Flunarizine in common migraine: Italian cooperative trial. II. Long-term follow-up

Flunarizine as prophylaxis for episodic migraine: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Based on few clinical trials, flunarizine is considered a first-line prophylactic treatment for migraine in several guidelines. In this meta-analysis, we examined the pooled evidence for its effectiveness, tolerability, and safety. Prospective randomized controlled trials of flunarizine as a prophylaxis against migraine were identified from a systematic literature search, and risk of bias was assessed for all included studies. Reduction in mean attack frequency was estimated by calculating the mean difference (MD), and a series of secondary outcomes-including adverse events (AEs)-were also analyzed. The database search yielded 879 unique records. Twenty-five studies were included in data synthesis. We scored 31/175 risk of bias items as "high," with attrition as the most frequent bias. A pooled analysis estimated that flunarizine reduces the headache frequency by 0.4 attacks per 4 weeks compared with placebo (5 trials, 249 participants: MD -0.44; 95% confidence interval -0.61 to -0.26). Analysis also revealed that the effectiveness of flunarizine prophylaxis is comparable with that of propranolol (7 trials, 1151 participants, MD -0.08; 95% confidence interval -0.34 to 0.18). Flunarizine also seems to be effective in children. The most frequent AEs were sedation and weight increase. Meta-analyses were robust and homogenous, although several of the included trials potentially suffered from high risk of bias. Unfortunately, reporting of AEs was inconsistent and limited. In conclusion, pooled analysis of data from partially outdated trials shows that 10-mg flunarizine per day is effective and well tolerated in treating episodic migraine-supporting current guideline recommendations.

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

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

EFNS guideline on the drug treatment of migraine - report of an EFNS task force

Migraine is one of the most frequent disabling neurological conditions with a major impact on the patients' quality of life. To give evidence-based or expert recommendations for the different drug treatment procedures of the different migraine syndromes based on a literature search and an consensus in an expert panel. All available medical reference systems were screened for all kinds of clinical studies on migraine with and without aura and on migraine-like syndromes. The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the EFNS resulting in level A,B, or C recommendations and good practice points. For the acute treatment of migraine attacks, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and triptans are recommended. The administration should follow the concept of stratified treatment. Before intake of NSAIDs and triptans, oral metoclopramide or domperidon is recommended. In very severe attacks, intravenous acetylsalicylic acid or subcutaneous sumatriptan are drugs of first choice. A status migrainosus can probably be treated by steroids. For the prophylaxis of migraine, betablockers (propranolol and metoprolol), flunarizine, valproic acid, and topiramate are drugs of first choice. Drugs of second choice for migraine prophylaxis are amitriptyline, naproxen, petasites, and bisoprolol.

Effects of betaxolol and flunarizine on visual fields and intraocular pressure in patients with migraine

Fifty-one patients with migraine were divided into four groups to investigate the effects of topical betaxolol and systemic calcium channel blocker flunarizine on visual fields (VF) and intraocular pressure (IOP). The first group (Group 0) was followed with no medications, topical betaxolol (bid) was precribed to the second group (Group B), oral flunarizine (10 mg daily) was prescribed to the third group (Group F), and the last group (Group BF) was assigned for combined betaxolol and flunarizine treatment. After a mean follow-up time of 4.2 +/- 1.2 months (3-6 months), IOP measurements and VF tests were repeated. Group B and Group BF were found to be statistically different from the other groups in terms of IOP reduction and VF improvement according to mean deviation and corrected pattern standard deviation indices in the second examinations. On the other hand, Group F and Group BF differed from the other two groups considering the improvement in migrainous complaints. VF findings which are probably influenced by perfusion problems due to vasospastic mechanisms in migraineurs, improved following topical betaxolol treatment. However, systemic use of flunarizine--a calcium channel blocker--did not seem to be effective on visual fields although it had beneficial effects on migraine.

