Efficacy and safety of 6.25 mg t.i.d. feverfew CO2-extract (MIG-99) in migraine prevention--a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled study

The efficacy and tolerability of a CO(2)-extract of feverfew (MIG-99, 6.25 mg t.i.d.) for migraine prevention were investigated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, parallel-group study. Patients (N = 170 intention-to-treat; MIG-99, N = 89; placebo, N = 81) suffering from migraine according to International Headache Society criteria were treated for 16 weeks after a 4-week baseline period. The primary endpoint was the average number of migraine attacks per 28 days during the treatment months 2 and 3 compared with baseline. Safety parameters included adverse events, laboratory parameters, vital signs and physical examination. The migraine frequency decreased from 4.76 by 1.9 attacks per month in the MIG-99 group and by 1.3 attacks in the placebo group (P = 0.0456). Logistic regression of responder rates showed an odds ratio of 3.4 in favour of MIG-99 (P = 0.0049). Adverse events possibly related to study medication were 9/107 (8.4%) with MIG-99 and 11/108 (10.2%) with placebo (P = 0.654). MIG-99 is effective and shows a favourable benefit-risk ratio.     

A double-blind placebo-controlled pilot study of sublingual feverfew and ginger (LipiGesic™ M) in the treatment of migraine

(Headache 2011;51:1078‐1086) Background.— Therapeutic needs of migraineurs vary considerably from patient to patient and even attack to attack. Some attacks require high‐end therapy, while other attacks have treatment needs that are less immediate. While triptans are considered the “gold standard” of migraine therapy, they do have limitations and many patients are seeking other therapeutic alternatives. In 2005, an open‐label study of feverfew/ginger suggested efficacy for attacks of migraine treated early during the mild headache phase of the attack. Methods/Materials.— In this multi‐center pilot study, 60 patients treated 221 attacks of migraine with sublingual feverfew/ginger or placebo. All subjects met International Headache Society criteria for migraine with or without aura, experiencing 2‐6 attacks of migraine per month within the previous 3 months. Subjects had <15 headache days per month and were not experiencing medication overuse headache. Inclusion required that subjects were able to identify a period of mild headache in at least 75% of attacks. Subjects were required to be able to distinguish migraine from non‐migraine headache. Subjects were randomized 3:1 to receive either sublingual feverfew/ginger or a matching placebo and were instructed but not required to treat with study medication at the earliest recognition of migraine. Results.— Sixty subjects treated 208 evaluable attacks of migraine over a 1‐month period; 45 subjects treated 163 attacks with sublingual feverfew/ginger and 15 subjects treated 58 attacks with a sublingual placebo preparation. Evaluable diaries were completed for 151 attacks of migraine in the population using feverfew/ginger and 57 attacks for those attacks treated with placebo. At 2 hours, 32% of subjects receiving active medication and 16% of subjects receiving placebo were pain‐free (P = .02). At 2 hours, 63% of subjects receiving feverfew/ginger found pain relief (pain‐free or mild headache) vs 39% for placebo (P = .002). Pain level differences on a 4‐point pain scale for those receiving feverfew/ginger vs placebo were ?0.24 vs ?0.04 respectively (P = .006). Feverfew/ginger was generally well tolerated with oral numbness and nausea being the most frequently occurring adverse event. Conclusion.— Sublingual feverfew/ginger appears safe and effective as a first‐line abortive treatment for a population of migraineurs who frequently experience mild headache prior to the onset of moderate to severe headache.     

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.     

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.     

