Montelukast for migraine prophylaxis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of montelukast 20 mg in the prophylactic treatment of migraine. BACKGROUND: A previous small open-label study in migraine patients suggested prophylactic efficacy for montelukast, an antagonist of the cysteinyl leukotriene receptor that is used in the treatment of asthma. We sought to confirm these findings in a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-groups study enrolled adult migraine outpatients who experienced > or =3 and < or =8 migraine attacks per month for the last 6 months. Patients were entered into a 2-month, single-blind, placebo run-in phase. Only patients who experienced > or =3 migraine attacks in the second month were eligible to enter the subsequent 3-month, double-blind treatment phase of the study. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percentage of patients reporting at least a 50% decrease in migraine attack frequency per month during the double-blind treatment period (months 3-5) compared to baseline (run-in month 2). RESULTS: A total of 93 patients were randomized to montelukast 20 mg and 84 patients to placebo at the end of the placebo run-in month 2; 76 patients on montelukast and 72 patients on placebo completed the double-blind treatment period. Over 3 months of treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the percentage of patients who reported at least a 50% decrease in migraine attack frequency per month: 15.4% for montelukast versus 10.3% for placebo (P= .304). In addition, montelukast 20 mg was not significantly superior to placebo on any of the secondary endpoints. There were no differences between treatment groups for adverse events. CONCLUSION: Montelukast 20 mg was well tolerated in migraine patients but was not an effective prophylactic for prevention of migraine.     

Prophylaxis of migraine with oral magnesium: results from a prospective, multi-center, placebo-controlled and double-blind randomized study

In order to evaluate the prophylactic effect of oral magnesium, 81 patients aged 18–65 years with migraine according to the International Headache Society (IHS) criteria (mean attack frequency 3.6 per month) were examined. After a prospective baseline period of 4 weeks they received oral 600 mg (24 mmol) magnesium (trimagnesium dicitrate) daily for 12 weeks or placebo. In weeks 9–12 the attack frequency was reduced by 41.6% in the magnesium group and by 15.8% in the placebo group compared to the baseline (p <0.05). The number of days with migraine and the drug consumption for symptomatic treatment per patient also decreased significantly in the magnesium group. Duration and intensity of the attacks and the drug consumption per attack also tended to decrease compared to placebo but failed to be significant. Adverse events were diarrhea (18.6%) and gastric irritation (4.7%). High-dose oral magnesium appears to be effective in migraine prophylaxis.     

Cyclandelate in the prophylaxis of migraine: a placebo-controlled study

The prophylactic action of cyclandelate was investigated in a multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group study. A 4-week baseline period was followed by a 4-week placebo phase and a 16-week treatment period with either 1600 mg cyclandelate or placebo. Patients (n = 251) with two to six migraine attacks/month were randomized. Neither the primary study endpoint (reduction of migraine days from baseline to the last 28 days) nor most of the secondary endpoints (reduction in the number of migraine attacks, severity or duration of attacks, frequency of autonomic disturbances, medication for treatment of attacks) showed a difference between cyclandelate and placebo. Cyclandelate, however, was superior to placebo in a global impression of efficacy rated by the patients and the treating physicians. Both treatments were well tolerated. In conclusion, cyclandelate was not superior to placebo in the prophylaxis of migraine with regard to parameters usually used in migraine prophylaxis trials.     

The efficacy and safety of Tanacetum parthenium (feverfew) in migraine prophylaxis--a double-blind,multicentre, randomized placebo-controlled dose-response study

