-
Pain Research & Management 2022Migraine is one of the most common types of headache, and it is the second most common cause of neurological disorders, with an annual prevalence of about 15% of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Migraine is one of the most common types of headache, and it is the second most common cause of neurological disorders, with an annual prevalence of about 15% of the population. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of BoNT-A on the duration and intensity of migraine attacks. In addition, we investigated the effective injection sites.
METHODS
According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched online databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar from 2011 to 2021.
RESULTS
A total of 24 articles were included in the study. The use of BoNT-A in individuals suffering from chronic migraine (CM) decreases the frequency of migraine attacks per month, pain intensity, medication use, emergency visits, and migraine-related disabilities. The BoNT-A was well tolerated and leads to improved performance and better quality of life (QoL). Overall, treatment with BoNT-A in adults with CM is beneficial. In addition, the use of BoNT-A in individuals with vestibular migraine (VM) reduces the frequency of migraines and brings about the improvement of disability status caused by migraine headaches. Meanwhile, the use of BoNT-A reduces the frequency of migraine attacks per month among individuals with chronic refractory migraine (CRM).
CONCLUSIONS
The use of BoNT-A is a low-cost option for the treatment of various kinds of migraines, including chronic, episodic, unilateral, and vestibular types. BoNT-A can reduce the frequency of migraine attacks per month and diminish the severity of pain.
Topics: Adult; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Headache; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35401888
DOI: 10.1155/2022/3284446 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Oct 2020Migraine and sleep disorders are common and often burdensome chronic conditions with a high prevalence in the general population, and with considerable socio-economic...
Migraine and sleep disorders are common and often burdensome chronic conditions with a high prevalence in the general population, and with considerable socio-economic impact and costs.The existence of a relationship between migraine and sleep disorders has been recognized from centuries by clinicians and epidemiological studies. Nevertheless, the exact nature of this association, the underlying mechanisms and interactions are complex and not completely understood. Recent biochemical and functional imaging studies identified central nervous system structures and neurotransmitters involved in the pathophysiology of migraine and also important for the regulation of normal sleep architecture, suggesting a possible causative role, in the pathogenesis of both disorders, of a dysregulation in these common nervous system pathways.This systematic review summarizes the existing data on migraine and sleep disorders with the aim to evaluate the existence of a causal relationship and to assess the presence of influencing factors. The identification of specific sleep disorders associated with migraine should induce clinicians to systematically assess their presence in migraine patients and to adopt combined treatment strategies.
Topics: Humans; Migraine Disorders; Sleep; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 33109076
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-020-01192-5 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Jun 2022A previous European Headache Federation (EHF) guideline addressed the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
A previous European Headache Federation (EHF) guideline addressed the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway to prevent migraine. Since then, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence have expanded the evidence and knowledge for those treatments. Therefore, the EHF panel decided to provide an updated guideline on the use of those treatments.
METHODS
The guideline was developed following the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The working group identified relevant questions, performed a systematic review and an analysis of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote recommendations. Where the GRADE approach was not applicable, expert opinion was provided.
RESULTS
We found moderate to high quality of evidence to recommend eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in individuals with episodic and chronic migraine. For several important clinical questions, we found not enough evidence to provide evidence-based recommendations and guidance relied on experts' opinion. Nevertheless, we provided updated suggestions regarding the long-term management of those treatments and their place with respect to the other migraine preventatives.
CONCLUSION
Monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway are recommended for migraine prevention as they are effective and safe also in the long-term.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists; Headache; Humans; Migraine Disorders
PubMed: 35690723
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01431-x -
Headache Jul 2020Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder often associated with triggers. Diet-related triggers are a common cause of migraine and certain diets have been...
BACKGROUND
Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder often associated with triggers. Diet-related triggers are a common cause of migraine and certain diets have been reported to decrease the frequency of migraine attacks if dietary triggers or patterns are adjusted.
OBJECTIVE
The systematic literature review was conducted to qualitatively summarize evidence from the published literature regarding the role of diet patterns, diet-related triggers, and diet interventions in people with migraine.
