Topiramate in the Treatment of Chronic Migraine

High Dosage Omega-3 Fatty Acids Outperform Existing Pharmacological Options for Migraine Prophylaxis: A Network Meta-Analysis

Migraine is a highly prevalent neurologic disorder with prevalence rates ranging from 9% to 18% worldwide. Current pharmacologic prophylactic strategies for migraine have limited efficacy and acceptability, with relatively low response rates of 40% to 50% and limited safety profiles. Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are considered promising therapeutic agents for migraine prophylaxis. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and acceptability of various dosages of EPA/DHA and other current Food and Drug Administration-approved or guideline-recommended prophylactic pharmacologic interventions for migraine. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion if they enrolled participants with a diagnosis of either episodic or chronic migraine. All NMA procedures were conducted under the frequentist model. The primary outcomes assessed were 1) changes in migraine frequency and 2) acceptability (i.e., dropout for any reason). Secondary outcomes included response rates, changes in migraine severity, changes in the frequency of using rescue medications, and frequency of any adverse events. Forty RCTs were included (N = 6616; mean age = 35.0 y; 78.9% women). Our analysis showed that supplementation with high dosage EPA/DHA yields the highest decrease in migraine frequency [standardized mean difference (SMD): -1.36; 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.32, -0.39 compared with placebo] and the largest decrease in migraine severity (SMD: -2.23; 95% CI: -3.17, -1.30 compared with placebo) in all studied interventions. Furthermore, supplementation with high dosage EPA/DHA showed the most favorable acceptability rates (odds ratio: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.06, 17.41 compared with placebo) of all examined prophylactic treatments. This study provides compelling evidence that high dosage EPA/DHA supplementation can be considered a first-choice treatment of migraine prophylaxis because this treatment displayed the highest efficacy and highest acceptability of all studied treatments. This study was registered in PROSPERO as CRD42022319577.

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

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

Effect of herbal medicine (Jodeungsan) on migraine: A double-blind randomized clinical trial

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Management of General Practitioners of the Hospital Districts of Ouagadougou about Migraine (Burkina Faso)

Background

Migraine is a common neurological disorder characterized by severe headache attacks that may be debilitating. The objective of this study is to determine the knowledge and attitudes of general practitioners in the hospital districts of the city of Ouagadougou on migraine.

Methods

This cross-sectional study was carried out in hospital districts of Ouagadougou. The data were collected during three months from February 1 to April 30, 2020.

Results

The study included 116 general practitioners. Thirteen percent of them were suffering from migraine. All participants had previous experience with migraine diagnosis before the survey. Eighty percent of general practitioners had a good level of knowledge of ICDH-3 criteria (knowing 6-7 criteria). The most widely recognized IHS criteria were pulsatility quality (93.1%), photophobia or sonophobia (80.2%), and mild-to-moderate intensity (80%). Ninety-five (81.9%) general practitioners rarely ordered brain imaging. The most common acute treatments were nonsteroidal inflammatory drug (39.47%), paracetamol (44.74%), and derivate of ergot (3.95%). The most common preventive treatments were amitriptyline (27.8%), derivate of ergot (18.9%), and NSAID (16.7%). The majority of general practitioners (56.9%) have referred headache patients to a colleague or specialist.

Conclusions

Our study found that diagnostic criteria and acute treatment of migraine were well known by the majority of general practitioners, in contrast of preventive treatment.

CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine: an efficacy and tolerability comparison with standard prophylactic drugs

BACKGROUND

Several drugs are available for the preventive treatment of both episodic and chronic migraine. The choice of which therapy to initiate first, second, or third is not straightforward and is based on multiple factors, including general efficacy, tolerability, potential for serious adverse events, comorbid conditions, and costs. Recently, a new class of migraine preventive drugs was introduced, i.e. monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor.

METHODS

The present article summarizes the evidence gathered with this new migraine preventive drug class from randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials. It further puts this into perspective next to the evidence gained by the most widely used agents for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine with an emphasis on efficacy and the robustness with which this efficacy signal was obtained.

RESULTS

Although being a relatively new class of migraine preventive drugs, monoclonal antibodies blocking the CGRP pathway have an efficacy which is at least comparable if not higher than those of the currently used preventive drugs. Moreover, the robustness of this efficacy signal is substantiated by several randomized clinical trials each including large numbers of patients. In addition, because of their excellent tolerability and with long-term safety data emerging, they seem to have an unprecedented efficacy over adverse effect profile, clearly resulting in an added value for migraine prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Balancing the data presented in the current manuscript with additional data concerning long term safety on the one hand and cost issues on the other hand, can be of particular use to health policy makers to implement this new drug class in the prevention of migraine.

