Failure of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in prevention of migraine: a double-blind study versus placebo

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (OPFA) have beneficial effects on inflammatory reactions and production of cytokines. They decrease the release of 5HT by platelets and possess vasorelaxant activity. This led them to be tried in the prophylactic treatment of migraine. After 4 weeks of a single-blind placebo run-in period, patients were randomized and treated in double-blind condition by placebo or OPFA 6 g a day for 16 weeks, followed by a 4-week placebo run-out period. The intention to treat population included 196 patients. Those who received all four treatment periods included 96 patients taking OPFA and 87 taking placebo. The primary efficacy analysis was the number of migraine attacks during the last 4 weeks of treatment. During this period, the mean number of attacks was 1.20 +/- 1.40 in the OPFA group and 1.26 +/- 1.11 in the placebo group (NS). The total number of attacks during the 4-month period of the study was significantly different between groups: 7.05 in the placebo group, 5.95 in the OPFA group (P = 0.036). Mean intensity, mean duration of the attacks and rescue medication use, were not significantly different between the two groups. Except for a significant difference against OPFA for eructations, the tolerance was satisfying. Despite a run-in placebo period of 1 month, a very strong placebo effect was observed in this trial: 45% reduction of the attacks between run-in and 4-month treatment period (55% in the OPFA group, P = 0.058). Finally, this large study did not confirm two previous studies based on a small number of patients.     

Lamotrigine versus placebo in the prophylaxis of migraine with and without aura

Lamotrigine blocks voltage-sensitive sodium channels, leading to inhibition of neuronal release of glutamate. Release of glutamate may be essential in the propagation of spreading cortical depression, which some believe is central to the genesis of migraine attacks. This study compared safety and efficacy of lamotrigine and placebo in migraine prophylaxis in a double-blind randomized parallel-groups trial. A total of 110 patients entered; after a 1-month placebo run-in period, placebo-responders and non-compliers were excluded, leaving 77 to be treated with lamotrigine ( n =37) or placebo ( n =40) for up to 3 months. Initially lamotrigine therapy was commenced at the full dose of 200 mg/day, but, following a high incidence of skin rashes, a slow dose-escalation was introduced: 25 mg/day for 2 weeks, 50 mg/day for 2 weeks, then 200 mg/day. Attack rates were reduced from baseline means of 3.6 per month on lamotrigine and 4.4 on placebo to 3.2 and 3.0 respectively during the last month of treatment. Improvements were greater on placebo and these changes, not statistically significant, indicate that lamotrigine is ineffective for migraine prophylaxis. There were more adverse events on lamotrigine than on placebo, most commonly rash. With slow dose-escalation their frequency was reduced and the rate of withdrawal for adverse events was similar in both treatment groups.     

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.     

Flunarizine Versus Metoprolol in Migraine Prophylaxis: A Double-Blind, Randomized Parallel Group Study of Efficacy and Tolerability

The prophylactic effect of flunarizine and metoprolol was studied in a multi-center randomized, double-blind trial of 149 patients with migraine with or without aura. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients were randomly allocated to treatment with flunarizine 10 mg daily or metoprolol 200 mg daily for 16 weeks (parallel group design). Both drugs reduced the number of migraine days per month by 37% (95% confidence interval 21-53%) compared with the placebo run-in period. All efficacy parameters were significantly reduced by both drugs and no significant difference was found between the two drugs at any time of the treatment period. However, calculation of the 95% confidence limits showed that each drug may have a superiority of more than 100% on a single main effect parameter. The most common adverse experiences were day-time sedation (both drugs) and weight gain (flunarizine). Depression was the most serious side-effect occurring in 8% on flunarizine and 3% on metoprolol. We conclude that both drugs are effective in the prevention of migraine attacks but a higher number of dropouts occurred on flunarizine because of depression or weight gain.     

Effectiveness of lamotrigine in the prophylaxis of migraine with aura: an open pilot study

We report a small open pilot study to evaluate the efficacy of lamotrigine (100 mg/day) in the prevention of migraine with aura attacks. We studied 24 patients affected by migraine with aura with a high frequency of attacks. Following a 1-month run-in period, the patients took lamotrigine for 3 months. Mean attack number per month was reduced from 6.1 +/- 4.1 during the run-in period to 0.7 +/- 1.3 at the 3rd month of treatment (p < 0.0001). In 13 out of 21 patients who completed the study, the attacks were completely abolished at the 3rd month of treatment, while only one patient was completely unresponsive to the drug. Lamotrigine seems worthy of a controlled trial as prophylaxis of a migraine with aura.     