Tanacetum parthenium (feverfew), is a well-known herb for the prophylactic treatment of migraine. The primary objective was to show a dose-response of a new stable extract (MIG-99) reproducibly manufactured with supercritical CO2 from feverfew (T. parthenium). Furthermore, the study should provide data on the safety and tolerability of MIG-99. In a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, controlled trial with an adaptive design, the clinical efficacy and safety of three dosages of MIG-99 (2.08 mg; 6.25 mg; 18.75 mg t.i.d.) were compared with placebo. The patients (n = 147) suffered from migraine with and without aura according to International Headache Society (IHS) criteria and were treated with one of the study medications for 12 weeks after a 4-week baseline period. The primary efficacy parameter was the number of migraine attacks during the last 28 days of the treatment period compared with baseline. Secondary endpoints were total and average duration and intensity of migraine attacks, mean duration of the single attack, number of days with accompanying migraine symptoms, number of days with inability to work due to migraine as well as type and amount of additionally taken medications for the treatment of migraine attacks. The design of the study included a pre-planned adaptive interim analysis for patients with at least four migraine attacks within the baseline period. With respect to the primary and secondary efficacy parameter, a statistically significant difference was not found between the overall and the confirmatory intention-to-treat (ITT) sample in the exploratorily analysed four treatment groups. The frequency of migraine attacks for the predefined confirmatory subgroup of patients (n = 49) with at least four migraine attacks during the baseline period decreased in a dose-dependent manner (P = 0.001). The highest absolute change of migraine attacks was observed under treatment with 6.25 mg t.i.d. (mean +/- SD = -1.8 +/- 1.5 per 28 days) compared with placebo (-0.3 +/- 1.9; P = 0.02). Overall, 52 of 147 (35%) patients reported at least one adverse event (AE). The incidence of AEs in the active treatment groups was similar to that in the placebo group, and no dose-related effect was observed in any safety parameter. MIG-99 failed to show a significant migraine prophylactic effect in general. Accordingly, in the ITT analysis a dose-response relationship could not be observed. MIG-99 was shown to be effective only in a small predefined subgroup of patients with at least four attacks during the 28-day baseline period where the most favourable benefit-risk ratio was observed with a dosage of three capsules of 6.25 mg MIG-99 extract per day. Because of the low number of patients, these findings need to be verified in a larger sample. The incidence of AEs was similar for all treatment groups.     

Treatment of acute migraine attack: naproxen and placebo compared

A double-blind, cross-over, randomized study of acute migraine attack compared treatment results of naproxen with that of placebo. Each treatment period continued for either three months or six migraine attacks, whichever occurred first. The initial dose of naproxen was 750 mg, with additional 250-500 mg doses taken if and when required, to a maximum of five 250 mg tablets within a period of 24 h in each migraine attack. Forty-one patients were enrolled in the study; they had all experienced at least two but not more than eight migraine attacks a month during the preceding year. Thirty-two patients completed the two treatment periods. Naproxen was statistically significantly superior to placebo in reducing the severity of head pain, nausea, and photophobia; in shortening the duration of head pain, nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and lightheadedness; in diminishing the frequency of vomiting; and in decreasing the need for escape medication. Both patient and physician treatment preferences significantly favoured naproxen. Nine side effects were experienced by seven patients while receiving placebo and seven by five patients during naproxen treatment. Mild gastrointestinal discomfort was the main complaint. Only one patient withdrew from treatment because of a side effect, which occurred while receiving placebo.     

Efficacy of ICS 205-930, a novel 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist, in the prevention of migraine attacks. A complex answer to a simple question. ICS 205-930 Migraine Study Group

To investigate whether the novel, potent and highly selective 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist ICS 205-930 can prevent migraine attacks, we conducted simultaneously two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, international trials, involving a total of 204 patients, suffering from classic or common migraine. Both trials had the same parallel-group design (1 month baseline observation, followed by 3 months treatment) and both produced remarkably similar results. The primary efficacy parameter was the proportional reduction in attack frequency recorded after 3 months of treatment. Twenty-two patients withdrew prematurely from the trials and could not be assessed for efficacy. Mild to severe constipation was reported by about 50% of the patients on active treatment. None of the doses of ICS 205-930 tested (50 mg, 25 mg and 15 mg daily) produced a statistically significantly better result to reduce attack frequency than did placebo. However, confidence intervals for the difference in effect with placebo were wide, indicating that 15 mg ICS 205-930 may produce a 57% reduction in attack frequency as compared to placebo. The most unusual finding was that, for all efficacy parameters, the best results were obtained with the lowest dose (15 mg), the worst results with the highest dose (50 mg) and an intermediate effect with 25 mg. Such an inverse relation between dose and efficacy suggests a bell-shaped dose-response curve, implying that doses lower than 15 mg might well prove to be more effective. Thus, the present study has produced inconclusive, but intriguing results. Lower doses should be further investigated before drawing any definite conclusion on the efficacy of ICS 205-930 in the prophylactic treatment of migraine.     