Identification of predictors of response to Erenumab in a cohort of patients with migraine

Background:

The migraine-specific monoclonal antibody Erenumab targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide receptor is an effective and well tolerated preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine. However, its price limits its use as a first line therapy against migraine. Therefore, identifying patients who will adequately respond to such treatment is paramount.

Methods:

In this retrospective, real-life cohort study, 172 adult patients with refractory episodic or chronic migraine treated with Erenumab were included. To identify the predictors of response to Erenumab, bivariate subgroup analysis of several potential factors was performed, and multivariate logistic regression modeling was done to obtain Odds Ratio (OR).

Results:

Of the 172 patients, 57.0% achieved a successful treatment response (reduction of monthly migraine days by ≥50%). Statistically significant predictors of a treatment response were the presence of chronic migraine, tension-type headache, and a positive response to triptan with an odd ratio of 0.473 (95% CI, 0.235–0.952), 0.485 (95% CI, 0.245–0.962) and 3.985 (95% CI, 1.811–8.770), respectively (P < 0.05).

Conclusions:

Successful Erenumab treatment response rate was 57.0% in this retrospective cohort. As chronic migraine and tension-type headache were negative predictors of Erenumab response while triptan response was a positive predictor, this data suggests the potential for Erenumab monotherapy without the need for traditional preventive treatment in refractory migraine sufferers improving side effect profile and treatment adherence for a cohort of patients difficult to treat.

CGRP-antibodies, topiramate and botulinum toxin type A in episodic and chronic migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The approval of monoclonal antibodies for prevention of migraine has revolutionized treatment for patients. Oral preventatives are still considered first line treatments as head-to-head trials comparing them with antibodies are lacking.

Methods

The main purpose of this study was to provide a comparative overview of the efficacy of three commonly prescribed migraine preventative medication classes. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE until 20 March 2020. We included RCTs reporting the 50% response rates for topiramate, Botulinum Toxin Type A and monoclonal antibodies against CGRP(r). Studies were excluded if response rates were not reported, treatment allocation was unclear, or if study quality was insufficient. Primary outcome measure were the 50% response rates. The pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the random effects model. The study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020222880).

Findings

We identified 6552 reports. Thirty-two were eligible for our review. Studies assessing monoclonal antibodies included 13,302 patients and yielded pooled odds ratios for the 50% response rate of 2.30 (CI: 2.11–2.50). Topiramate had an overall effect estimate of 2.70 (CI: 1.97–3.69) with 1989 included patients and Botulinum Toxin Type A achieved 1.28 (CI: 0.98–1. 67) with 2472 patients included.

Interpretation

Topiramate, botulinum toxin type A and monoclonal antibodies showed higher odds ratios in achieving a 50% response rate compared to placebo. Topiramate numerically demonstrated the greatest effect size but also the highest drop-out rate.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Consensus of the Brazilian Headache Society on the treatment of chronic migraine

Chronic migraine poses a significant personal, social and economic burden and is characterized by headache present on 15 or more days per month for at least three months, with at least eight days of migrainous headache per month. It is frequently associated with analgesic or acute migraine medication overuse and this should not be overlooked. The present consensus was elaborated upon by a group of members of the Brazilian Headache Society in order to describe current evidence and to provide recommendations related to chronic migraine pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatment. Withdrawal strategies in medication overuse headache are also described, as well as treatment risks during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Oral topiramate and onabotulinum toxin A injections are the only treatments granted Class A recommendation, while valproate, gabapentin, and tizanidine received Class B recommendation, along with acupuncture, biofeedback, and mindfulness. The anti-CGRP or anti-CGRPr monoclonal antibodies, still unavailable in Brazil, are promising new drugs already approved elsewhere for migraine prophylactic treatment, the efficacy of which in chronic migraine is still to be definitively proven.

Development of an education and self-management intervention for chronic headache - CHESS trial (Chronic Headache Education and Self-management Study)

BACKGROUND

Self-management interventions are well recognised and widely used in chronic conditions. Their application to chronic headaches has been limited and generally of low quality. We describe here our process for developing an evidence based, and theory driven, education and self-management intervention for those living with chronic headache.

