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.     

Naproxen Sodium Versus Ergotamine Tartrate in the Treatment of Acute Migraine Attacks

A double-blind parallel study compared the efficacy and safety of naproxen sodium (NPX) and ergotamine tartrate (ERG) as abortive therapy for acute headache in 79 patients with classical or common migraine. The design study was of the double-blind design. Forty-two patients completed the study. Discontinuation of treatment was generally due to lack of efficacy or adverse reactions. NPX was significantly better than ERG in the overall efficacy of treatment rated by the patients (p less than 004). NPX was comparable to ERG in reducing the severity and duration of the headache and its associated symptoms. In classical migraine, NPX was better than ERG in alleviating the severity of headache. Patients in the NPX group tended to use less rescue medication. There was no significant difference in the frequency of side-effects reported by the patients under NPX or ERG. This study demonstrates that NPX is as safe as ERG, and somewhat more effective in acute migraine attacks (although the difference is not statistically significant) and that migrainous patients tend to prefer NPX to ERG in treating their acute migraine headaches.     

Acute migraine attack therapy: comparison of naproxen sodium and an ergotamine tartrate compound

The efficacy of safety of naproxen sodium and ergotamine tartrate were compared for the treatment of acute migraine attack in a randomized, parallel trial with 114 participating patients. At the start of symptoms, patients took either three tablets of naproxen sodium (275 mg each) or one of an ergotamine combination (containing 2 mg ergotamine tartrate, 91.5 mg caffeine, and 50 mg cyclizine chlorhydrate). Patients were followed for three months or until six attacks were monitored, whichever came first. Both medications substantially shortened the duration of migraine attacks and reduced the severity of symptoms. When the test medications were taken within 2 h of onset of attack, naproxen sodium was statistically significantly more effective than the ergotamine combination in reducing the severity of headache pain, nausea, and lightheadedness. The ergotamine combination was associated with significantly more vomiting, need for rescue medication, and side effects than was naproxen sodium. Four patients required discontinuation of the ergotamine combination and one of naproxen sodium. Both patients and investigators rated tolerance for naproxen sodium as superior to tolerance for the ergotamine combination. Naproxen sodium seems to be an effective and safe treatment for migraine attacks.     

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.     

不同前驱期症状与偏头痛预后的关系及其对头痛的预警价值

目的:探讨偏头痛患者前驱期症状特点、与头痛预后的关系及预警能力.方法:回顾性分析2018年1月至2020年8月确诊的偏头痛患者共107例,依据有无前驱期进行分组,比较2组前驱期常见症状,分析不同前驱期症状对头痛发作的预警能力.结果:107例患者中,有前驱期症状组68例(63.55％),无前驱期症状组39例(36.45％...     

Symptomatic relief of migraine: multicenter comparison of Cafergot P-B, Cafergot, and placebo

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial was conducted to compare the efficacy of Cafergot P-B with that of its components, Cafergot, pentobarbital, and Bellafoline, and with placebo for the treatment of migraine. Patients with vascular headaches of the migraine type who regularly experienced nervous tension and some form of gastrointestinal distress with their headaches were randomized to one of five treatment groups. They were given treatment packets containing their assigned drug for use during two separate migraine attacks. Patients made pretreatment evaluations of the following symptoms: head pain, nervous tension, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, abdominal cramps, and photophobia. They made posttreatment evaluations of these symptoms 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 3.0 hours after ingesting their assigned drug. Improvement scores were calculated from the differences between the pretreatment and the posttreatment ratings. Patients also made a final global assessment of their drug's efficacy. All patients who took at least one dose of the study medication and completed a baseline evaluation and at least one postdose evaluation of severity of pain were included in the analysis (n = 254). The comparisons of particular interest were those between Cafergot P-B and Cafergot and between Cafergot P-B and placebo. Cafergot P-B was significantly more effective than Cafergot in relieving head pain at hours 2 and 3, nervous tension, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, and photophobia. Cafergot P-B was significantly more effective than placebo in relieving head pain, nervous tension, nausea (second headache only), vomiting, and photphobia. The incidence of reported adverse effects was no greater with Cafergot P-B than with Cafergot; however, patients given Cafergot P-B reported less vomiting than did patients given Cafergot. The results of this study show that addition of pentobarbital and Bellafoline to Cafergot provides greater relief of pain, vomiting, nervous tension, photophobia, and other symptoms associated with migraine, while reducing the severity of the nausea that may accompany a migraine headache or Cafergot therapy.     

