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.     

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

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

The prophylactic effect of timolol versus propranolol and placebo in common migraine: beta-blockers in migraine

A multicentre double-blind, cross-over trial was planned to evaluate the prophylactic effect of timolol in migraine. The effectiveness of the drug was compared to propranolol and placebo. In the Norwegian part of the trial described in this paper, 18 patients completed the study. The data suggest that timolol is equivalent in effectiveness to propranolol in migraine prophylaxis. Firm conclusions should not be drawn until the results from the multicentre trial are available.     

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 dose of propranolol for migraine prophylaxis. Efficacy of low doses

Although propranolol is still the drug of first choice for migraine prophylaxis, the optimal antimigraine dose of this drug is still unknown. The main aim of our study is to clarify this point. Fifty-three patients suffering from severe migraine attacks were given propranolol at low doses, close to or up to 1 mgkg body weight daily, for one month. If the patient responded, then treatment was maintained unchanged for a further two months. If the patient did not respond, propranolol was progressively increased until control was obtained. Thirty-nine (73.5%) patients responded to low doses, and 7 of the 17 patients whose dose had been increased, because of poor or absent response, showed improvement. Five patients did not finish the study because of intolerable side effects, which intensified as the dose was increased. Tolerance was not noticed. In addition to confirming the well-known utility of propranolol in migraine prophylaxis, our results show that low doses are effective in controlling serious migraine bouts in many patients. Fewer than a third of patients will need higher doses in controlling migraine attacks.     

Post-marketing cohort study comparing the safety and efficacy of flunarizine and propranolol in the prophylaxis of migraine

A comparative post-marketing surveillance study of the safety and efficacy of flunarizine and propranolol in the treatment of migraine was carried out. General practitioners in Belgium and the Netherlands each recruited patients for whom they would prescribe one of the study medications in the normal course of their treatment and recorded all medical events on follow-up forms for up to 8 months. A total of 1601 migraine patients were enrolled; 838 in the flunarizine cohort and 763 in the propranolol cohort. Propranolol was somewhat better than flunarizine in reducing the severity of migraine attacks, although this may have been due to a selection bias. Discontinuations of therapy due to events considered likely to be treatment-related were mostly due to the recognized side effects of the two drugs. As regards the occurrence of depressions, a total of 58 patients had depressive events, 34 in the flunarizine cohort and 24 in the propranolol cohort. Whereas migraine itself appears to be associated with an increased risk of depression, the number of previous migraine treatments was shown to be an additional risk factor for the development of depression in patients receiving flunarizine as was a history of depression. Overall, there was no appreciable difference in the risk/benefit ratio between flunarizine and propranolol.     

Successful use of propranolol in migraine associated with electroconvulsive therapy

To date, there have been no reports on the use of propranolol in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT)-induced migraine; we describe a 32-year-old woman who was successfully treated with propranolol for this condition. Over a course of ECT, the patient developed increasingly severe migraine which was refractory to treatment with acetaminophen, codeine, and naproxen. Sumatriptan did not relieve the headache and aggravated the nausea. Successful migraine relief was achieved with a combination of propranolol and naproxen, administered before and after ECT. Propranolol reduced blood pressure and decreased the heart rate, measured before and immediately after ECT. Propranolol, possibly in combination with naproxen, may be useful in both acute and prophylactic treatment of post-ECT migraine.     

L-5-Hydroxytryptophan versus placebo in childhood migraine prophylaxis: a double-blind crossover study

L-5HTP was tested versus placebo in a double-blind crossover study of 27 migraine children aged 6-12 years, who recorded their headaches in a headache diary for 1 month. Twenty-one patients subsequently started the trial. The mean daily dose of L-5HTP was 5 mg/kg body weight, and each treatment period with either L-5HTP or placebo lasted 12 weeks. In group A (L-5HTP-placebo; 10 patients) and group B (placebo-L-5HTP; 11 patients) both L-5HTP and placebo led to a significant reduction of the migraine index and frequency of migraine attacks during the 3rd month of each treatment period. However, we found a treatment X period interaction because the efficacy determinants decreased significantly during the first and the second treatment periods in both groups irrespective of the sequence of treatments. No differences were found between L-5HTP (first period of group A) and placebo (first period of group B).     