Effect of divalproex on metabolic parameters is dose related in migraine prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE: To examine the metabolic effects of three divalproex dosing regimens in patients with migraine. BACKGROUND: Epidemiological and clinical studies have demonstrated a strong association between serum lipid levels and the development of coronary artery disease. Thus, it is important to understand the impact of chronically administered medications on serum lipids. Metabolic properties of divalproex, an approved and commonly used treatment for migraine prophylaxis, have not been systematically studied in patients with migraine. METHODS: Adult patients with migraine were randomized to receive one of three daily doses of divalproex (500 mg [n = 45], 1000 mg [n = 43], or 1500 mg [n = 44]) or placebo (n = 44) for 12 weeks. Post hoc analyses were performed to determine the effects of divalproex on total cholesterol, glucose, weight, and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: The treatment groups were similar at baseline based on demographic and clinical characteristics and the use of concomitant medications. Divalproex resulted in a dose-related mean decrease from baseline in total cholesterol: -5.7 mg/dL or 3% reduction with 500 mg/day; -8.4 mg/dL or 4% reduction with 1000 mg/day; and -12.8 mg/dL or 7% reduction with 1500 mg/day (P < .05 for 1500 mg/day vs. placebo). There were no differences between any divalproex dose group and placebo for mean change from baseline in glucose, weight, or BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Divalproex results in a dose-dependent reduction in serum cholesterol within the first 3 months of therapy, with no significant change in serum glucose or BMI.     

Botulinum toxin type A and divalproex sodium for prophylactic treatment of episodic or chronic migraine

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA; BOTOX: Allergan, Inc.) and divalproex sodium (DVPX; DEPAKOTE: Abbott Laboratories) as prophylaxis in reducing disability and impact associated with migraine. BACKGROUND: There is a need for effective, well-tolerated prophylactic treatment of migraine. DESIGN/METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, single-center prospective study. Fifty-nine patients received either BoNTA 100 U/placebo-DVPX bid or placebo-BoNTA/DVPX 250 mg bid. BoNTA/placebo injections were given at Day 0 and at Month 3. Patients were evaluated at Months 1, 3, 6, and 9. RESULTS: Both treatments showed significant improvements in migraine disability scores and reductions in headache days and headache index. A trend to decreased headache severity was observed with BoNTA. A greater percentage of DVPX patients reported adverse events possibly related to treatment (DVPX 75.8% vs BoNTA 50%, P = .04) and discontinued because of adverse events (DVPX 27.6% vs BoNTA 3.3%, P = .012). CONCLUSIONS: Both BoNTA and DVPX significantly reduced disability associated with migraine; BoNTA had a favorable tolerability profile compared with DVPX.     

Magnesium in the prophylaxis of migraine-a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

The migraine prophylactic effect of 10 mmol magnesium twice-daily has been evaluated in a multicentre, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients with two to six migraine attacks per month without aura, and history of migraine of at least 2 years, were included. A 4-week baseline period without medication was followed by 12 weeks of treatment with magnesium or placebo. The primary efficacy end-point was a reduction of at least 50% in intensity or duration of migraine attacks in hours at the end of the 12 weeks of treatment compared to baseline. With a calculated total sample size of 150 patients, an interim analysis was planned after completing treatment of at least 60 patients, which in fact was performed with 69 patients (64F, 5M), aged 18–64 years. Of these, 35 had received magnesium and 34 placebo. The number of responders was 1 in each group (28.6% under magnesium and 29.4% under placebo). As determined in the study protocol, this was a major reason to discontinue the trial. With regard to the number of migraine days or migraine attacks there was no benefit with magnesium compared to placebo. There were no centre-specific differences, and the final assessments of treatment efficacy by the doctor and patient were largely equivocal. With respect to tolerability and safety, 45.7% of patients in the magnesium group reported primarily mild adverse' events like soft stool and diarrhoea in contrast to 23.5% in the placebo group.     