Efficacy and tolerability in migraine prophylaxis of flunarizine in reduced doses: a comparison with propranolol 160 mg daily

This was a phase-IV double-blind equivalence trial designed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of two doses of flunarizine (10 mg o.d.=FLU 10 mg and 5 mg o.d.=FLU 5 mg) in the prophylaxis of migraine, in comparison with slow-release propranolol (160 mg o.d.). A total of 808 subjects were treated in a treatment period of 16 weeks. 142 subjects discontinued the trial prematurely, mainly because of adverse events (n=58). The mean attack frequency in the double-blind period was 2.0 for the FLU 5 mg group, 1.9 for the FLU 10 mg group, and 1.9 for the propranolol group. The mean attack frequency in the last 28 days of the double-blind period was 1.8 for FLU 5 mg, 1.6 for FLU 10 mg, and 1.7 for propranolol. Both flunarizine groups were at least as effective as propranolol (P<0.001 in one-sided test). The percentage of responders (defined as subjects for whom attack frequency decreased by at least 50% compared to run-in) in the last 28 days of the double-blind period was 46% (118/259) for FLU 5 mg, 53% (141/264) for FLU 10 mg, and 48% (125/258) for propranolol. Statistical analysis showed that FLU 10 mg is at least as effective as propranolol (P<0.001) and showed a trend for noninferiority of FLU5 and propranolol (P=0.053). No statistically significant differences between the treatment groups were found for any of the secondary parameters. Overall, 190 subjects reported one or more adverse events during the run-in phase: 54 (20.5%) in the FLU 5 mg group, 76 (27.7%) in the FLU 10 mg group and 60 (22.3%) in the propranolol group. The results of this equivalence trial show that 10 mg flunarizine daily with a drug-free weekend is at least as effective as 160 mg propranolol in the prophylaxis of migraine for all evaluated parameters (one-sided equivalence tests) after 16 weeks of treatment. In addition, 5 mg flunarizine proves to be at least as effective as 160 mg propranolol when looking at the mean attack frequency for both the whole double-blind period and the last 28 days of treatment. However, in the analysis of responders, 160 mg propranolol seems to be slightly better than 5 mg flunarizine. In addition, no significant differences between the three treatments were found with regard to safety: all three treatments were generally well-tolerated and safe.

NiCl2 and amiloride induce spreading depression in guinea pig hippocampal slices

Spreading depressions (SD) occur in association with ischaemia, epilepsy and migraine. Intracellular calcium oscillations have been suggested to be involved in the generation and propagation of SD. The present study was performed to study the mechanism of conditioning guinea pig hippocampal slices by the T-type calcium channel blockers NiCl2 and amiloride. SD-like fluctuations of DC potential were recorded by inserting microelectrodes into the CA1 and CA3 regions. The SD occurrence was significantly greater with 10 micromol/l NiCl2 as well as with 25 and 50 micromol/l amiloride than with other concentrations of these substances. The concentration response curve was inversely U-shaped with the maximum repetition rates of SDs being achieved at 10 micromol/l NiCl2 as well as at 25 and 50 micromol/l amiloride. SD occurrence could be completely blocked by the NMDA antagonist APV (10 micromol/l) in all cases. These data demonstrate that modulation of the Ca2+ dynamics conditioned guinea pig hippocampal slices and increased their susceptibility to generate SD.

Long-term follow-up after flunarizine or nimodipine discontinuation in migraine patients

Various open and controlled studies have confirmed the antimigraine action of flunarizine, while the antimigraine properties of nimodipine are still open to controversy. Moreover, only a few studies include an additional follow-up after discontinuation of migraine prophylaxis with either drug. We carried out a single blind evaluation of the efficacy and tolerance of flunarizine (25 patients) in comparison with nimodipine (25 patients) and the long-term effect after discontinuation of a 6-month treatment. Both medications significantly reduced migraine frequently and severity. Flunarizine was more efficacious than nimodipine in reducing migraine frequency (p < 0.001), pain severity (p < 0.05), migraine index (p < 0.05) and corrected migraine index (p < 0.05). The positive effect lasted 8.4 +/- 4.0 months after discontinuation of flunarizine and 4.9 +/- 3.5 months after nimodipine (p < 0.05). Our results suggest that flunarizine is more effective than nimodipine in the prophylactic treatment of migraine. The positive effect after drug discontinuation lasts longer with flunarizine, compared to nimodipine.

