Search

Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of prednisone for treatment of withdrawal headache in patients with medication overuse headache (MOH)., Patients and Methods: In this prospective double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel designed multicentre trial, 96 consecutive patients with MOH were randomized to withdrawal treatment with either 100 mg prednisone or placebo over 5 days. Patients were enrolled if they met the International Headache Society criteria for MOH and were diagnosed with migraine or episodic tension-type headache as primary headache. Exclusion criteria comprised significant neurological or psychiatric disorders. Withdrawal symptoms, including headache severity and intake of rescue medication, were documented for 14 days after randomization., Results: Patients treated with prednisone did not experience fewer hours of moderate or severe headache than patients receiving placebo. However, patients requested less rescue medication within the first 5 days., Conclusions: During withdrawal in MOH, prednisone reduces rescue medication without decreasing the severity and duration of withdrawal headache.

Cluster headache is a rare primary neurovascular headache and a severe pain condition with unilateral headache over 15-180 minutes and concomitant unilateral autonomic symptoms. The detailed pathophysiology of the condition is still unclear. Only a few evidence-based therapeutic options for acute therapy and the preventive management of the disease are available. Triptans, in particular sumatriptan 6 mg subcutaneously, are highly effective for acute treatment. This review focuses on the potential use of oral triptans in the prophylaxis of cluster headache.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether frovatriptan would show efficacy in short term prophylactic treatment of episodic cluster headache (ECH) in comparison to placebo., Background: The 5-hydroxytryptamine(1B/d) (5-HT(1B/d) )-agonists naratriptan, eletriptan, and frovatriptan have been shown to reduce the frequency of ECH. So far, no double-blind placebo-controlled trials have investigated the potential prophylactic effects of 5-HT(1B/d) -agonists in ECH., Methods: The trial was conducted as a multi-center, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, prospective phase III parallel-group trial with two independent treatment groups (5 mg frovatriptan vs placebo). It was planned to randomize about 96 patients (48 patients per group) into the trial to obtain 80 evaluable patients (40 patients per group)., Results: The study was prematurely discontinued after 13 months and enrollment of 11, instead of the planned 80 patients, by the sponsor due to infeasibility. Recruitment was slow and each of the patients included conducted major protocol violations. The differences in the primary and secondary endpoints were not significant., Conclusion: This study shows that particular therapeutic aims are impossible to be addressed in a double-blind, randomized, parallel group, study design with specific inclusion and exclusion criteria according to the International Headache Society (IHS) guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in cluster headache. Further studies are required to evaluate the potential efficacy of triptans in the prophylactic treatment of ECH. The outcome of the trial suggests that the recommendations of the Guidelines for controlled Trials of Drugs in Cluster Headache from the IHS should be revised., (© 2010 American Headache Society.)

Objective: To compare the superior efficacy of the fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine over the single substances, which was observed in the randomized, double-blind phase of the clinical trial, with the efficacy of the respective usual nonprescription medication taken by the patients in the open-label pre-phase of the same study., Background: The "Thomapyrin Study" showed significant superiority of the fixed combination containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine over the combination without caffeine, the single preparations, and placebo in the treatment of headache., Methods: Prior to the randomized treatment phase, a headache episode treated with the patient's usual nonprescription medication was recorded (open-label pre-phase). Patients assessed their pain intensity on a 100-mm visual analog scale. For the 1734 patients included in the efficacy analysis, we compared the time course of the pain intensity difference (PID) to baseline after the patients took their usual medication with the time course of the PID after intake of the randomized study medication., Results: Time course of PID after intake of the patient's usual medication was very similar to the time course of PID after intake of the randomized study medication. After 2 hours, pain reduction was on average 43.0, 38.2, 38.1, and 37.7 mm as assessed on the visual analog scale in the group of patients who took their usual triple combination containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine, the single agents acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and ibuprofen, respectively, in the open-label phase. The corresponding mean pain reduction was 44.7, 40.7, and 39.5 mm in patients allocated to the triple combination containing acetylsalicylic acid, paracetamol, and caffeine, the single agents acetylsalicylic acid, and paracetamol, respectively, in the randomized, double-blind phase.