Flunarizine in migraine prophylaxis: efficacy and tolerability of 5 mg and 10 mg dose levels

The use of flunarizine, a drug which has proven its efficacy in migraine, is often associated with important side effects. The aim of this paper has been to check their incidence at different dose levels (5 mg vs 10 mg). Our data confirm the occurrence of important side effects (in particular weight gain); on the other hand, they emphasize the dose-dependency of the side effects.     

Metoprolol and propranolol in the prophylactic treatment of classical and common migraine. A double-blind study

In a double-blind, cross-over study the effect and tolerance of the non-selective beta-blocker propranolol in a dosage of 80 mg twice daily was compared to that of the beta 1-selective beta-blocker metoprolol 200 mg once daily in Durules (a controlled-release formulation). The attack frequency, migraine days, severity score, consumption of acute medication and subjective evaluation were the main parameters used for evaluation. Thirty-six patients with classical or common migraine were included. Thirty-three completed the investigation. It is concluded from the results that there are no differences in efficacy between metoprolol and propranolol regarding the studied parameters. Both drugs reduced the migraine symptoms compared to the run-in period and were generally well tolerated.     

A quantification of the placebo response in migraine prophylaxis

To quantify the placebo response of prophylactic therapy in migraine, a meta-analysis of prophylactic, double-blind, placebo controlled migraine studies was performed. The total analysis included 22 studies testing 19 different products, including 2013 patients, of which 828 were treated with placebo. A reduction in migraine attacks of 50% or more (responders) was seen in 23.5%+/-8.0 (95% C.I. 18.3-28.8%) of the patients in the placebo groups and 45.5%+/-15.5 (95% C.I. 37.4-53.6%) in the active groups. A reduction in migraine attacks of 16.8%+/-12.7 (95% C.I. 10.9-22.6%) was observed in the placebo groups and 41.8%+/-11.7 (95% C.I. 36.9-46.6%) in the active groups. We propose that if the percentage of responders in an open-label prophylactic trial in migraine is above 35-40%, or if a reduction in migraine attack frequency is found of 40% or more, further studies are indicated to determine the prophylactic activity of the drug. In all studies included in this analysis, no placebo response was seen above these limits.     

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.     

Intravenous dipyrone in the acute treatment of migraine without aura and migraine with aura: a randomized,double blind,placebo controlled study

BACKGROUND: Dipyrone (Metamizol) has been used in the acute treatment of migraines in Brazil. Some investigators have found it to be a highly effective medication for migraine pain and associated symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a randomized, placebo controlled, double blind study to assess the effect of dipyrone on the pain and symptoms associated with migraine without aura or with aura and the adverse effect profile of this medication. METHODS: For the migraine without aura group, 44 patients were assigned at random to receive 1 g intravenous dipyrone, and 30 patients received 10 mL 0.9% physiological saline. For the migraine with aura group, 30 patients received both dipyrone or placebo. We used seven parameters of analgesic evaluation and an analog scale to assess nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. RESULTS: Patients receiving dipyrone demonstrated a statistically superior improvement (P<.05 and P<.01) in pain and all associated symptoms compared with control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Dipyrone is an effective drug for the relief of acute migraine pain and associated symptoms.     

Topiramate: a case series study in migraine prophylaxis

We reviewed the electronic records of 74 migraine patients treated with topiramate for more than 6 weeks. Twenty-four patients had episodic migraine and 50 had chronic (transformed) migraine. Most (81%) started treatment at 25 mg per day and reached a dose of 100 mg twice a day (mean dose on the last follow-up visit was 208 mg). The mean headache frequency decreased from 20.6 days to 13.6 days per month (P<0.0001) for all headaches (9.9-5.1 (P<0.0001) and 25.7-17.7 (P<0.001) for episodic migraine and chronic migraine, respectively). The percentage of patients whose headache frequency was reduced by > or =50% was 44.6% for all patients; 58.3 for episodic migraine and 38.0 for chronic migraine. For all patients mean headache severity (10-point scale) was reduced from 6.2 to 4.8 (P<0.0001). Patients on monotherapy (20%) and polytherapy (80%) had similar reductions in headache frequency. Adverse events were usually mild to moderate and were seen in 58.1% (paresthesias in 25%, cognitive difficulties 14.9%). Mean weight loss was 3.1 +/- 4 kg (3.8% of total body weight).     