METHODS
A literature search was carried out on diet patterns, diet-related triggers, and diet interventions used to treat and/or prevent migraine attacks, using an a priori protocol. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify studies assessing the effect of diet, food, and nutrition in people with migraine aged ≥18 years. Only primary literature sources (randomized controlled trials or observational studies) were included and searches were conducted from January 2000 to March 2019. The NICE checklist was used to assess the quality of the included studies of randomized controlled trials and the Downs and Black checklist was used for the assessment of observational studies.
RESULTS
A total of 43 studies were included in this review, of which 11 assessed diet patterns, 12 assessed diet interventions, and 20 assessed diet-related triggers. The overall quality of evidence was low, as most of the (68%) studies assessing diet patterns and diet-related triggers were cross-sectional studies or patient surveys. The studies regarding diet interventions assessed a variety of diets, such as ketogenic diet, elimination diets, and low-fat diets. Alcohol and caffeine uses were the most common diet patterns and diet-related triggers associated with increased frequency of migraine attacks. Most of the diet interventions, such as low-fat and elimination diets, were related to a decrease in the frequency of migraine attacks.
CONCLUSIONS
There is limited high-quality randomized controlled trial data on diet patterns or diet-related triggers. A few small randomized controlled trials have assessed diet interventions in preventing migraine attacks without strong results. Although many patients already reported avoiding personal diet-related triggers in their migraine management, high-quality research is needed to confirm the effect of diet in people with migraine.
Topics: Diet; Diet Therapy; Feeding Behavior; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Precipitating Factors
PubMed: 32449944
DOI: 10.1111/head.13836 -
JAMA Jun 2021Migraine is common and can be associated with significant morbidity, and several treatment options exist for acute therapy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Migraine is common and can be associated with significant morbidity, and several treatment options exist for acute therapy.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the benefits and harms associated with acute treatments for episodic migraine in adults.
DATA SOURCES
Multiple databases from database inception to February 24, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews that assessed effectiveness or harms of acute therapy for migraine attacks.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Independent reviewers selected studies and extracted data. Meta-analysis was performed with the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman variance correction or by using a fixed-effect model based on the Mantel-Haenszel method if the number of studies was small.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The main outcomes included pain freedom, pain relief, sustained pain freedom, sustained pain relief, and adverse events. The strength of evidence (SOE) was graded with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews.
FINDINGS
Evidence on triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was summarized from 15 systematic reviews. For other interventions, 115 randomized clinical trials with 28 803 patients were included. Compared with placebo, triptans and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used individually were significantly associated with reduced pain at 2 hours and 1 day (moderate to high SOE) and increased risk of mild and transient adverse events. Compared with placebo, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists (low to high SOE), lasmiditan (5-HT1F receptor agonist; high SOE), dihydroergotamine (moderate to high SOE), ergotamine plus caffeine (moderate SOE), acetaminophen (moderate SOE), antiemetics (low SOE), butorphanol (low SOE), and tramadol in combination with acetaminophen (low SOE) were significantly associated with pain reduction and increase in mild adverse events. The findings for opioids were based on low or insufficient SOE. Several nonpharmacologic treatments were significantly associated with improved pain, including remote electrical neuromodulation (moderate SOE), transcranial magnetic stimulation (low SOE), external trigeminal nerve stimulation (low SOE), and noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation (moderate SOE). No significant difference in adverse events was found between nonpharmacologic treatments and sham.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
There are several acute treatments for migraine, with varying strength of supporting evidence. Use of triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, dihydroergotamine, calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, lasmiditan, and some nonpharmacologic treatments was associated with improved pain and function. The evidence for many other interventions, including opioids, was limited.
Topics: Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antiemetics; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Ergot Alkaloids; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Pain Measurement; Serotonin Receptor Agonists; Tryptamines
PubMed: 34128998
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.7939 -
Cephalalgia : An International Journal... Apr 2023Several novel treatments targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway have been developed for migraine. We evaluated the efficacy of these medications,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Evaluating the efficacy of CGRP mAbs and gepants for the preventive treatment of migraine: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase 3 randomised controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Several novel treatments targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway have been developed for migraine. We evaluated the efficacy of these medications, including atogepant, rimegepant, erenumab, eptinezumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab, for the prevention of migraine via network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Databases, including MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane central, were systematically reviewed, and all eligible phase 3 randomised controlled trials were included.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies (n = 14,584 participants) were included. Studies included episodic (n = 11) and chronic (n = 4) migraine or both (n = 4). All interventions, except for eptinzumab 30mg, significantly reduced mean monthly migraine days compared to placebo. All medications had a higher ≥50% responder rate than placebo and results were statistically significant in those with the subcutaneous or intravenous route of administrations, but not with the oral one. All medications significantly reduced mean monthly headache days, although no data for this outcome was available for rimegepant, and mean monthly acute medication days, with no data for eptinezumab.