A combination of riboflavin, magnesium, and feverfew for migraine prophylaxis: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy for migraine prophylaxis of a compound containing a combination of riboflavin, magnesium, and feverfew. BACKGROUND: Previous studies of magnesium and feverfew for migraine prophylaxis have found conflicting results, and there has been only a single placebo-controlled trial of riboflavin. DESIGN/METHODS: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of a compound providing a daily dose of riboflavin 400 mg, magnesium 300 mg, and feverfew 100 mg. The placebo contained 25 mg riboflavin. The study included a 1-month run-in phase and 3-month trial. The protocol allowed for 120 patients to be randomized, with a preplanned interim analysis of the data after 48 patients had completed the trial. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients completed the 3-month trial. For the primary outcome measure, a 50% or greater reduction in migraines, there was no difference between active and "placebo" groups, achieved by 10 (42%) and 11 (44%), respectively (P=.87). Similarly, there was no significant difference in secondary outcome measures, for active versus placebo groups, respectively: 50% or greater reduction in migraine days (33% and 40%, P=.63); or change in mean number of migraines, migraine days, migraine index, or triptan doses. Compared to baseline, however, both groups showed a significant reduction in number of migraines, migraine days, and migraine index. This effect exceeds that reported for placebo agents in previous migraine trials. CONCLUSION: Riboflavin 25 mg showed an effect comparable to a combination of riboflavin 400 mg, magnesium 300 mg, and feverfew 100 mg. The placebo response exceeds that reported for any other placebo in trials of migraine prophylaxis, and suggests that riboflavin 25 mg may be an active comparator. There is at present conflicting scientific evidence with regard to the efficacy of these compounds for migraine prophylaxis.     

Consistent efficacy and tolerability of almotriptan in the acute treatment of multiple migraine attacks: results of a large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

In this double-blind study, the efficacy and tolerability of a single dose of almotriptan (6.25 or 12.5 mg) was compared with placebo in the treatment of three consecutive migraine attacks of moderate or severe intensity. Of 1013 randomized patients, 722 evaluable patients completed the study. The total number of attacks relieved (severe or moderate pain reduced to mild or no pain) at 2 h post-dose was significantly higher (P < 0.001) after treatment with almotriptan 6.25 or 12.5 mg compared with placebo (60% and 70% vs. 38%, respectively). Moreover, a consistent response was achieved across and within patients for almotriptan 6.25 or 12.5 mg compared with placebo (pain relief in at least two out of three attacks within 2 h for 64% and 75% vs. 36%, respectively) and less than one-third of the patients relapsed within 24 h. Almotriptan was well tolerated with no significant differences between the almotriptan and placebo treatment groups in the percentage of patients reporting adverse events. Overall, the 12.5-mg dose was associated with the most favourable efficacy/tolerability ratio and is, therefore, the recommended dose.     

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.     

Botulinum toxin type a prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled exploratory study

OBJECTIVE: This exploratory trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of multiple treatments of botulinum toxin type A (BoNTA; BOTOX, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA, USA) as prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine headaches. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an 11-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, exploratory study. Patients were screened during a 30-day baseline period, and eligible patients with 4 or more migraine episodes and < or =15 headache days entered a single-blind 30-day placebo run-in period. Patients were classified as placebo nonresponders (PNR) if they had at least 4 moderate-to-severe migraine episodes and did not experience at least a 50% decrease from baseline in the frequency of migraine episodes following their placebo treatment. All other subjects were classified as placebo responders (PR). Patients were randomized within each stratum (PNR, PR) to 3 treatments with BoNTA (110 to 260 U of BoNTA per treatment cycle) or placebo at 90-day intervals using a modified follow-the-pain treatment paradigm. The primary efficacy outcome measure was the mean change from baseline in the frequency of migraine episodes for the 30 days prior to day 180 in the PNR group. Secondary efficacy measures included the proportion of patients with a decrease from baseline of 50% or more migraine episodes per 30-day period. Patients were allowed to take concomitant acute and prophylactic headache medications. Adverse events were reported. RESULTS: A total of 809 patients were screened and 369 patients (89.2% female; mean age, 45 years; range, 20 to 65 years) entered the placebo run-in period and were subsequently randomized to BoNTA or placebo. The mean total dose of BoNTA was 190.5 units (U) (range, 110 U to 260 U). The predetermined primary efficacy endpoint was not met. Substantial mean improvements of 2.4 and 2.2 fewer migraine episodes per month at day 180 in the PNR stratum treated with BoNTA and placebo, respectively, were observed (P > .999). From day 180 through the end of the study (day 270) at least 50% of all patients in each treatment group had a decrease from baseline of 50% or more migraine episodes per 30-day period. However, in the group of patients with > or =12 headache days at baseline (and < or =15 headache days), BoNTA patients experienced a mean change from baseline of -4.0 headache episodes at day 180 compared with -1.9 headache episodes in the placebo group (P= .048). The majority of treatment-related adverse events were transient and mild to moderate in severity. Only 7 patients (1.9%) discontinued the study due to adverse events (6 BoNTA, 1 placebo). CONCLUSION: There were no statistically significant between-group differences in the mean change from baseline in the frequency of migraine episodes per 30-day period. There were substantial, sustained improvements during the course of the study in all groups. Multiple treatments with BoNTA were shown to be safe and well tolerated over an active treatment period lasting 9 months.     

A placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over trial of flunarizine in common migraine

After four weeks of medication-free baseline observation, 29 patients with common migraine randomly received flunarizine (10 mg daily) or placebo for a 16-week period. After four weeks wash-out they crossed treatments for another 16 weeks; 27 patients completed the trial. Compared with placebo, flunarizine significantly reduced the frequency of migraine attacks and the derived headache indices, but the duration and severity of single attacks remained unchanged (Mann-Whitney U-test). The effect of flunarizine increased during the 16-week treatment period and during the last four weeks the number of migraine attacks reduced to 50% compared to the wash-out period. The only side-effect of flunarizine was mild daytime sedation in three patients. It is concluded that flunarizine is a valuable new prophylactic agent for common migraine.     

Prophylactic treatment of migraine with bisoprolol: a placebo-controlled study

The objective of the present study was to assess the efficacy of bisoprolol in migraine prophylaxis. A double-blind placebo-controlled study was conducted in 226 patients with migraine with or without aura, a migraine history of at least 2 years and at least 3 documented attacks during the 28 days run-in period. The duration of treatment was 12 weeks following an initial 28 days' run-in period. Patients reported the number of attacks and their severity in a diary. Treatment with bisoprolol 5 mg resulted in a significant reduction in the frequency of migraine attacks (39% vs 22%) compared to placebo treatment ( p <0.05). Treatment had no effect on the duration and severity of the attacks. Bisoprolol was well tolerated.     

Comparative Efficacy of Nadolol and Propranolol in the Management of Migraine

SYNOPSIS
A multicenter randomized double-blind study was conducted on 140 patients with classic and/or common migraine who received either nadolol (80 mg or 160 mg OD) or propranolol (80 mg bid). Admission into the 12-week active treatment period required at least 3 attacks per month during a placebo lead-in period. Abortive headache therapy was allowed at the patients' discretion, each keeping a diary of migraine attacks and use of medications. Clinical assessments were performed monthly.
Data from 42 patients were excluded from the evaluation of efficacy, mainly because of non-adherence to protocol requirements. Drug efficacy evaluation in the remaining 98 patients was based on 4 separate migraine indices: frequency of attacks, intensity of attacks, days of pain, and need for relief medication, with success being defined as a reduction in an index of at least 50% relative to baseline. A successful response in at least I index was found in 48% of patients on nadolol 80 mg (p=NS vs propranolol 160 mg) and in 69% of the patients on nadolol 160 mg compared with 54% on propranolol 160 mg (p<0.05). Success in all 4 indices was found in 21% of patients on nadolol 80 mg (p=NS vs propranolol 160 mg) and in 41% of patients on 160 mg nadolol as compared to 15% on propranolol 160 mg (p<0.05).
Adverse reactions required discontinuation from therapy in 2 of 48 patients on nadolol 80 mg (4.1%), 2 of 47 patients on nadolol 160 mg (4.3%), and 4 of 44 patients on propranolol 160 mg (9.1%).
This study indicates that, in the prophylaxis of migraine, 80 mg of nadolol administered once daily is equivalent in efficacy and safety to propranolol 80 mg administered twice daily. Furthermore, nadolol given as a single daily dose of 160 mg is superior to an equal total daily dose of propranolol administered twice daily.     