Topiramate prophylaxis and response to triptan treatment for acute migraine

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of topiramate migraine prophylaxis on subject responsiveness to triptans used for acute symptomatic migraine treatment. BACKGROUND: Clinical experience suggests that prophylactic migraine treatment may enhance the efficacy of symptomatic medications used to treat acute migraine attacks. METHODS: This open-label, single-arm multicenter study consisted of a 6-week baseline period followed by a 16-week topiramate treatment period. Subjects meeting International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for migraine with and without aura signed consent and entered the baseline period. Those with 3 to 12 migraine periods per month during baseline received topiramate prophylactic treatment. Only patients who completed at least 12 weeks of topiramate treatment were included in the data analysis. RESULTS: Of 55 patients screened, 40 subjects entered the topiramate treatment period and 21 subjects received at least 12 weeks of treatment. Mean final dose of topiramate was 124 mg per day (range 50 to 200 mg per day). During the baseline period, the mean percentage of attacks rendered pain-free at 2 hours for the 21 subjects was 46.9% (SD = 31.9), while during the topiramate treatment period it was 44.6% (SD = 32.2) (P= .8). On topiramate, after the first 8 weeks of dosage titration, patients experienced a mean of 3.68 migraine attacks/month, compared to 4.31 during the baseline period (P < .03). Thirteen subjects discontinued because of adverse events. The most commonly reported adverse events were paresthesia, fatigue, anxiety, and dizziness. CONCLUSION: Although topiramate prophylaxis did reduce migraine attack frequency, in this pilot study topiramate prophylactic migraine treatment did not increase the proportion of patients pain-free 2 hours after symptomatic triptan therapy.     

Sumatriptan in the treatment of acute migraine with aura

The efficacy of the selective 5HT1-like agonist sumatriptan in acute treatment of classical migraine (i.e. migraine with aura) was assessed in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group randomized trial. An oral dose of 200 mg was chosen on the basis of the efficacy rates achieved (70-85%) with 70-280 mg in open studies (1, 2). The dose of 200 mg was also chosen for the study because preliminary data from an oral pilot study indicated that efficacy increased with increasing dose up to 200 mg. Each patient was treated for a maximum of three separate attacks of migraine with aura within a three months' period. Three attacks were treated so that we could examine consistency of response across more than one attack. For attack 1, 200 mg sumatriptan was significantly more effective, safe and well tolerated than placebo at relieving headache 2 h after treatment was given (p = 0.023). In subsequent attacks, i.e. in attacks 2 and 3, there was no such significant effect of sumatriptan compared with placebo in relieving headache. This reduced efficacy of sumatriptan in the second and third attacks may be due to a high incidence of vomiting induced by the high dose of dispersible formulation and also by the bitter taste of the tablets. In addition, there was an increase in placebo response in attacks 2 and 3 compared to the first attack.     

Randomized, controlled study of telcagepant in patients with migraine and coronary artery disease

Objective.— To evaluate the efficacy of telcagepant in patients with migraine and coronary artery disease. Background.— Calcitonin gene‐related peptide receptor antagonists, such as telcagepant, may be useful for acute migraine treatment in patients with cardiovascular disease, a population for whom triptans are contraindicated. Methods.— Randomized, double‐blind, two‐period (6 weeks per period) crossover study in patients with stable coronary artery disease and migraine. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either: (1) Period 1: telcagepant (280‐mg tablet/300‐mg capsule), Period 2: acetaminophen (1000‐mg); or (2) Period 1: placebo for attack 1 then acetaminophen for subsequent attacks, Period 2: telcagepant. Patients could treat up to 12 migraine attacks per period to assess the tolerability of telcagepant. The primary efficacy analysis evaluated telcagepant vs placebo on 2‐hour pain freedom during the first attack of Period 1. Results.— One hundred and sixty‐five of the planned 400 patients were enrolled, and 114 took at least one dose of treatment. Telcagepant was not statistically different from placebo for 2‐hour pain freedom (25.0% vs 18.9%, odds ratio = 1.62 [95% confidence interval: 0.62, 4.25]). The median number of attacks treated per period was 3. No cardiovascular thrombotic adverse events occurred within 14 days of dosing. Conclusion.— The study was underpowered due to enrollment difficulties and did not demonstrate a significant efficacy difference between telcagepant and placebo for the treatment of a migraine attack in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Telcagepant was generally well tolerated for acute intermittent migraine treatment in these patients.     