METHODS

Our intervention was designed using several core information sources; the results of three systematic reviews, qualitative material from those living with chronic headaches, our knowledge from existing self-management interventions; and finally collaborative input from a multidisciplinary team of clinicians, academics, patients, and charity partners. We manualised the intervention and associated training as a package for use in a feasibility study. We made adaptations for its use in a randomised controlled trial.

RESULTS

We piloted the intervention in four groups with a total of 18 participants. Qualitative feedback from 12 participants and five facilitators allowed the intervention to be refined for the main randomised controlled trial. Some of the key changes included shortening of the overall intervention, changes to the originally planned facilitators and spreading the facilitator training over three days rather than two. We are now testing the final revised intervention in a randomised controlled trial of its clinical and cost effectiveness. The group component of the intervention is delivered over two days with the first day focused on living, understanding and dealing with chronic headaches and the second day exploring how to adapt and take control of one's life with chronic headaches.

CONCLUSION

Our pilot work indicates that our intervention is feasible to deliver, and with the relevant changes would be acceptable for use with this population. Our randomised control trial is ongoing. We anticipate publishing final results in 2021.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN79708100. Registered 16th December 2015, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN79708100.

Protocol and methods for testing the efficacy of well-being therapy in chronic migraine patients: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Chronic migraine is a chronic medical condition associated with resistance to pharmacological treatment and poor benefits from the psychological interventions studied to date, including acceptance and commitment therapy or mindfulness. This manuscript describes the rationale and methods for a pilot feasibility study designed to (1) establish and (2) evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of research procedures and interventions to investigate whether well-being therapy improves outcomes relative to a control condition.

Methods

The current intervention will use a randomized controlled trial design, wherein 30 outpatients with chronic migraine will be randomized (1:1) to well-being therapy (n = 15) or to a control condition (n = 15). Primary outcomes include the level of disability caused by migraine and the frequency, duration, and intensity of migraine attacks; the secondary outcomes focus on anxiety, depression, psychological well-being, euthymia, and distress. Primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed at baseline, after sessions 4 and 8, and at 3-month follow-up. The Ethical Review Boards at the University-Hospital Careggi has approved the study (5th December 2017).

Discussion

Identifying medium-term interventions able to improve chronic migraine is relevant to manage this illness. The present randomized trial might represent a step forward for managing chronic migraine by means of psychological interventions.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT03404336. Registered on 19 January 2018.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2944-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Acupuncture as prophylaxis for chronic migraine: a protocol for a single-blinded, double-dummy randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 1.4%-2.2% of the global population suffers from chronic migraine. Acupuncture may serve as an alternative management for chronic migraine, where pharmacological prophylaxis is not suitable. However, the effects of acupuncture as migraine prophylaxis have not been confirmed. This study is designed as a single-blinded, double-dummy randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupuncture compared with topiramate in patients with chronic migraine.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A total of 60 participants will be randomly assigned to two different groups. Participants will receive verum acupuncture and placebo medicine in the treatment group, while participants in the control group will be treated with sham acupuncture and real medicine (topiramate). All participants will receive a 12-week treatment and then be followed up for another 12 weeks. The primary outcome is the reduction of monthly headache days, and the secondary outcomes include the reduction of the number of days with acute headache medications, and changes of Migraine Disability Assessment, Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, Headache Impact Test, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-trait, and Beck Depression Inventory-II scores from baseline to endpoints.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval of this study was granted by the Research Ethical Committee of Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Capital Medical University (2017BL-045-01). Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Outcomes of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13563102; Pre-results.

Medication overuse headache: An entrenched idea in need of scrutiny

It is a widely accepted idea that medications taken to relieve acute headache pain can paradoxically worsen headache if used too often. This type of secondary headache is referred to as medication overuse headache (MOH); previously used terms include rebound headache and drug-induced headache. In the absence of consensus about the duration of use, amount, and type of medication needed to cause MOH, the default position is conservative. A common recommendation is to limit treatment to no more than 10 or 15 days per month (depending on medication type) to prevent headache frequency progression. Medication withdrawal is often recommended as a first step in treatment of patients with very frequent headaches. Existing evidence, however, does not provide a strong basis for such causal claims about the relationship between medication use and frequent headache. Observational studies linking treatment patterns with headache frequency are by their nature confounded by indication. Medication withdrawal studies have mostly been uncontrolled and often have high dropout rates. Evaluation of this evidence suggests that only a minority of patients required to limit the use of symptomatic medication may benefit from treatment limitation. Similarly, only a minority of patients deemed to be overusing medications may benefit from withdrawal. These findings raise serious questions about the value of withholding or withdrawing symptom-relieving medications from people with frequent headaches solely to prevent or treat MOH. The benefits of doing so are smaller, and the harms larger, than currently recognized. The concept of MOH should be viewed with more skepticism. Until the evidence is better, we should avoid dogmatism about the use of symptomatic medication. Frequent use of symptom-relieving headache medications should be viewed more neutrally, as an indicator of poorly controlled headaches, and not invariably a cause.