Objective: This analysis evaluates and ranks efficacy endpoints often used in headache trials concerning their clinical relevance in relation to the patient-related criterion "global assessment of overall efficacy" based on data gained in a large trial investigating different over-the-counter drugs in the treatment of headache., Background: The original study showed a significant superiority of the fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid+paracetamol+caffeine over the combination without caffeine, the single preparations, and placebo in the treatment of headache., Methods: For 1734 patients included in the efficacy analysis we investigated the correlation of patient's global efficacy assessment with the endpoints "time to 50% pain relief" (primary endpoint), "time to be pain-free," pain intensity difference, sum of pain intensity difference, and extent of impairment of daily activities. Patients recorded pain intensity on a visual analog scale. Efficacy, tolerability, and extent of impairment of daily activity were assessed on verbal rating scales.A logistic regression, proportional odds model was adapted to the time to event data., Results: The highest correlation with patient's global efficacy assessment was demonstrated for the primary endpoint time to 50% pain relief (r = 0.6727) and the sum of pain intensity difference (r = 0.7037). The frequency distribution of patient's global efficacy assessment depended primarily on the time to 50% pain relief and similarly, but to a somewhat lesser extent, on the reduction of pain intensity to 10 mm as assessed on the visual analog scale. More than 86% of the patients assessed efficacy as very good or good when their pain was reduced by 50% at least within 1 hour after drug intake. The patients accept a longer time span than 2 hours for reaching no pain to give a positive global evaluation of efficacy.

Medication-overuse headache (MOH) can be caused by almost all anti-headache drugs including analgesics, ergots, triptans, and combined preparations The prevalence of chronic daily headache (CDH) appears to be between 2% and 4% in the general population. Current epidemiologic studies suggest that MOH accounts for approximately 50% of these cases. The pathophysiology of MOH remains unclear. The only therapy is withdrawal from the overused substances. Prednisone decreases the duration of headache in the first days of withdrawal therapy. The only strategy to reduce the prevalence of MOH is to prevent the development of MOH in the first place by restriction of anti-headache drugs and constant education of patients.

Objective: The study compared efficacy and tolerability of intravenous valproate (iVPA) with intravenous lysine-acetylsalicylic acid (iLAS) in acute migraine attacks. Background.-iLAS has been proven to be a highly effective treatment in acute migraine attacks, but it is not available in many countries and contraindicated in patients with asthma or peptic ulcers. Current data suggest that iVPA may be effective in the treatment of acute migraine attacks., Design/methods: In this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group phase-II study, 40 patients with acute migraine attacks (onset <5 hours, severe or moderate headache on a four-point IHS scale) alternately received iVPA 800 mg or iLAS 1000 mg. Primary outcome criteria were the percentage of patients reporting pain relief after 1 hour and patients who remained sustained pain free for 24 hours following drug administration. Secondary outcome criteria were relief of pain and associated migrainous symptoms (nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia) at 1, 2, 24, and 48 hours following drug administration., Results: There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical features between both treatment groups. Percentage of pain relief after 1 hour in the iVPA and iLAS groups were 25% and 30%, respectively, and of sustained pain free for 24 hours were 20% and 30%, respectively, without significant differences (P = 1 and P= .72, respectively). Both drugs improved associated migrainous symptoms without significant differences at the different time points, but again with a trend in favor of iLAS. No adverse events were observed., Conclusion: Both drugs were effective in acute migraine attacks with a trend in favor of iLAS. As both drugs were well tolerated, further studies with higher doses of iVPA for the treatment of acute migraine attacks are recommended.

Background: Migraine is a common neurological disorder (16% women, 6% men) associated with high direct and indirect costs. We evaluated the diagnostic and paramedical therapeutic measures by estimating the expenditure per patient and the effect of treatment., Methods: A questionnaire was sent to 1000 patients attending the Essen outpatient headache centre in 1995. A total of 293 patients responded, of whom 165 were eligible and could be evaluated. Patients were asked to report diagnostic tests, paramedical treatments applied, average duration of success (defined as meaningful reduction in migraine frequency) and costs of paramedical therapy., Results: Paramedical methods of therapy most frequently used were acupuncture, special pads, relaxation methods and herbal therapy. A total of 579 (3.5 on average) diagnostic procedures such as brain or cervical spine CT and MRI or EEG was performed. The average cost for acupuncture was 465 US dollars, while the success was maintained for 3.2 months. 1510 US dollars was spent on psychotherapy, which was successful for 1.7 months. Patients spent 93 US dollars for relaxation methods, achieving migraine relief for 7.4 months., Conclusion: Paramedical treatments lack scientific proof, while both acute and prophylactic treatment strategies have been successfully tested in many clinical trials. Paramedical treatment shows a good temporally effect in individual patients.