Weight gain associated with cinnarizine

OBJECTIVE

To report four cases of cinnarizine-induced weight gain.

DATA SOURCES

Case reports from a local obesity center and review articles.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were abstracted from spontaneous comments made by patients to one of the authors, who was a doctor at the clinic, and reviewed by the remaining authors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We reviewed the cases of four women, aged 50-57 years without endocrine or metabolic pathologies, that showed weight gain associated with the intake of cinnarizine for one to two years. No other drugs usually were administered during the period in which the women gained weight, although in two cases cinnarizine was associated with dihydroergocristine in the same medicine (Clinadil). The mean weight increase was 6.25 kg (range 4-10). The increases do not appear to be related to whether the patients' initial weight was ideal or excessive. The weight gain was always associated with increased appetite and food intake. One patient discontinued cinnarizine treatment and her weight returned to its previous level.

CONCLUSIONS

Cinnarizine is a piperazine derivative used in the treatment of vertigo and in the prophylaxis of migraine. In contrast to related drugs, data about cinnarizine are scarce because randomized trials of cinnarizine have been inconclusive. Our observations indicate that cinnarizine may cause weight gain, as observed with other drugs in the same class.

Long-term results of migraine prophylaxis with flunarizine and beta-blockers

We followed-up 64 migraine patients after discontinuation of successful interval prophylaxis with flunarizine, propranolol or metoprolol, to investigate how long the therapeutic success would last, if further prophylaxis would be successful again, and what factors would influence the prognosis. We found that 16 out of 64 patients experienced a lasting reduction of migraine frequency, whereas 48 patients did improve initially, but later experienced a relapse. Further prophylaxis was effective in 29, poorly effective in 11, and ineffective in 8 of these patients; in 7 of the 8 non-responders prophylaxis was not changed. Negative prognostic factors were frequent attacks, a history of analgesic abuse and/or analgesic withdrawal therapy and ineffective previous prophylaxis. In conclusion, the therapeutic success decreases dramatically in the majority of patients several months after discontinuation of prophylaxis; further prophylaxis is more effective if the substance class is changed; increased analgesic intake is the most important prognostic factor. As a strategy for migraine prophylaxis we propose sequential changing of interval prophylaxis or--in patients with negative prognostic factors--long-term prophylaxis.

Flunarizine. A reappraisal of its pharmacological properties and therapeutic use in neurological disorders

Flunarizine is a class IV calcium antagonist with a pharmacological profile which suggests its therapeutic potential in a number of neurological and cerebrovascular disorders. It is an effective prophylactic treatment for common or classic migraine in children and adults, and it appears at least as effective as a number of other agents which act by different pharmacological mechanisms, including pizotifen (pizotyline), cinnarizine, methysergide, nimodipine, metoprolol, propranolol, aspirin and cyclandelate. Flunarizine is also effective in reducing the frequency of seizures, when used as an 'add-on' treatment, in some patients with partial or generalised epilepsy resistant to maximal therapy with a combination of several conventional antiepileptic drugs. Placebo-controlled studies show that flunarizine is effective in the treatment of vertigo and associated symptoms of either peripheral or central origin, and in the treatment of cerebrovascular insufficiency where psychological symptoms, rather than vertigo, are the primary symptoms. In the treatment of vertigo, flunarizine appears at least as effective as cinnarizine and more effective than nicergoline, betahistine dichlorhydrate, pentoxifylline (oxpentifylline) and vincamine. Flunarizine therefore is useful in the prophylaxis of migraine, an effective treatment for vertigo and a worthwhile alternative as 'add-on' therapy in patients with epilepsy resistant to conventional drugs.