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.     

Efficacy and tolerability of almotriptan in adolescents: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Objectives.— To assess the efficacy and safety of almotriptan 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, and 25 mg vs placebo for acute migraine treatment in adolescents. Patients and Methods.— In this double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, multicenter trial, 866 patients aged 12 to 17 years with a >1 year history of migraine (per International Headache Society criteria) were randomized to treat one migraine headache with almotriptan 6.25 mg, 12.5 mg, 25 mg, or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was headache pain relief 2 hours after dosing, adjusted for baseline severity, with absence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia 2 hours after dosing as coprimary endpoints. Results.— The 2‐hour pain‐relief rate was significantly higher with almotriptan 25 mg compared with placebo (66.7% vs 55.3%; P = .022). The incidence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia at 2 hours (adjusted for baseline pain intensity) for the almotriptan 25 mg and placebo groups was not significantly different. The 2‐hour pain‐relief rates (unadjusted) were significantly higher with almotriptan 6.25 mg (71.8%), 12.5 mg (72.9%), and 25 mg (66.7%) than with placebo (55.3%; P = .001, P < .001, and P = .028, respectively). Rates for sustained pain relief also were significantly greater with almotriptan 6.25 mg (67.2%), 12.5 mg (66.9%), and 25 mg (64.5%) than with placebo group (52.4%), P < .01 for the 6.25‐ and 12.5‐mg doses and P < .05 for the 25‐mg dose. Age group subanalysis demonstrated significantly greater 2‐hour pain‐relief rates with all 3 doses of almotriptan compared with placebo for patients aged 15 to 17 years, a significantly lower incidence of photophobia and phonophobia at 2 hours with almotriptan 12.5 mg compared with placebo for patients aged 15 to 17 years, and a significantly lower incidence of photophobia with almotriptan 12.5 mg compared with placebo for those aged 12 to 14 years. Almotriptan treatment was well tolerated, with the most common adverse events (>2%) of nausea, dizziness, and somnolence. Conclusions.— Oral almotriptan was efficacious for relieving migraine headache pain in adolescents, with the 12.5‐mg dose associated with the most favorable efficacy profile with respect to relieving headache pain and associated symptoms of migraine (photophobia and phonophobia). Almotriptan treatment was well tolerated in this adolescent population.     

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.     

Use of rescue medication in trials of almotriptan versus placebo in the treatment of acute migraine

BACKGROUND: Almotriptan malate is a recently marketed triptan for the treatment of acute migraine. Results from controlled clinical trials demonstrate efficacy superior to placebo and an adverse event rate comparable to that with placebo. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the effect of oral almotriptan on the use of rescue medication in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. METHODS: Three Phase II and III, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind studies of almotriptan used as the basis for regulatory approval of the drug were included in the analysis. Two studies (1 single dose, 1 multiple dose) assessed almotriptan 6.25 mg and 12.5 mg and a third compared almotriptan 12.5 mg and sumatriptan 100 mg. Primary results from all 3 trials were previously published. Rescue medication was permitted if migraine pain had not decreased to mild severity or to no pain at 2 hours after study medication. The primary end point of this analysis was use of rescue medication. RESULTS: A total of 1777 patients were included in the analysis. Mean patient age ranged from 39.4 to 44.0 years; approximately 87% were women, and >98% were white. Patients were well matched for demographic characteristics. Overall, use of rescue medication was significantly lower with almotriptan 6.25 mg and 12.5 mg compared with placebo (P < or = 0.05 for each group). No significant difference was noted between the almotriptan 12.5-mg and sumatriptan 100-mg groups. In 2 of the studies, patients with moderate or severe baseline pain used significantly less rescue medication in the almotriptan groups compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Oral almotriptan 6.25 mg or 12.5 mg significantly reduced use of rescue medication compared with placebo among patients with acute migraine. Use of rescue medication was comparable with almotriptan 12.5 mg and sumatriptan 100 mg.     