Divalproex sodium in migraine prophylaxis: a dose-controlled study

Objective : To evaluate the efficacy and safety of divalproex sodium (DVPX) when used as prophylactic monotherapy in patients with migraine. Design : Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group. Patients were previously untreated or had failed no more than two adequate trials of prophylactic therapy. During the 4-week (single-blind) baseline, patients received placebo and completed a headache diary. Patients with two or more migraine attacks during the baseline were randomized to receive a DVPX daily dose of 500, 1000, or 1500 mg, or to placebo. The experimental phase (EP) lasted 12 weeks, the first 4 weeks for dose escalation to randomized dose, and the remaining 8 weeks for maintenance at that dose. The primary efficacy variable was 4-week migraine attack frequency during the EP. Results : One-hundred-and-seventy-six patients (44 placebo, 132 DVPX) were randomized; 171 provided efficacy data and 137 completed the study. During the EP, after adjustment for differences in baseline migraine attack frequencies, mean reductions in the DVPX groups were 1.7 (500 mg), 2.0 (1000 mg) and 1.7 (1500 mg) migraine attacks per 4 weeks compared to a mean reduction of 0.5 migraine attacks in the placebo group ( p 0.05 vs placebo). Forty-four to 45% of DVPX-treated patients, compared to 21% of patients in the placebo group achieved 50% reduction in their migraine attack frequencies ( p 0.05 vs placebo). The recommended initial dose of DVPX in migraine prophylaxis is 500 mg per day, although some patients may benefit from higher doses. Adverse events were similar in the DVPX and placebo treatment groups except for nausea, dizziness and tremor, in which incidence rates were significantly higher in the DVPX 1500 mg group (nausea was also higher in 500 mg group) than in the placebo group. Conclusion : Divalproex sodium is an effective prophylactic treatment in migraine and is generally well tolerated.     

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.     

Classic migraine: Effective prophylaxis with metoprolol

Metoprolol slow-release tablets (Durules®), 200 mg, given once daily in the morning were compared with placebo in the prophylaxis of classic migraine. The trial comprised eight Scandinavian neurologic centres and was designed as a double-blind cross-over study with 4 weeks' run-in, four weeks washout, and 8 weeks of either treatment. Seventy-seven patients with two to eight migraine attacks per month were entered in the trial, and 73 completed it. A total of 1119 attacks with aura symptoms and 374 without were recorded. Metoprolol was significantly better than placebo with regard to the total frequency of attacks (1.8 versus 2.5 attacks/4 weeks), mean duration of attacks (6.0 versus 8.0 h/attack), mean global rating, and consumption of analgesics per attack: Similar differences could be shown for attacks with aura symptoms alone, except for the duration of attacks. Metoprolol is the first drug for which a prophylactic effect in classic migraine has been convincingly demonstrated.     

Topiramate for migraine prevention in children: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate for the prevention of pediatric migraine with or without aura in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. BACKGROUND: Treatment options for pediatric migraine are currently limited, and no migraine preventive agents are approved for use in children in the United States. Topiramate is an effective migraine preventive therapy in adults, as demonstrated in several large, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-two children with migraine (age, 6 to 15 years) were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive topiramate (n = 112) or placebo (n = 50). This study was designed to ensure that 150 participants were randomized to study medication. An additional 12 qualified patients were randomized because they had successfully completed the screening phase. The double-blind phase of the trial consisted of a titration period and a maintenance period. Topiramate was initiated at 15 mg/day and titrated over 8 weeks to 2 to 3 mg/kg per day, or maximum tolerated dose, whichever was less (maximum allowed dose was 200 mg/day). The target dose was maintained for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the change in mean number of migraine days per month (28 days) during the double-blind phase relative to the 4-week prospective baseline phase for each treatment group. RESULTS: Topiramate treatment was associated with a mean reduction over the entire double-blind phase of 2.6 migraine days per month, compared with a mean reduction of 2.0 migraine days per month for placebo (P = .061 topiramate vs. placebo). A significantly greater percentage of topiramate patients (32%) experienced a > or = 75% reduction in mean monthly migraine days compared with placebo (14%, P = .02). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were low: 6.5% for the topiramate group and 4.0% for the placebo group. The adverse events that occurred most commonly in the topiramate group at an incidence rate greater than in the placebo group were: upper respiratory tract infection, anorexia, weight decrease, gastroenteritis, paresthesia, and somnolence. The mean average daily dose of topiramate during the maintenance period was 2.0 mg/kg per day. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that topiramate may be an effective migraine preventive therapy in children. Topiramate was well tolerated in this population. Further randomized studies would be required to definitively establish the efficacy of topiramate for pediatric migraine prevention.     