CONCLUSION
The results show that medications targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide were effective in preventing migraine compared to placebo. Considering limitations of single studies, different populations such as episodic and chronic migraine, and the absence of head-to-head trials, all novel treatments decreased mean monthly migraine and headache days, and showed higher 50%, 75% and 100% responder rates than placebo. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022310579.
Topics: Humans; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Migraine Disorders; Headache; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36855951
DOI: 10.1177/03331024231159366 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Oct 2022Multiple clinical trials with different exercise protocols have demonstrated efficacy in the management of migraine. However, there is no head-to-head comparison of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple clinical trials with different exercise protocols have demonstrated efficacy in the management of migraine. However, there is no head-to-head comparison of efficacy between the different exercise interventions.
METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed involving all clinical trials which determined the efficacy of exercise interventions in reducing the frequency of monthly migraine. Medical journal search engines included Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus spanning all previous years up to July 30, 2022. Both aerobic and strength/resistance training protocols were included. The mean difference (MD, 95% confidence interval) in monthly migraine frequency from baseline to end-of-intervention between the active and control arms was used as an outcome measure. Efficacy evidence from direct and indirect comparisons was combined by conducting a random effects model network meta-analysis. The efficacy of the three exercise protocols was compared, i.e., moderate-intensity aerobic exercise, high-intensity aerobic exercise, and strength/resistance training. Studies that compared the efficacy of migraine medications (topiramate, amitriptyline) to exercise were included. Additionally, the risk of bias in all included studies was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias version 2 (RoB2).
RESULTS
There were 21 published clinical trials that involved a total of 1195 migraine patients with a mean age of 35 years and a female-to-male ratio of 6.7. There were 27 pairwise comparisons and 8 indirect comparisons. The rank of the interventions was as follows: strength training (MD = -3.55 [- 6.15, - 0.95]), high-intensity aerobic exercise (-3.13 [-5.28, -0.97]), moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (-2.18 [-3.25, -1.11]), topiramate (-0.98 [-4.16, 2.20]), placebo, amitriptyline (3.82 [- 1.03, 8.68]). The RoB2 assessment showed that 85% of the included studies demonstrated low risk of bias, while 15% indicated high risk of bias for intention-to-treat analysis. Sources of high risk of bias include randomization process and handling of missing outcome data.
CONCLUSION
Strength training exercise regimens demonstrated the highest efficacy in reducing migraine burden, followed by high-intensity aerobic exercise.
Topics: Adult; Amitriptyline; Exercise; Female; Humans; Male; Migraine Disorders; Network Meta-Analysis; Resistance Training; Topiramate
PubMed: 36229774
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01503-y -
Headache 2015Although triptans are widely used in the acute management of migraine, there is uncertainty around the comparative efficacy of triptans among each other and vs... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Although triptans are widely used in the acute management of migraine, there is uncertainty around the comparative efficacy of triptans among each other and vs non-triptan migraine treatments. We conducted systematic reviews and network meta-analyses to compare the relative efficacy of triptans (alone or in combination with other drugs) for acute treatment of migraines compared with other triptan agents, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), acetaminophen, ergots, opioids, or anti-emetics.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared triptans (alone or in combination with other drugs) with placebo-controlled or active migraine treatments. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were completed independently by multiple reviewers. Outcome data were combined and analyzed using a Bayesian network meta-analysis. For each outcome, odds ratios, relative risks, and absolute probability of response were calculated.
RESULTS
A total of 133 randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Standard dose triptans relieved headaches within 2 hours in 42 to 76% of patients, and 2-hour sustained freedom from pain was achieved for 18 to 50% of patients. Standard dose triptans provided sustained headache relief at 24 hours in 29 to 50% of patients, and sustained freedom from pain in 18 to 33% of patients. Use of rescue medications ranged from 20 to 34%. For 2-hour headache relief, standard dose triptan achieved better outcomes (42 to 76% response) than ergots (38%); equal or better outcomes than NSAIDs, ASA, and acetaminophen (46 to 52%); and equal or slightly worse outcomes than combination therapy (62 to 80%). Among individual triptans, sumatriptan subcutaneous injection, rizatriptan ODT, zolmitriptan ODT, and eletriptan tablets were associated with the most favorable outcomes.
INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS
Triptans are effective for migraine relief. Standard dose triptans are associated with better outcomes than ergots, and most triptans are associated with equal or better outcomes compared with NSAIDs, ASA, and acetaminophen. Use of triptans in combination with ASA or acetaminophen, or using alternative modes of administration such as injectables, may be associated with slightly better outcomes than standard dose triptan tablets.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Migraine Disorders; Oxazolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Serotonin 5-HT1 Receptor Agonists; Treatment Outcome; Tryptamines
PubMed: 26178694
DOI: 10.1111/head.12601 -
The Journal of Pain Jul 2022The primary aim of this study was to review the effect of exercise in comparison with a non-active treatment on pain intensity, frequency of headache episodes, headache... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The primary aim of this study was to review the effect of exercise in comparison with a non-active treatment on pain intensity, frequency of headache episodes, headache duration, quality of life, medication use, and psychological symptoms, in patients with migraine or tension-type headache (TTH). A systematic search was conducted in various electronic databases to identify all relevant studies: Medline (PubMed), PEDro, EBSCO and Google Scholar. Clinical trials assessing the effects of exercise interventions in patients with primary headaches were selected. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and PEDro scale and qualitative analysis was based on classifying the results into levels of evidence according to the GRADE. 19 studies (2776 participants; 85% female) were included. The meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in pain intensity for aerobic training in patients with migraine (SMD = -0.65; 95% CI = -1.07 to -0.22, very low certainty evidence) and for strength training in patients with TTH (SMD = -0.84; 95% CI = -1.68 to- -0.01, very low certainty evidence). Statistically significant differences were also found in the medication use (SMD = -0.51; 95% CI = -0.85 to -0.17, low certainty evidence). Low transparency, replicability and high risk of bias were found. Aerobic training has a small to moderate clinical effect on pain intensity and medication use on migraine patients, with very low to low certainty of evidence. Strength training showed a moderate clinical effect with very low quality of evidence in patients with TTH. Exercise could be considered as clinically relevant for the management of patients with primary headaches, but the presence of low certainty of evidence and low transparency and replicability limited its clinical application. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents current evidence about exercise interventions in patients with primary headaches, including migraine and tension-type headache. Existing findings are reviewed, and relevant data are provided on the effectiveness of each exercise modality, as well as its certainty of evidence and clinical applicability.
Topics: Exercise; Female; Headache; Humans; Male; Migraine Disorders; Quality of Life; Tension-Type Headache
PubMed: 34929374
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2021.12.003 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain May 2023While there are several trials that support the efficacy of various drugs for migraine prophylaxis against placebo, there is limited evidence addressing the comparative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
While there are several trials that support the efficacy of various drugs for migraine prophylaxis against placebo, there is limited evidence addressing the comparative safety and efficacy of these drugs. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to facilitate comparison between drugs for migraine prophylaxis.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to August 13, 2022, for randomized trials of pharmacological treatments for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to screen references, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and rated the certainty (quality) of evidence as either high, moderate, low, or very low using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
We identified 74 eligible trials, reporting on 32,990 patients. We found high certainty evidence that monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene related peptide or its receptor (CGRP(r)mAbs), gepants, and topiramate increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo. We found moderate certainty evidence that beta-blockers, valproate, and amitriptyline increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, and low certainty evidence that gabapentin may not be different from placebo. We found high certainty evidence that, compared to placebo, valproate and amitriptyline lead to substantial adverse events leading to discontinuation, moderate certainty evidence that topiramate, beta-blockers, and gabapentin increase adverse events leading to discontinuation, and moderate to high certainty evidence that (CGRP(r)mAbs) and gepants do not increase adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
(CGRP(r)mAbs) have the best safety and efficacy profile of all drugs for migraine prophylaxis, followed closely by gepants.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Gabapentin; Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide; Network Meta-Analysis; Amitriptyline; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Migraine Disorders
PubMed: 37208596
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01594-1