The supraorbital region revisited: An anatomic exploration of the neuro-vascular bundle with regard to frontal migraine headache

BACKGROUND

Recent findings on the pathogenesis of frontal migraine headache support, besides a central vasogenic cause, an alternative peripheral mechanism involving compressed craniofacial nerves. This is further supported by the efficiency of botulinum toxin injections as a new treatment option in frontal migraine headache patients.

METHODS

The supraorbital regions of 22 alcohol-glycerine-embalmed facial halves of both sexes were dissected. Both the supratrochlear and supraorbital nerves (STN and SON, respectively) were identified, and their relationship with the corrugator supercilii muscle (CSM) was investigated by dissection and ultrasound. The course of both nerves was defined, and the interaction between the supraorbital artery (SOA) and SON was determined.

RESULTS

We discovered a new possible compression point of the STN passing through the orbital septum and verified previously described compression points of both STN and SON. Osteofibrous channels used by the STN and SON were found constantly. We described the varying topography of the STN and CSM, the SON and CSM, and the SON and SOA. Further, we provide an algorithm for the ultrasound visualization of the supraorbital neurovascular bundle.

CONCLUSION

Our data support the hypothesis of a peripheral mechanism for frontal migraine headache because of following potential irritation points: first, the CSM is constantly perforated by the SON and frequently by the STN; second, the topographic proximity between SOA and SON and the osteofibrous channels is used by the SON and STN; and third, the STN passes through the orbital septum.

Flunarizine versus topiramate for chronic migraine prophylaxis: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Botulinum toxin in the management of chronic migraine: clinical evidence and experience

Chronic migraine (CM) is a severely disabling neurological condition characterized by episodes of pulsating unilateral or bilateral headache. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox®) for the prophylactic treatment of CM in 2010. It has been shown that onabotulinumtoxinA is effective in the reduction of headache frequency and severity in patients with CM. Treatment is well tolerated by the patients. This review reports on the history of botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) in CM and presents the current clinical evidence for the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of CM.

Chronic migraine: risk factors, mechanisms and treatment

Chronic migraine has a great detrimental influence on a patient's life, with a severe impact on socioeconomic functioning and quality of life. Chronic migraine affects 1-2% of the general population, and about 8% of patients with migraine; it usually develops from episodic migraine at an annual conversion rate of about 3%. The chronification is reversible: about 26% of patients with chronic migraine go into remission within 2 years of chronification. The most important modifiable risk factors for chronic migraine include overuse of acute migraine medication, ineffective acute treatment, obesity, depression and stressful life events. Moreover, age, female sex and low educational status increase the risk of chronic migraine. The pathophysiology of migraine chronification can be understood as a threshold problem: certain predisposing factors, combined with frequent headache pain, lower the threshold of migraine attacks, thereby increasing the risk of chronic migraine. Treatment options include oral medications, nerve blockade with local anaesthetics or corticoids, and neuromodulation. Well-defined diagnostic criteria are crucial for the identification of chronic migraine. The International Headache Society classification of chronic migraine was recently updated, and now allows co-diagnosis of chronic migraine and medication overuse headache. This Review provides an up-to-date overview of the classification of chronic migraine, basic mechanisms and risk factors of migraine chronification, and the currently established treatment options.

WITHDRAWN: Anticonvulsant drugs for migraine prophylaxis

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

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

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

A Narrative Review of Evidence-Based Preventive Options for Chronic Migraine

Chronic migraine is a debilitating disorder that affects 2 % of the global population and imparts a significant societal and economic impact. The cornerstones of chronic migraine management include making an accurate diagnosis, patient education, treatment of comorbid conditions, and selection of an appropriate, evidence-based acute and preventive treatment regimen. Although it is common to treat chronic migraine with preventive medications effective for episodic migraine, a number of treatment options exist with specific evidence for effectiveness in chronic migraine. Currently, onabotulinumtoxinA injections are the only FDA-approved preventive treatment for chronic migraine. A number of non-medication treatment options including occipital nerve and supraorbital nerve stimulation have shown promise as effective prevention for patients either unable to tolerate or unable to obtain relief from oral medications, but more research is necessary.