Almotriptan in migraine patients who respond poorly to oral sumatriptan: a double-blind, randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of almotriptan 12.5 mg in migraine patients who respond poorly to sumatriptan 50 mg. BACKGROUND: Poor response to sumatriptan therapy for acute migraine attacks has been documented in the literature, but few controlled trials have investigated the efficacy of an alternative triptan in this subgroup of patients. METHODS: Patients with an International Headache Society diagnosis of migraine who self-described as experiencing at least two unsatisfactory responses to sumatriptan treated their first migraine attack with open-label sumatriptan 50 mg. Patients who did not achieve 2-hour pain relief (improvement of headache from moderate/severe to mild/no headache) were then randomized to treat their second attack with almotriptan 12.5 mg or placebo under double-blind conditions. RESULTS: In the first attack, 221 of 302 participants (73%) did not achieve 2-hour pain relief with sumatriptan and were randomized to treatment of their second attack with almotriptan 12.5 mg or placebo. Of the 198 sumatriptan nonresponders who treated their second attack (99 almotriptan; 99 placebo), 70% had severe headache pain at baseline. Two-hour pain-relief rates were significantly higher with almotriptan compared to placebo (47.5% vs 23.2%; P<.001). A significant treatment effect for almotriptan was also seen in pain-free rates at 2 hours (33.3% vs 14.1%; P<.005) and sustained freedom from pain (20.9% vs 9.0%; P<.05). In the second attack, 7.1% of patients in the almotriptan group experienced adverse events compared to 5.1% in the placebo group (P=.77). CONCLUSIONS: Almotriptan 12.5 mg is an effective and well-tolerated alternative for patients who respond poorly to sumatriptan 50 mg. A poor response to one triptan does not predict a poor response to other agents in that class.     

Divalproex extended-release in adolescent migraine prophylaxis: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Objective.— To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 3 different doses of divalproex sodium extended‐release vs placebo in the prophylaxis of migraine headaches in adolescents. Background.— Divalproex sodium has been approved for migraine prophylaxis in adults, and previous uncontrolled data suggest divalproex sodium may be effective in preventing migraine in children and adolescents with acceptable tolerability. Methods.— This was a 12‐week, phase 3, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, parallel‐group, multicenter study in approximately 300 adolescents aged 12 to 17 years with migraine headaches. At the end of the baseline phase, subjects still meeting study criteria were randomized in a 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to receive divalproex sodium extended‐release 250 mg, 500 mg, or 1000 mg once daily, or placebo. The primary efficacy variable was reduction from baseline in 4‐week migraine headache rate for each active treatment group vs placebo. Standard safety assessments were conducted and testosterone and sex hormone‐binding globulin levels were collected for postmenarchal females. Results.— There was no statistically significant treatment difference between any divalproex sodium extended‐release dose group and placebo for the primary efficacy variable, reduction from baseline in 4‐week migraine headache rate. There were no statistically significant differences in adverse events between any active treatment group and placebo. A notable dose‐related decrease in platelets was observed, and individuals in all 4 treatment groups had increases in ammonia levels; treatment differences in other laboratory variables were generally small. Among postmenarchal female subjects who were not taking hormonal contraceptives or other steroids, there was no statistically significant change in testosterone levels, but a statistically significant dose‐related increase in sex hormone‐binding globulin was observed. Conclusions.— In the current study, divalproex sodium extended‐release did not differentiate from placebo in the prophylactic treatment of migraine headaches but was generally well‐tolerated in adolescents aged 12 to 17 years.     

Treatment of Acute Migraine Attack: Ibuprofen and Placebo Compared

The efficacy of ibuprofen in comparison with that of placebo was assessed in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. The material consisted of 40 migraine patients. Each treatment period continued for five migraine attacks. The initial dose of ibuprofen was 800 mg, with additional 400 mg taken if and when needed. The mean duration of migraine attacks treated with ibuprofen was significantly shorter than the duration of migraine attacks treated with placebo. Need for supplementary medication was also significantly lower in the ibuprofen-treated migraine attack group. Ibuprofen was well tolerated and no marked side effects were reported during the trial.     