Evaluation of Carisbamate for the Treatment of Migraine in a Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

Objective.— This study explored the dose‐response relationship of carisbamate administered at doses of 100 mg per day, 300 mg per day, or 600 mg per day, in the prevention of migraine. Background.— Carisbamate ([S]‐2‐O‐carbamoyl‐1‐o‐chlorophenyl‐ethanol; RWJ 333369) is a new chemical entity being studied for efficacy as adjunctive therapy in partial onset epilepsy. Because some antiepileptic drugs are also efficacious in migraine, for example, topiramate and valproate sodium, we tested carisbamate in migraine prophylaxis. Design/Methods.— This was a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial, approximately 22‐week duration. The primary efficacy variable was the percent reduction from baseline through the double‐blind phase in average monthly migraine frequency using a 48‐hour rule. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 : 1 to treatment with carisbamate 100, 300, or 600 mg per day, or placebo. Migraine attacks were counted during a prospective 4‐week baseline period, which was followed by a 2‐week titration period, a 12‐week maintenance period, a 1‐week medication reduction period, and a 3‐week observation period. Patients had an established history of migraine, with or without aura, for at least 1 year and a 3‐month history of 3‐12 migraine attacks per month. Results.— Patients (n = 323) were predominantly women (85%) and white (89%); mean age was 41 years. There were no statistically significant differences between any of the carisbamate groups and placebo (P ≥ .6) for the median (range) percentage reduction from baseline to end point in average monthly migraine frequency (P value vs placebo): 37% (?250%, 100%) for placebo; 33% (?210%, 100%; P = .7) CRS 100 mg/day; 27% (?100%, 100%; P = .8) CRS 300 mg/day; and 35% (?87%, 100%; P = .6) CRS 600 mg/day. Results for secondary efficacy measures (responder rate, percent reduction in average monthly migraine frequency using the 24‐hour rule, and percent reduction in average monthly migraine days) were consistent (P ≥ .075). The proportion of patients discontinuing because of adverse events was similar for placebo and carisbamate‐treated patients (13% each). The most common (occurring in ≥5% of patients) treatment‐emergent adverse events in patients treated with carisbamate were fatigue (17%) and nasopharyngitis (13%). Fatigue appeared to be dose related. Conclusions.— Carisbamate was not more efficacious in migraine prophylaxis than placebo in this well‐controlled study that included a suitable population. However, carisbamate monotherapy was well tolerated at doses up to 600 mg per day.     

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.     

Hydroxocobalamin,a nitric oxide scavenger,in the prophylaxis of migraine: an open,pilot study

Drugs which directly counteract nitric oxide (NO), such as endothelial receptor blockers, NO-synthase inhibitors, and NO-scavengers, may be effective in the acute treatment of migraine, but are also likely to be effective in migraine prophylaxis. In the underlying pilot study the prophylactic effect of the NO scavenger hydroxocobalamin after intranasal administration in migraine was evaluated. Twenty patients, with a history of migraine of > 1 year and with two to eight migraine attacks per month, were included in an open trial. A baseline period was followed by an active treatment period of 3 months with 1 mg intranasal hydroxocobalamin daily. Patients were instructed to complete a diary in which details of each attack were described. A reduction in migraine attack frequency of >/ or = 50% was seen in 10 of 19 patients, which corresponds to 53% of the patients (responders). A reduction of > or = 30% was noted in 63% of the patients. The mean attack frequency in the total study population showed a reduction from 4.7 +/- 1.7 attacks per month to 2.7 +/- 1.6 (P < 0.001). For the responders the migraine attack frequency was reduced from 5.2 +/- 1.9 (baseline) to 1.9 +/- 1.3 attacks per month (P < 0.005), while for those who did not respond a non-significant reduction was found: 4.1 +/- 1.4 to 3.7 +/- 1.5 (P > 0.1). A reduction was also observed for the total duration of the migraine attacks per month, the total number of migraine days per month and the number of medication doses for acute treatment used per month. This is the first prospective, open study indicating that intranasal hydroxocobalamin may have a prophylactic effect in migraine. As a percentage of responders in prophylactic trials of > 35-40% is unlikely to be a placebo effect, a double-blind study is warranted.     