Pilot study of sphenopalatine injection of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of intractable chronic migraine

Objective The main objective of this pilot study was to investigate the safety of administering onabotulinumtoxinA towards the sphenopalatine ganglion in 10 patients with intractable chronic migraine with an open, uncontrolled design. We also collected efficacy data to provide an indication as to whether future placebo-controlled studies should be performed. Method In a prospective, open-label, uncontrolled study after one-month baseline, we performed bilateral injections of 25 IU onabotulinumtoxinA (total dose 50 IU) toward the sphenopalatine ganglion in a single outpatient session in 10 patients with intractable migraine with a follow-up of 12 weeks. The primary outcome was adverse events and the main efficacy outcome was frequency of moderate and severe headache days in month 2 post-treatment compared to baseline. Results All 10 patients experienced a total of 25 adverse events. The majority of these were different types of local discomfort in the face and jaw, and none were classified as serious. In an intention-to-treat analysis of the main efficacy outcome, a statistically significant reduction of moderate and severe headache days in baseline versus month 2 was observed (16.3 ± 6.2 days baseline versus 7.6 ± 7.6 days month 2, p = 0.009). Eight out of 10 patients experienced an at least 50% reduction of moderate and severe headache days compared to baseline. Conclusion The result warrants randomised, placebo-controlled studies to establish both safety and efficacy of this potential novel treatment of chronic migraine.

Evidence-Based Treatments for Adults with Migraine

Migraine, a significantly disabling condition, is treated with acute and preventive medications. However, some individuals are refractory to standard treatments. Although there is a host of alternative management options available, these are not always backed by strong evidence. In fact, most of the drugs used in migraine were initially designed for other purposes. Whilst effective, the benefits from these medications are modest, reflecting the need for newer and migraine-specific therapeutic agents. In recent years, we have witnessed the emergence of novel treatments, of which noninvasive neuromodulation appears to be the most attractive given its ease of use and excellent tolerability profile. This paper reviews the evidence behind the available treatments for migraine.

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

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

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

Objective

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

Design

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

Data Sources

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

Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Treatment of chronic migraine with transcutaneous stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagal nerve (auricular t-VNS): a randomized, monocentric clinical trial

Background

Aim of the study was assessment of efficacy and safety of transcutaneous stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagal nerve (t-VNS) in the treatment of chronic migraine.

Methods

A monocentric, randomized, controlled, double-blind study was conducted. After one month of baseline, chronic migraine patients were randomized to receive 25 Hz or 1 Hz stimulation of the sensory vagal area at the left ear by a handhold battery driven stimulator for 4 h/day during 3 months. Headache days per 28 days were compared between baseline and the last month of treatment and the number of days with acute medication was recorded The Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaires were used to assess headache-related disability.

Results

Of 46 randomized patients, 40 finished the study (per protocol). In the per protocol analysis, patients in the 1 Hz group had a significantly larger reduction in headache days per 28 days than patients in the 25 Hz group (−7.0 ± 4.6 vs. −3.3 ± 5.4 days, p = 0.035). 29.4 % of the patients in the 1 Hz group had a ≥50 % reduction in headache days vs. 13.3 % in the 25 Hz group. HIT-6 and MIDAS scores were significantly improved in both groups, without group differences. There were no serious treatment-related adverse events.

Conclusion

Treatment of chronic migraine by t-VNS at 1 Hz was safe and effective. The mean reduction of headache days after 12 weeks of treatment exceeded that reported for other nerve stimulating procedures.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS/DESIGN

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

DISCUSSION

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

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01516892.

Glutamate receptor antagonists in the management of migraine

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

Diagnosis, pathophysiology and management of chronic migraine: a proposal of the Belgian Headache Society

Chronic migraine (CM) is a disabling neurological condition affecting 0.5-2 % of the population. In the current third edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders, medication overuse is no longer an exclusion criterion and CM is diagnosed in patients suffering from at least 15 headache days per month of which at least eight are related to migraine. CM is difficult to treat, and preventive treatment options are limited. We provide a pathogenetic model for CM, integrating the latest findings from neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies. On behalf of the Belgian Headache Society, we present a management algorithm for CM based on the international literature and adapted to the Belgian situation. Pharmacological treatment options are discussed, and recent data on transcranial and invasive neuromodulation studies in CM are reviewed. An integrated multimodal treatment programme may be beneficial to refractory patients, but at present, this approach is only supported by a limited number of observational studies and quite variable between centres.

