence of heart disease, possible antiparkinson effect of calcium channel blockers, additive effect of drugs modifying the renin-angiotensin system activity, etc.). Current evidence supports the use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (mainly lisinopril) and angiotensin receptor blockers (mainly candesartan) for long-term migraine prevention and blood pressure control. Long-term beta-blocker treatment should be avoided in the absence of ischemic heart disease due to possible unfavourable cardiovascular effects.

Comparative efficacy trial of cupping and serkangabin versus conventional therapy of migraine headaches: A randomized, open-label, comparative efficacy trial

BACKGROUND

Migraine headaches are the most common acute and recurrent headaches. Current treatment of a migraine headache consists of multiple medications for control and prevention of recurrent attacks. Global emergence of alternative medicine led us to examine the efficacy of cupping therapy plus serkangabin syrup in the treatment of migraine headaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a randomized, controlled, open-label, comparative efficacy trial. We randomly assigned patients with migraine into cupping therapy plus serkangabin group (30 patients) and conventional treatment group (30 patients). An investigator assessed the severity of headache, frequency of attacks in a week and duration of attacks per hour in 5 visits (at the end of 2 weeks, 1, 3 and 6 months). Generalized estimating equations approach was used to analyze repeated measures data to compare outcomes in both groups.

RESULTS

Average age for cupping therapy group and conventional treatment group were 31.7 (±7.6) and 32.6 (±12.7) years, respectively (P = 0.45). After treatment for 2 weeks; and 1, 3 and 6 months, severity of headache (P = 0.80), frequency of migraine attacks (P = 0.63) and duration of attacks per hours (P = 0.48) were similar in conventional and cupping groups but these symptoms were decreased in each group during the study (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference between cupping plus serkangabin therapy and conventional treatment in the treatment and prophylaxis of migraine. The alternative therapy may be used in cases of drug intolerance, no medication response, and in primary care.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between antiepileptics and antidepressants

INTRODUCTION

Antiepileptic-antidepressant combinations are frequently used by clinicians; their pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) drug interactions (DIs) have not been well studied but are frequently likely to be clinically relevant.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides a comprehensive review of PK DIs between antiepileptics and antidepressants. In the absence of PD DI studies, PD information on pharmacological mechanisms and studies on efficacy and safety of individual drugs are reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical relevance of the inductive properties of carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital and primidone and the inhibitory properties of valproic acid and some antidepressants are well understood; correction factors are provided if appropriate DI studies have been completed. More PK studies are needed for: i) antiepileptics with potent inductive effects for all recently approved antidepressants; ii) high doses of mild CYP3A4 inducers, such as clobazam, eslicarbazepine, oxcarbazepine, rufinamide and topiramate for reboxetine and vilazodone; iii) valproate as a possible inhibitor, mild inducer or both a mild inducer and competitive inhibitor of some antidepressants; and iv) inhibitory effects of long-term fluoxetine use on clobazam, lacosamide, phenobarbital, primidone, carbamazepine, felbamate, tiagabine and zonisamide. Possible synergistic or additive beneficial PD DIs in generalized anxiety disorder, chronic pain, migraine prophylaxis, weight control and menopausal symptoms need study.

A prospective, open-label study of milnacipran in the prevention of headache in patients with episodic or chronic migraine

Migraine is a highly prevalent episodic and chronic neurological disorder that impacts otherwise healthy men and women in their most productive years. An anecdotal survey in our clinical practices suggested that milnacipran, a drug indicated for the treatment of fibromyalgia, reduced the incidence of headache in patients with migraine. In this 3-month, open-label, pilot study, 38 patients diagnosed with episodic migraine and 7 patients with chronic migraine maintained headache diaries to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of milnacipran in headache prevention. After a 1-month period to obtain baseline data, milnacipran treatment was initiated and doses were titrated up to 100 mg/day over 1 month. Maintenance therapy continued for an additional 3 months. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in the number of all headache days during the last 28 days of maintenance therapy analyzed, using last observation carried forward (LOCF). Change from baseline in migraine days during the last month of the maintenance period using LOCF was a secondary end point. Milnacipran 100 mg daily was associated with a significant reduction in headache (-4.2 days; P < 0.001) and migraine frequency (-2.2 days; P < 0.003). The adverse event profile was consistent with prior reports of milnacipran for the treatment of other conditions. However, compared with the recommended protocol, a more gradual increase in milnacipran dose was required to improve tolerability for some patients. The robust efficacy signal found in this study strongly suggests that a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of milnacipran in migraine and chronic headache is warranted.