Propranolol in the Prophylaxis of Migraine

SYNOPSIS
This 34-week, placebo-controlled, single crossover study with a double-blind randomized treatment sequence evaluated the effects of propranolol as a prophylactic agent in individualized doses ranging from 60–320 mg/day given to 62 patients who had common and/or classic migraine. Variables reflecting efficacy were the frequency, severity, and persistency of acute migraine attacks expressed as Headache Unit Index (HUI) and the therapeutic medication required for acute attacks during the study expressed as the Relief Medication Unit Index (RMUI). Both HUI and RMUI were significantly reduced from baseline after the six weeks of propranolol titration (p<0.0001) reflecting fewer and/or less severe headaches. During the crossover treatment periods, propranolol, in comparison with placebo, was significantly more effective in the reduction of HUI (p<0.01) and RMUI (p<0.05). Data at the end of the dose finding (titration) period were analyzed separately for patients whose final prescribed doses were 60-240 mg or 320 mg/day propranolol. Significant reductions in HUI and RMUI (p< 0.0001) were shown at this time at each dose level. At all dose levels, propranolol was well tolerated. This was the first study in which the propranolol dose for migraine extended above the usual recommended 240 mg/day, i.e., up to 320 mg/day. This higher dose was administered if the drug had been well tolerated, even if only one headache in 2 weeks occurred at lower doses. The data suggest that there is an option to prescribe propranolol at higher doses as a preventive measure, thus reducing the need for ancillary medications.     

Aborting a Migraine Attack: Naproxen Sodium v Ergotamine plus Caffeine

SYNOPSIS
The tolerability and efficacy of naproxen sodium and of ergotamine tartrate plus caffeine (ergotamine) were compared in the treatment of acute migraine attacks and associated symptoms. In this multicenter, double-blind, parallel study of up to six headaches over a 3-month period, patients took naproxen sodium 825 mg, ergotamine 2 mg, or placebo at the time of the first symptom of an attack; 30 minutes later, if necessary, patients repeated naproxen sodium 275 mg, ergotamine 1 mg or placebo, as appropriate. Rescue medication was allowed 30 minutes following the second dose if needed. Active drugs provided notably better relief of head pain than did placebo; 1 hour following the first dose the difference between naproxen sodium and placebo was statistically significant. Naproxen sodium was as efficacious as ergotamine in the relief of migraine attacks and associated symptoms. Relief of vomiting, nausea, photophobia, and motor symptoms favored naproxen sodium over ergotamine; these differences were statistically significant for nausea and motor symptoms. Ergotamine-treated patients reported more complaints and had more severe and longer-lasting complaints than patients on the other two regimens. Overall tolerance ratings by both investigators and patients indicated that naproxen sodium and placebo were tolerated significantly better than ergotamine.     

Randomized, controlled trial of phytoestrogen in the prophylactic treatment of menstrual migraine.

Approximately 30% of women afflicted with migraine have menstrually associated attacks. These migraines are often refractory to treatment. Evidence suggests estrogen and progestin fluctuations may influence menstrual migraine. Phytoestrogens have demonstrated estrogenic effects in some tissues, but are without stimulation of the endometrium, suggesting decreased risk with long-term use. This study was undertaken to assess the efficacy of a phytoestrogen combination in the prophylactic treatment of menstrual migraine. Forty-nine patients were randomized to receive either placebo, or a daily combination of 60 mg soy isoflavones, 100 mg dong quai, and 50 mg black cohosh, with each component standardized to its primary alkaloid. Patients received study medication for 24 weeks. Average frequency of menstrually associated migraine attacks during weeks 9-24 was reduced from 10.3 +/- 2.4 (mean +/- s.e.m.) in placebo treated patients to 4.7 +/- 1.8 (P < 0.01) in patients treated with the phytoestrogen preparation.     

Nadolol and Propranolol in Migraine Management

SYNOPSIS
The prophylactic effects of nadolol once daily and propranolol b.i.d. were studied in 28 patients with common or classic migraine. Following screening procedures, the subjects entered a 28- to 120-day placebo period, which was followed by a 24-week randomized, double-blind treatment period. The prophylactic effects were evaluated by frequency of migraine attacks, consumption of acute migraine-relief tablets, duration of attacks, ratings of headache and nausea severity, and duration of incapacitation. Compared to placebo, both beta blockers brought about a highly significant (p < 0.01 ) reduction in attack frequency and consumption of acute migraine-relief tablets, while no significant changes were found with regard to the other variables. No significant differences were found between the two beta blockers. The results indicate that nadolol once daily is as effective as propranolol b.i.d. in migraine management and that the main effect of beta blockers in migraine is in preventing attacks from breaking out, while the capacity for reducing the intensity or duration of unsuppressed attacks is less prominent.