Providing Care for Patients with Chronic Migraine: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Management

Chronic migraine, a subtype of migraine defined as ≥ 15 headache days per month for ≥ 3 months, in which ≥ 8 days per month meet criteria for migraine with or without aura or respond to migraine-specific treatment, is a disabling, underdiagnosed, and undertreated disorder associated with significant disability, poor health-related quality of life, and high economic burden. The keys to caring for chronic migraine patients include: (1) making a proper diagnosis; (2) identifying and eliminating exacerbating factors; (3) assessing for medication overuse (patients with chronic headache often overuse acute medications); and (4) continued management. Communication between patient and physician about treatment goals is important. The patient management guidelines presented in this article should help physicians improve treatment success and proactively address common comorbidities among their patients with chronic migraine.

Efficacy and mechanism of anticonvulsant drugs in migraine

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

Management of medication-overuse headache

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

Preventive pharmacologic treatments for episodic migraine in adults

OBJECTIVES

Systematic review of preventive pharmacologic treatments for community-dwelling adults with episodic migraine.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases through May 20, 2012.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of preventive drugs compared to placebo or active treatments examining rates of ≥50 % reduction in monthly migraine frequency or improvement in quality of life.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

We assessed risk of bias and strength of evidence and conducted random effects meta-analyses of absolute risk differences and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Of 5,244 retrieved references, 215 publications of RCTs provided mostly low-strength evidence because of the risk of bias and imprecision. RCTs examined 59 drugs from 14 drug classes. All approved drugs, including topiramate (9 RCTs), divalproex (3 RCTs), timolol (3 RCTs), and propranolol (4 RCTs); off-label beta blockers metoprolol (4 RCTs), atenolol (1 RCT), nadolol (1 RCT), and acebutolol (1 RCT); angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors captopril (1 RCT) and lisinopril (1 RCT); and angiotensin II receptor blocker candesartan (1 RCT), outperformed placebo in reducing monthly migraine frequency by ≥50 % in 200-400 patients per 1,000 treated. Adverse effects leading to treatment discontinuation (68 RCTs) were greater with topiramate, off-label antiepileptics, and antidepressants than with placebo. Limited direct evidence as well as frequentist and exploratory network Bayesian meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences in benefits between approved drugs. Off-label angiotensin-inhibiting drugs and beta-blockers were most effective and tolerable for episodic migraine prevention.

LIMITATIONS

We did not quantify reporting bias or contact principal investigators regarding unpublished trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Approved drugs prevented episodic migraine frequency by ≥50 % with no statistically significant difference between them. Exploratory network meta-analysis suggested that off-label angiotensin-inhibiting drugs and beta-blockers had favorable benefit-to-harm ratios. Evidence is lacking for long-term effects of drug treatments (i.e., trials of more than 3 months duration), especially for quality of life.

Latin American consensus on guidelines for chronic migraine treatment

Chronic migraine is a condition with significant prevalence all around the world and high socioeconomic impact, and its handling has been challenging neurologists. Developments for understanding its mechanisms and associated conditions, as well as that of new therapies, have been quick and important, a fact which has motivated the Latin American and Brazilian Headache Societies to prepare the present consensus. The treatment of chronic migraine should always be preceded by a careful diagnosis review; the detection of possible worsening factors and associated conditions; the stratification of seriousness/impossibility to treat; and monitoring establishment, with a pain diary. The present consensus deals with pharmacological and nonpharmacological forms of treatment to be used in chronic migraine.

Topiramate for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine in adults

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Chronic migraine

The second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders revised in 2006 (ICHD-2R) gives a definition which requires 15 or more headache days per month over the past 3months with at least eight headache days per month that meet criteria for migraine without aura or that responds to migraine specific treatment. Approximately 2% of the global population suffers of chronic migraine (CM). Frequency of headache and degree of disability distinguish CM from episodic migraine (EM). There is a high frequency of medication overuse. The treatment depends on evaluation with education, lifestyle modifications, and trigger management, behavioral and pharmacologic therapies.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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