Responders and non-responders to metoprolol, propranolol and nifedipine treatment in migraine prophylaxis: a dose-range study based on time-series analysis

The aim of the present study was to ascertain, on the basis of single case statistics and time-series analysis, responder and non-responder rates for metoprolol, propranolol and nifedipine in migraine prophylaxis. In addition, an attempt was made to identify the dose relationship for the various drugs on headache parameters. In a double-blind dose-finding study, 58 patients were treated in five consecutive dosage steps each lasting 1-3 months. All patients kept a headache diary before, during and after treatment. Serum drug levels were also determined. The data were assessed by time-series analysis, as well as by multiple regression and analysis of variance. A significant improvement was noted in 54.4% of patients with migraine during treatment with metoprolol. The study did not confirm the high success rates in migraine prophylaxis of nifedipine and propranolol quoted in the literature. Administration of nifedipine led to an increase in migraine attacks in 71% of the patients. Nifedipine was of no value in the prophylaxis of migraine. Only 32% of patients showed a reduction in frequency of migraine attacks during administration of propranolol. The analysis of variance failed to show any significant difference between the responder rates for metoprolol and propranolol. Higher doses of propranolol and metoprolol were more effective. Multiple regression analysis explained a considerable part of variance for propranolol (but not for metoprolol) as a result of reduced intake of ergotamine preparations and analgesics. It can therefore be concluded that part of the prophylactic effect of propranolol is attributable to a reduction in the use of migraine medication.     

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.     

Comparison of the effectiveness of slow-release propranolol (Inderal LA) 80, 160 and 320 mg orally daily in the treatment of angina pectoris

Doses of 80, 160 and 320 mg of Inderal LA (slow-release propranolol) were compared in 12 patients with stable angina pectoris. There was an unpredictable and variable individual response to treatment and hence no differences were detected between the effects of the three doses on mean treadmill exercise duration, time to angina, frequency of angina or glyceryl/trinitrate consumption. There was a marked deterioration in two patients whilst on 320 mg Inderal LA. In these patients, the time to angina fell by 2 minutes 50 seconds and 4 minutes 20 seconds on 320 mg daily and 160 mg daily respectively. Given the inter-patient variability in response to Inderal LA, the dose for each patient should be individually titrated according to response. Two patients reported here suggest that some subjects may benefit from lower doses, although further work is required to clarify this point. Possible explanations for this finding are discussed.     

Dihydroergokryptine versus dihydroergotamine in migraine prophylaxis: a double-blind clinical trial

Dihydroergokryptine has been evaluated in the prophylaxis of headache attacks in patients with migraine without aura. The study was controlled vs dihydroergotamine with a double-blind crossover design. After a 1-month run-in period, 30 patients were randomized into two groups and submitted to 4 months treatment with dihydroergokryptine 10 mg b.i.d. or dihydroergotamine (controlled release) 5 mg b.i.d. The treatment was repeated in crossover after 2 months washout. The clinical patients' evaluation was determined by monthly Pain Total Index recording, headache daysmonth and analgesic consumption. The patients were considered responsible when Pain Total Index decreased by 50% or more in 1 or more months of each treatment period; otherwise the patients were considered unresponsive. The response rate to dihydroergokryptine was 66% while 48% of cases were responsive to dihydroergotamine. The response rate to both treatments was 41%, while 26 % did not respond to either treatment. Seven cases unresponsive to dihydroergotamine responded positively to dihydroergokryptine while two cases only, resistant to dihydroergokryptine, responded positively to dihydroergotamine. Three cases dropped out during treatment with dihydroergotamine due to gastric pain and nausea, while they did not show any side effects during dihydroergokryptine therapy. During treatment with dihydroergokryptine there was one case of skin rash which disappeared after drug withdrawal. In conclusion, dihydroergokryptine appears to be an effective drug for the prophylaxis of migraine attacks.     

Double-blind comparison of an acetaminophen 400 mg-codeine 25 mg combination versus aspirin 1000 mg and placebo in acute migraine attack

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerance of a single dose of the acetaminophen 400 mg-codeine 25 mg combination (ACC) aspirin 1000 mg (A) and a placebo (P) for the treatment of acute migraine attack. The study design was randomized, multicentre, double-blind and double dummy with cross-over on three periods. Of the 198 patients who had three attacks 29.8%, 52.3% and 49.7% had recorded the complete or almost complete disappearance of the pain at 2 h after P, A and ACC respectively. When compared with the placebo, the difference was significant for the A and ACC. When complete disappearance of pain at 2 h was used as a criterion, no significant difference was observed. These results enabled the sensitivity of the evaluation criteria suggested for clinical trials of migraine attack to be discussed.