Fixed-Dose Sumatriptan and Naproxen in Poor Responders to Triptans With a Short Half-Life

Objective.— To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of a single, fixed‐dose tablet of sumatriptan 85 mg/naproxen sodium 500 mg (sumatriptan/naproxen sodium) vs placebo in migraineurs who had discontinued treatment with a short‐acting triptan because of poor response or intolerance. Background.— Triptan monotherapy is ineffective or poorly tolerated in 1 of 3 migraineurs and in 2 of 5 migraine attacks. In April, 2008, the Food and Drug Administration approved the combination therapy sumatriptan/naproxen sodium, developed specifically to target multiple migraine mechanisms. This combination product offers an alternative migraine therapy for patients who have reported poor response or intolerance to short‐acting triptans. Methods.— Two replicate, randomized, multicenter, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, 2‐attack crossover trials evaluated migraineurs who had discontinued a short‐acting triptan in the past year because of poor response or intolerance. Patients were instructed to treat within 1 hour and while pain was mild. Results.— Patients (n = 144 study 1; n = 139 study 2) had discontinued an average of 3.3 triptans before study entry. Sumatriptan/naproxen sodium was superior (P < .001) to placebo for 2‐ through 24‐hour sustained pain‐free response (primary end point) (study 1, 26% vs 8%; study 2, 31% vs 8%) and pain‐free response 2 hours post dose (key secondary end point) (study 1, 40% vs 17%; study 2, 44% vs 14%). A similar pattern of results was observed for other end points that evaluated acute (2‐ or 4‐hour), intermediate (8‐hour), or 2‐ through 24‐hour sustained response for migraine (ie, pain and associated symptoms), photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea (with the exception of nausea 2 and 4 hours post dose). The percentage of patients with at least 1 adverse event (regardless of causality) was 11% with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium compared with 4% with placebo in study 1 and 9% with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium compared with 5% with placebo in study 2. Only 1 adverse event in 1 study was reported in ≥2% of patients after treatment with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium and reported more frequently with sumatriptan/naproxen than placebo: chest discomfort was reported in 2% of subjects in study 1, and no events met this threshold in study 2. No serious adverse events attributed to study medication were reported in either study. Conclusion.— In migraineurs who reported poor response to a short‐acting triptan, sumatriptan/naproxen sodium was generally well tolerated and significantly more effective than placebo in conferring initial, intermediate, and sustained efficacy for pain and migraine‐associated symptoms of photophobia and phonophobia.     

Meta‐Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Naproxen Sodium in the Acute Treatment of Migraine

(Headache 2010;50:808‐818) Objective.— To assess the efficacy and safety of naproxen sodium in the treatment of acute migraine attacks. Background.— Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs including naproxen sodium have been used in treating migraine attack. A number of clinical trials of naproxen sodium in migraine have been reported. However, it remains to be established whether naproxen sodium unequivocally offers clinical benefits taken into account the desired outcomes in acute migraine therapy as recommended by the International Headache Society. Methods.— Clinical trials were identified through electronic searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBM review, and the Cochrane Library) up to June 2009 and historical searches of relevant articles. Studies were included in the meta‐analysis if they were (1) double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trials that evaluated naproxen sodium tablet in moderate or severe migraine attacks in adult patients, and (2) reporting the efficacy in terms of headache relief, pain‐free, relief of migraine‐associated symptoms, sustained headache relief, sustained pain‐free, or headache recurrence. Data extraction and study quality assessment were performed independently by 2 investigators. Disagreements were resolved by a third investigator. Treatment effects and adverse effects were expressed as risk ratio. A random effects model was used when significant heterogeneity existed, otherwise the fixed effects model was performed. Results.— We identified 16 published randomized controlled trials of naproxen in the treatment of migraine. Four trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta‐analysis. Naproxen sodium was more effective than placebo in reducing pain intensity and providing pain‐free within 2 hours in adults with moderate or severe migraine attacks. The pooled risk ratios were 1.58 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41‐1.77, P < .00001), and 2.22 (95% CI 1.46‐3.37, P = .0002), respectively, for headache relief at 2 hours and pain‐free at 2 hours. It was also effective in achieving headache relief at 4 hours, relief of migraine‐associated symptoms, sustained headache relief, and sustained pain‐free responses. There was no significant difference in headache recurrence rate between naproxen sodium and placebo. The risk of any adverse event was greater with naproxen sodium than with placebo (pooled risk ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.04‐1.60, P = .02). The adverse events commonly associated with naproxen sodium were nausea, dizziness, dyspepsia, and abdominal pain. Conclusions.— The available evidence suggests that naproxen sodium is more effective but may cause more adverse events than placebo in the acute treatment of moderate to severe migraine. It is effective in reducing headache intensity, rendering pain‐free at 2 hours and improving migraine‐associated symptoms. However, its effectiveness relative to other active comparators needs to be better defined by appropriate head‐to‐head clinical trials.     