Telmisartan in migraine prophylaxis: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

We evaluated telmisartan 80 mg for migraine prophylaxis. Migraine patients ( n  = 95) with three to seven migraine attacks in 3 months were randomized, double-blind to telmisartan or placebo. The primary end-point was the reduction in the number of migraine days (i.e. a day with ≥ 1 h of symptoms) between the 4-week baseline period and the last 4 weeks of the 12-week treatment period. A responder was recorded when there was a symptom reduction of ≥ 50% in these 4-week baseline and treatment periods. The reduction in migraine days was 1.65 with telmisartan and 1.14 with placebo ( P  > 0.05). Post hoc analyses adjusting for baseline and centre showed a 38% reduction in migraine days with telmisartan vs. 15% with placebo ( P  = 0.03), and a borderline significant difference in responders (40% vs. 25%, P  = 0.07). The incidence of adverse events was similar between treatments. This study indicates that telmisartan might be effective in migraine prophylaxis.     

Efficacy and tolerability of topiramate 200 mg/d in the prevention of migraine with/without aura in adults: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 12-week pilot study

BACKGROUND: Several large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have found topiramate (TPM) to be effective and generally well tolerated as a preventive therapy for migraine. OBJECTIVE: This paper evaluates efficacy and safety data from a pilot study of TPM 200 mg/d as preventive therapy in adult subjects with a history of migraine with or without aura. METHODS: The pilot study had a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. Subjects were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive TPM 200 mg/d or placebo. The double-blind treatment phase consisted of an 8-week titration period (25 mg/d for the first week, followed by weekly increases of 25 mg) and a 12-week maintenance period. The primary efficacy measure was the change in mean monthly migraine frequency. Additional measures were the median percent reduction in monthly migraine frequency and the proportion of responders (those with > or =50%, > or =75%, or 100% reduction in monthly migraine frequency). RESULTS: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population included 211 subjects (138 TPM, 73 placebo; mean [SD] mean weight, 76.7 [18.7] kg). Of 45 subjects who discontinued the study in the TPM group, 21 discontinued during the titration period, compared with 3 of 13 subjects who discontinued in the placebo group. When the efficacy data were assessed using the per-protocol, analysis-of-covariance model, TPM 200 mg/d was not associated with a significant reduction in mean monthly migraine frequency compared with placebo. A post hoc analysis using a Poisson regression model in the ITT population suggested that TPM significantly reduced mean monthly migraine frequency compared with placebo (P=0.04). A significantly larger proportion of TPM-treated subjects had a > or =75% reduction in monthly migraine frequency compared with placebo (P=0.03). At least 1 adverse event was reported by 90.0% and 69.9% of the TPM and placebo groups, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurring in > or =10% of subjects in the TPM group were paresthesia (45%), dizziness (16%), fatigue (16%), nausea (14%), and weight loss (14%). Most treatment-emergent AEs were rated mild or moderate in severity. Of 3 serious AEs (depression, abdominal pain, leg pain) occurring during the trial, none were considered related to either TPM or placebo. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, mean monthly migraine frequency did not differ significantly between TPM and placebo.