S-fluoxetine in the prophylaxis of migraine: a phase II double-blind randomized placebo-controlled study

S-fluoxetine is the long-acting enantiomer of the racemic antidepressant serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Sixty-five patients needing migraine prophylaxis were recruited into a phase II, double-blind, placeho-controlled trial. After a 1-month placebo run-in, 53 patients met entry criteria with regard to attack frequency and were randomized, 27 to S-fluoxetine and 26 to matching placebo. Three failed to start treatment and there were 17 early discontinuations, 9 from S-fluoxetine, 8 from placebo, at similar times and for similar reasons. The primary efficacy variable was attack frequency and analysis compared decline-from-baseline in the two groups. This was earlier and greater (1.7 attacks/28 days, or 52%) on active therapy than on placebo (1.1 attacks/28 days, or 27%), and statistically significant in month 2 (F=4.93; p =0.033) and month 4 (F=4.55; p =0.04l). As secondary measures of efficacy, migraine-days per month and Patient's Global Impression of Disease Severity coherently reflected the changes in attack frequency. Mean attack severity and acute medication use (doses per attack) were unaltered by either treatment. There were no serious adverse events. Withdrawals for adverse events were four from each group but none was considered causally related. The finding of greater efficacy of S-fluoxetine than of placebo should he interpreted conservatively, since the analysis in the final month was made on only half of the entered patients. It supports progression to phase III evaluation, which was the purpose of the study.     

Long-acting propranolol in migraine prophylaxis: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study

The efficacy and safety of long-acting propranolol (LA.P), 160 mg once-daily, in the prophylactic treatment of migraine have been tested against placebo in a multicentric, double-blind, randomized study. The two groups are compared in a parallel manner over a treatment period of 12 weeks, following a 4-week placebo run-in period. Fifty-five of the 74 patients who entered the trial were included at the end of the run-in period. Forty-one patients completed the study. None of the 14 patients who withdrew from the study did so because of side effects. The statistical analysis was done according to the "intention to treat" principle. LA.P was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing the frequency of migraine attacks (p = 0.01 by variance analysis). LA.P reduced the average number of monthly crises by 48% on day 84. There was a slight but significant reduction of the systolic blood pressure and heart rate in the erect position, but there was no significant difference between LA.P and placebo regarding either the number of complaints or the number of side effects elicited out of a 17-item questionnaire. None of the observed side effects led to a withdrawal from treatment.     

A comparative study of oral acetylsalicyclic acid and metoprolol for the prophylactic treatment of migraine. A randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel group phase III study

This study was a multinational, multicentre, double-blind, active controlled phase III trial designed to investigate efficacy and safety of 300 mg acetylsalicyclic acid (ASA) (n = 135) vs. 200 mg metoprolol (n = 135) in the prophylaxis of migraine. In total 270 (51 male and 219 female) patients, aged 18-65 years, suffering between two and six migraine attacks per month were recruited. The main objective was to show equivalence with respect to efficacy, defined as a 50% reduction in the rate of migraine attacks. A run-in phase was carried out with placebo for 4 weeks, followed by a 16-week drug phase. In both treatment groups the median frequency of migraine attacks improved during the study period, from three to two in the ASA group and from three to one in the metoprolol group; 45.2% of all metoprolol patients were responders compared with 29.6% with ASA. Medication-related adverse events were less frequent in the ASA group (37) than in the metoprolol group (73). The findings from this trial show that metoprolol is superior to ASA for migraine prophylaxis but has more side-effects. Acetylsalicylic acid is better tolerated than metoprolol. Using a strict responder criterion ASA showed a responder rate comparable with the placebo rate in the literature.     