Double-blind study of naproxen vs placebo in the treatment of acute migraine attacks

Naproxen was compared with placebo in a double-blind, crossover trial in classic and common migraine. The trial was terminated at a fixed date; 37 patients had entered, 5 of whom were excluded. Naproxen was given as 750 mg at the first symptom of the attack, a total of 1250 mg per 24 h was allowed. Patients were followed for six attacks or three months in each phase, whichever came first. The severity of the headache was significantly less with naproxen in the first 2 h of the attack (p = 0.047), whereas there was no difference when the whole attack was considered. Significantly more patients preferred naproxen (p = 0.042). Side effects occurred in five patients, causing withdrawal of one patient while on naproxen.     

Unilateral photophobia or phonophobia in migraine compared with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias

Our objective was to compare the presence of self-reported unilateral photophobia or phonophobia, or both, during headache attacks comparing patients with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs)—including cluster headache, short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) and paroxysmal hemicrania—or hemicrania continua, and other headache types. We conducted a prospective study in patients attending a referral out-patient clinic over 5 months and those admitted for an intramuscular indomethacin test. Two hundred and six patients were included. In episodic migraine patients, two of 54 (4%) reported unilateral photophobia or phonophobia, or both. In chronic migraine patients, six of 48 (13%) complained of unilateral photophobia or phonophobia, or both, whereas none of the 24 patients with medication-overuse headache reported these unilateral symptoms, although these patients all had clinical symptoms suggesting the diagnosis of migraine. Only three of 22 patients (14%) suffering from new daily persistent headache (NDPH) experienced unilateral photophobia or phonophobia. In chronic cluster headache 10 of 21 patients (48%) had unilateral photophobia or phonophobia, or both, and this symptom appeared in four of five patients (80%) with episodic cluster headache. Unilateral photophobia or phonophobia, or both, were reported by six of 11 patients (55%) with hemicrania continua, five of nine (56%) with SUNCT, and four of six (67%) with chronic paroxysmal hemicrania. Unilateral phonophobia or photophobia, or both, are more frequent in TACs and hemicrania continua than in migraine and NDPH. The presence of these unilateral symptoms may be clinically useful in the differential diagnosis of primary headaches.     

A Comparative Study of Naproxen Sodium, Pizotyline and Placebo in Migraine Prophylaxis

SYNOPSIS
318 patients satisfying the Ad Hoc Committee's criteria for common or classical migraine were entered into an 8 week single-blind placebo recording phase to establish, by diary cards, the frequency and severity of their attacks. 176 patients completed this and had records indicating 4–8 episodes in the 8 week period, with sufficient severity to reduce activity and/or work; these patients wore randomized by a predetermined code, into three double-blinded groups: naproxen sodium 550 mg bid (60 patients), pizotyline 0.5 mg tid (59 patients), or placebo (57 patients). The patients wore followed at monthly intervals for 12 weeks, with 25 dropping out (3 on naproxen sodium, and 2 each on pizotyline and placebo because of "side effects;" the remaining 18 because of noncompliance or reasons unrelated to therapy). Approximately 25% of patients in each of the 3 groups complained of side effects.
Statistical analysis showed that both naproxen sodium and pizotyline were better than placebo, and of overall equivalent (i.e. equal) efficacy in the prophylaxis of migraine. In some respects, naproxen sodium was slightly more effective than pizotyline in the first month of treatment.     