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX®): a review of its use in the prophylaxis of headaches in adults with chronic migraine

This article reviews the pharmacology, therapeutic efficacy and tolerability profile of intramuscularly injected onabotulinumtoxinA (onaBoNTA; BOTOX®) for headache prophylaxis in adults with chronic migraine, with a focus on UK labelling for the drug. The pharmacological actions of onaBoNTA include a direct antinociceptive (analgesic) effect; while not fully understood, the mechanism of action underlying its headache prophylaxis effect in chronic migraine is presumed to involve inhibition of peripheral and central sensitization in trigeminovascular neurones. Pooled findings from two large phase III studies of virtually identical design (PREEMPT [Phase III REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy] 1 and 2) showed that treatment with up to five cycles of onaBoNTA (155-195 units/cycle) at 12-week intervals was effective in reducing headache symptoms, decreasing headache-related disability, and improving health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in patients with chronic migraine, approximately two-thirds of whom were overusing acute headache medications at baseline. During the double-blind phase of both trials, significantly more patients treated with onaBoNTA (two cycles) than placebo experienced clinically meaningful improvements in the monthly frequencies of headache days, moderate to severe headache days and migraine days, and in the cumulative hours of headache on headache days/month. OnaBoNTA therapy also resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in functioning and HR-QOL compared with placebo. Notably, improvements in headache symptoms, functioning and HR-QOL favouring onaBoNTA over placebo were seen regardless of whether or not patients were medication overusers and irrespective of whether or not they were naive to (oral) prophylactic therapy. Further improvements relative to baseline in headache symptoms, functioning and HR-QOL were observed during the open-label extension phase of both trials (all patients received three cycles of onaBoNTA). Treatment with up to five cycles of onaBoNTA was generally well tolerated in the PREEMPT trials. Treatment-related adverse events reported by onaBoNTA recipients (e.g. neck pain, facial paresis and eyelid ptosis) were consistent with the well established tolerability profile of the neurotoxin when injected into head and neck muscles; no new safety events were observed. Debate surrounding the PREEMPT studies has centred on the small treatment effect of onaBoNTA relative to placebo, the possibility that blinding was inadequate and the relevance of the evaluated population. Nonetheless, the totality of the data showed that onaBoNTA therapy produced clinically meaningful improvements in headache symptoms, functioning and HR-QOL; on the basis of these trials, it has become the first (and so far only) headache prophylactic therapy to be specifically approved for chronic migraine in the UK and US. Overall, onaBoNTA offers a beneficial, acceptably tolerated and potentially convenient option for the management of this highly disabling condition, for example in patients who are refractory to oral medications used for prophylaxis.

Overview of migraine treatment

SUMMARY Migraine is ranked as the 19th top cause of disability worldwide by WHO. Despite advancements in migraine-specific acute treatment, only a minority of patients utilize these medications. Specific pharmacologic treatments consist of the ergot alkaloids and triptans (serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists). Both classes are regarded as relatively safe and effective; however, there is a greater concern for vasoconstrictive effects with the ergots, which limits their use. Triptans transformed migraine therapy, setting in motion revolutionary research that heightened our understanding of migraine mechanisms. However, one in three migraineurs may be triptan nonresponders and there is a group of migraine patients that remains ‘refractory’ to conventional pharmacologic migraine therapy. This article discusses the approach to migraine management, reviews currently available acute and preventive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options for migraine headache, as well as briefly focuses on novel and upcoming medicines presently under investigation.

Migraine therapy during pregnancy and lactation

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Migraine affects about 25% of women during childbearing years but few data are available about the risks connected with most antimigraine drugs during pregnancy.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

In this report, we review the available data, mainly obtained from published studies, toxicology databases and clinical guidelines, on migraine treatment during pregnancy and lactation.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

The following drugs should be preferred for the treatment of acute migraine attacks in pregnant women: paracetamol, NSAIDs and sumatriptan. Migraine prophylaxis should be undertaken when patients experience at least three prolonged severe attacks a month that are particularly incapacitating or unresponsive to symptomatic therapy and likely to result in complications. Non-pharmacologic approaches should be preferred, but if they are not effective, preventive treatment should include low doses of β-blockers and amitriptyline.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Migraine treatment is often necessary because maternal and fetal risks related to acute attacks may be more harmful than the therapy itself, especially if they are frequent, severe and associated with nausea, anorexia, vomiting, hypotension or dehydration. If non-pharmacologic treatments do not alleviate migraine symptoms, only few drugs can be used during pregnancy and lactation.