Long-term migraine prevention with topiramate: open-label extension of pivotal trials

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that topiramate is an effective and generally well-tolerated migraine preventive therapy when used for up to 14 months. BACKGROUND: Topiramate 100 and 200 mg/d significantly reduced mean monthly migraine frequency during 2 large, 26-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Only a small number of clinical trials have examined the long-term (> or =1 year) effectiveness and safety of migraine preventive therapies. METHODS: Five hundred sixty-seven patients with an established history of migraine with or without aura were enrolled in this 8-month, open-label extension of 2 large (49 US and 52 US and Canadian medical centers), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, 26-week trials of identical design. To be eligible for the open-label extension, patients were required to have either completed the double-blind phase of the 2 pivotal migraine prevention trials or withdrew after 4 weeks due to lack of efficacy. All eligible patients, regardless of type or dose of study medication (topiramate or placebo) received in the double-blind phase, were titrated to a clinically effective dose of open-label topiramate based on physician judgment of patient response. Efficacy of topiramate was measured as the change in mean monthly migraine frequency. RESULTS: The mean topiramate dose during the open-label extension phase was 124.7 mg/d and 150.3 mg/d for patients on placebo (n = 159) or topiramate (n = 408), respectively, during the double-blind phase (N = 567, 91% female, mean age 39.4 years). Patients on topiramate for up to 14 months had 2.2 +/- 2.4 (mean +/- SD) migraines per month after completion of the open-label extension phase (3.4 +/- 2.6 at double-blind endpoint). Patients on topiramate during the open-label extension phase only (placebo during the double-blind phase) had 3.0 +/- 2.9 migraines per month at open-label extension endpoint (4.9 +/- 3.0 migraines per month at double-blind endpoint). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events during the double-blind phase were 22.2% for patients on topiramate and 11.0% for patients on placebo. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events during the open-label extension phase were 8.6% for those patients who had already received topiramate during the double-blind phase and 20.9% for those patients who had previously received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving topiramate experienced a sustained reduction in migraine frequency for up to 14 months. The effectiveness and safety of topiramate was consistent with that observed during 2 26-week pivotal trials.     

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.     

Beta-blockers and migraine. Efficacy of time-release propranolol versus placebo

The efficacy and safety of long-acting propranolol (LA.P) 160 mg once-daily in the prophylactic treatment of migraine were tested against placebo in a multicentric, double-blind, randomized study comparing the two groups in a parallel manner over a treatment period of 12 weeks, and following a 4 week-placebo run-in period. Fifty-five out of the 74 patients who entered the trial included at the end of the run-in period. Forty-one patients completed the study. Out of the 14 patients who withdrew from the study, none discontinued because of side-effects. The statistical analysis was done according to the "intention to treat" principle. LA.P was significantly more efficient than placebo in reducing the frequency of migraine attacks (p = 0.01 by variance analysis). LA.P reduced the average number of monthly crises by 48% on day 84. There was a slight but significant reduction of the systolic blood pressure and heart rate in the erect position. There was no significant difference between LA.P and placebo regarding either the number of complaints or the number of side-effects elicited out of an 17 item questionnaire. None of the observed side effects led to a withdrawal of treatment.     

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.     

Combined oral lysine acetylsalicylate and metoclopramide in the acute treatment of migraine: a multicentre double-blind placebo-controlled study

This multicentre, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of combined oral lysine acetylsalicylate and metoclopramide (LAS-MCP) in the acute treatment of migraine attacks. A total of 266 patients, 18–65 years old, with two to six attacks of migraine with or without aura (IHS criteria) per month were included. The patients had to treat two migraine attacks with LAS-MCP (1620 mg lysine acetylsalicylate-the equivalent of 900 mg aspirin- combined with 10 mg metoclopramide) or placebo. The main outcome measure was headache relief (reduction in headache severity from grade 3 or 2-severe or moderate-to grade 1 or 0-mild or none) 2 h after treatment. LAS-MCP was superior to placebo for headache relief (56% vs 28%) and for the following secondary outcome measures: complete headache relief (18% vs 7%; p < 0.001), nausea (28% vs 44%; p < 0.001), vomiting (3% vs 11%; p = 0.001), use of rescue medication (47% vs 68%; p < 0.001), global efficacy judged as good or excellent (32% vs 14%; p < 0.001). The tolerability was considered as good in 94% of treated attacks in both groups. Combined oral lysine acetylsalicylate and metoclopramide is an effective and well-tolerated acute treatment of migraine attacks.     

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.     

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.     

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.