Sumatriptan and naproxen sodium for the acute treatment of migraine

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of treatment with a combination of sumatriptan 50 mg (encapsulated) and naproxen sodium 500 mg administered concurrently in the acute treatment of migraine. BACKGROUND: The pathogenesis of migraine involves multiple peripheral and central neural mechanisms that individually have been successful targets for acute (abortive) and preventive treatment. This suggests that multi-mechanism therapy, which acts on multiple target sites, may confer improved efficacy and symptom relief for patients with migraine. DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, four-arm study. Participants (n = 972) treated a single moderate or severe migraine attack with placebo, naproxen sodium 500 mg, sumatriptan 50 mg, or a combination of sumatriptan 50 mg and naproxen sodium 500 mg. In the latter two treatment arms, the sumatriptan tablets were encapsulated in order to achieve blinding of the study. RESULTS: In the sumatriptan plus naproxen sodium group, 46% of subjects achieved 24-hour pain relief response (primary endpoint), which was significantly more effective than sumatriptan alone (29%), naproxen sodium alone (25%), or placebo (17%) (P < .001). Two-hour headache response also significantly favored the sumatriptan 50 mg plus naproxen sodium 500 mg therapy (65%) versus sumatriptan (49%), naproxen sodium (46%), or placebo (27%) (P < .001). A similar pattern of between-group differences was observed for 2-hour pain-free response and sustained pain-free response (P < .001). The incidence of headache recurrence up to 24 hours after treatment was lowest in the sumatriptan plus naproxen sodium group (29%) versus sumatriptan alone (41%; P = .048), versus naproxen sodium alone (47%; P= .0035), and versus placebo (38%; P= .08). The incidences of the associated symptoms of migraine were significantly lower at 2 hours following sumatriptan 50 mg plus naproxen sodium 500 mg treatment versus placebo (P < .001). The frequencies and types of adverse events reported did not differ between treatment groups, with dizziness and somnolence being the most common. CONCLUSIONS: This is among the first prospective studies to demonstrate that multi-mechanism acute therapy for migraine, combining a triptan and an analgesic, is well tolerated and offers improved clinical benefits over monotherapy with these selected standard antimigraine treatments. Specifically, sumatriptan 50 mg (encapsulated) and naproxen sodium 500 mg resulted in significantly superior pain relief as compared to monotherapy with either sumatriptan 50 mg (encapsulated) or naproxen sodium 500 mg for the acute treatment of migraine. Because encapsulation of the sumatriptan for blinding purposes may have altered its pharmacokinetic profile and thereby decreased the efficacy responses, additional studies are warranted that do not involve encapsulation of the active treatments and assess the true onset of action of multi-mechanism therapy in migraine. This study did show that the combination of sumatriptan and naproxen sodium was well tolerated and that there was no significant increase in the incidence of adverse events compared to monotherapy.     

The efficacy and safety of venlafaxine in the prophylaxis of migraine

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine in the prophylaxis of migraine. BACKGROUND: The efficacy of venlafaxine, which is selectively effective on the serotonergic and noradrenergic mechanisms, on various headaches and chronic pain syndromes has been demonstrated. To our knowledge, this is the first placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study of two different doses of venlafaxine for migraine treatment. METHODS: In this prospective study, 60 migraine patients without aura were randomly assigned to venlafaxine XR 75 mg, venlafaxine XR 150 mg, or placebo. The frequency of headache attacks, the severity and the duration of attacks, and analgesic use were monitored every 2 weeks for 2 months. Adverse events and patient satisfaction were also evaluated during these visits. At the end of the 2 months, global efficacy and tolerance were investigated. RESULTS: A significant difference was observed between the venlafaxine 150 mg and placebo groups in the number of headache attacks (P= .006). According to patient satisfaction comparisons, the active drug groups were significantly different when compared with placebo (P= .001 at visit 2 and visit 6). When the global efficacy was considered, 80% of patients in the 75-mg group and 88.2% of the patients in the 150-mg group evaluated treatment benefits as either good or very good. CONCLUSIONS: Venlafaxine was more effective than placebo and is safe and well tolerated as migraine prophylaxis.     

A Sumatriptan Iontophoretic Transdermal System for the Acute Treatment of Migraine

Objective.— Gastrointestinal symptoms, such as nausea and vomiting, occur almost universally at one time or another in patients during a migraine attack. One third of patients who experience migraine‐related nausea report that this symptom interferes with their ability to take oral medications. The sumatriptan iontophoretic transdermal system (NuPathe Inc., Conshohocken, PA, USA) uses proprietary technology to circumvent the gastrointestinal tract while delivering triptan therapy. This phase III randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of this system for the acute treatment of migraine. Methods.— Patients were randomized to treat a single moderate‐to‐severe migraine attack with the sumatriptan iontophoretic transdermal system or placebo. The primary end point was the proportion of patients who were headache pain‐free 2 hours after patch activation. Other end points included the proportions of patients who reported headache pain relief, and freedom from nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia; rescue medication use; and tolerability. Results.— Four hundred sixty‐nine patients were treated. Significantly more patients treated with the sumatriptan iontophoretic transdermal system compared with placebo experienced freedom from headache pain, nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia 2 hours after patch activation, experienced rapid and sustained headache pain relief, and used less rescue medication. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were reported by 50% and 44% of patients treated with the sumatriptan iontophoretic transdermal system and placebo, respectively. Most events were transient mild‐to‐moderate application‐site reactions. Conclusions.— The sumatriptan iontophoretic transdermal system is effective and well tolerated, and may be particularly useful in patients with migraine‐related gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea.     

Effervescent metoclopramide and aspirin (Migravess) versus effervescent aspirin or placebo for migraine attacks: a double-blind study

Aspirin 650 mg and metoclopramide 10 mg in an effervescent preparation (Migravess) were compared with effervescent aspirin 650 mg (Alka-Seltzer) and placebo for common migraine attacks with a double-blind cross-over design. One hundred and eighteen patients with common migraine were entered. Eighty-five patients completed all three forms of treatment, eleven completed two, and six completed one. Medicine was taken when patients were sure they had a migraine attack and not just interval headache. After each form of treatment, they mailed a report form to the investigators. Additional medication was allowed after 2 h and was taken for 79/95 placebo treated attacks, 63/92 Migravess treated attacks, and 51/86 aspirin treated attacks (p less than 0.01). Aspirin was significantly better than placebo for pain but not quite significant for nausea. Migravess was significantly better than placebo for pain and for nausea. There was no significant difference between aspirin and Migravess with regard to analgesic effectiveness (p = 0.33) or to antinausea effect (p = 0.18).     

Propranolol in acute migraine: a controlled study

Propranolol is an established agent in migraine prophylaxis. Uncontrolled studies have suggested an action in the acute attack. We present the first double-blind placebo controlled study of propranolol in 27 unselected patients with common (migraine without aura) and classical (migraine with aura) migraine. There were 23 pairs of headaches in the 14 patients who completed the study. No difference was found, when the data were analysed by headache pair or by patient, in severity duration and subjective assessment of efficacy between those treated in an attack with propranolol 40 mg and placebo.     

The Premonitory Phase of Migraine – What Can We Learn From It?

This review aims to understand the prevalence of premonitory symptoms in migraine, postulate their mechanisms, and compare these with functional imaging studies. A thorough literature review was conducted using PubMed for prevalence studies of premonitory symptoms in migraine and functional imaging studies in the premonitory phase. The majority of studies have been retrospective reporting a prevalence of 7‐88% for premonitory symptoms in migraine. Only one study has investigated premonitory symptoms prospectively and used preselected patients with recognized premonitory symptoms. The majority of patients were able to predict correctly the onset of migraine headache. Only one functional imaging study has been conducted in the premonitory phase that showed activation of posterolateral hypothalamus, midbrain tegmental area and substantia nigra, periaqueductal gray, dorsal pons, and various cortical areas including occipital, temporal, and prefrontal cortex. Subgroup analysis of patients with photophobia more than without photophobia in the premonitory phase showed activation of the occipital cortex. Comparison of patients with nausea more than without nausea in the premonitory phase showed activation in upper dorsal medulla and periaqueductal gray. Premonitory symptoms are common in migraine, although the true prevalence cannot be stated with certainty in the absence of prospective studies in unselected patients. Hypothalamic involvement can explain many of the premonitory symptoms. Activation of the the brainstem structures and hypothalamus before pain suggests a pivotal role of these structures in the pathogenesis of migraine. Hypersensitivity to light and occurrence of nausea in migraine is associated with activation of central brain structures involved in these pathways, and this can occur in the absence of pain.     

Oral sumatriptan for the acute treatment of probable migraine: first randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan tablets in adults who meet International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for probable migraine but who do not meet IHS criteria for migraine with or without aura. BACKGROUND: Headaches with some but not all of the features of migraine meet criteria for probable migraine, a form of migraine recognized by the IHS. Probable migraine attacks are also prevalent and frequently underdiagnosed. METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Adults (18 to 65 years) with a 1-year history of headaches that met 2004 IHS criteria for probable migraine without aura (same operational definition as 1988 IHS migrainous disorder) were eligible for enrollment. All patients were triptan- and ergot-na?ve and had never been diagnosed with migraine. Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 fashion to receive sumatriptan 25, 50, or 100 mg conventional tablets or matching placebo and were instructed to treat a single moderate or severe probable migraine attack. A post hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate the population of patients who achieved headache relief sustained throughout the immediate posttreatment period. Patients who reported relief within 2 hours and subsequently lost headache relief within 4 hours were considered nonresponders. RESULTS: At 2 hours, more patients treated with sumatriptan achieved headache relief, the primary efficacy measure, compared with placebo, but differences only approached statistical significance for 100 mg (P= .053). The 2-hour headache relief rate in the sumatriptan 25 or 50 mg groups was not significantly different than placebo. The time to use of rescue was significantly shorter in the placebo group compared with the sumatriptan 100 mg group (P= .002). The time to use of rescue in the sumatriptan 25 or 50 mg groups was not significantly different than placebo. More patients treated with placebo (22%) lost headache relief within 4 hours compared with patients treated with sumatriptan 25 mg (17%), 50 mg (14%), or 100 mg (7%). A post hoc analysis demonstrated that at 2 hours, headache relief sustained through 4 hours (S 0-4 hours) was achieved in 44%, 49%, and 57% of patients treated with sumatriptan 25, 50, and 100 mg, respectively, compared with 34% of patients treated with placebo (P < .05 for sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg vs. placebo). All doses of sumatriptan were well tolerated and no serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that oral sumatriptan may be effective and is well tolerated for the acute treatment of probable migraine without aura, however, the difference between sumatriptan and placebo was not statistically significant for the a priori defined primary endpoint.     

Diclofenac-K (50 and 100 mg) and placebo in the acute treatment of migraine

The aim of the present study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of single oral doses of 50 mg and 100 mg of diclofenac-K compared to placebo in migraine sufferers during three attacks. The study was conducted in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, three-period, within-patient comparative trial; 72 migraine patients were treated with diclofenac-K (50 mg or 100 mg) or placebo at six centres (1 in Sweden and 5 in Finland). The primary efficacy end-point was the change in pain intensity assessed on a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 120 min after taking the study medication. We found that 50 mg and 100 mg of diclofenac-K reduced the pain intensity significantly better than placebo (p = 0.003 and p = 0.001, respectively), without difference between the doses; 100 mg diclofenac-K was significantly better than placebo in improving phonophobia, photophobia, working ability and need for rescue medication. Diclofenac-K 50 mg or 100 mg is an effective and well-tolerated acute treatment for migraine headache and its associated symptoms. The higher dose of diclofenac-K was only marginally more effective than the lower dose.