Search

Background: The identification of people at risk of cognitive impairment is essential for improving recruitment in secondary prevention trials of Alzheimer's disease. We aimed to test and qualify a biomarker risk assignment algorithm (BRAA) to identify participants at risk of developing mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease within 5 years, and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of low-dose pioglitazone to delay onset of mild cognitive impairment in these at-risk participants. Methods: In this phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, we enrolled cognitively healthy, community living participants aged 65–83 years from 57 academic affiliated and private research clinics in Australia, Germany, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. By use of the BRAA, participants were grouped as high risk or low risk. Participants at high risk were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral pioglitazone (0·8 mg/day sustained release) or placebo, and all low-risk participants received placebo. Study investigators, site staff, sponsor personnel, and study participants were masked to genotype, risk assignment, and treatment assignment. The planned study duration was the time to accumulate 202 events of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease in White participants who were at high risk (the population on whom the genetic analyses that informed the BRAA development was done). Primary endpoints were time-to-event comparisons between participants at high risk and low risk given placebo (for the BRAA objective), and between participants at high risk given pioglitazone or placebo (for the efficacy objective). The primary analysis included all participants who were randomly assigned, received at least one dose of study drug, and had at least one valid post-baseline visit, with significance set at p=0·01. The safety analysis included all participants who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study medication. An efficacy futility analysis was planned for when approximately 33% of the anticipated events occurred in the high-risk, White, non-Hispanic or Latino group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01931566. Findings: Between Aug 28, 2013, and Dec 21, 2015, we enrolled 3494 participants (3061 at high risk and 433 at low risk). Of those participants, 1545 were randomly assigned to pioglitazone and 1516 to placebo. 1104 participants discontinued treatment (464 assigned to the pioglitazone group, 501 in the placebo high risk group, and 139 in the placebo low risk group). 3399 participants had at least one dose of study drug or placebo and at least one post-baseline follow-up visit, and were included in the efficacy analysis. 3465 participants were included in the safety analysis (1531 assigned to the pioglitazone group, 1507 in the placebo high risk group, and 427 in the placebo low risk group). In the full analysis set, 46 (3·3%) of 1406 participants at high risk given placebo had mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease, versus four (1·0%) of 402 participants at low risk given placebo (hazard ratio 3·26, 99% CI 0·85–12·45; p=0·023). 39 (2·7%) of 1430 participants at high risk given pioglitazone had mild cognitive impairment, versus 46 (3·3%) of 1406 participants at high risk given placebo (hazard ratio 0·80, 99% CI 0·45–1·40; p=0·307). In the safety analysis set, seven (0·5%) of 1531 participants at high risk given pioglitazone died versus 21 (1·4%) of 1507 participants at high risk given placebo. There were no other notable differences in adverse events between groups. The study was terminated in January, 2018, after failing to meet the non-futility threshold. Interpretation: Pioglitazone did not delay the onset of mild cognitive impairment. The biomarker algorithm demonstrated a 3 times enrichment of events in the high risk placebo group compared with the low risk placebo group, but did not reach the pre-specified significance threshold. Because we did not complete the study as planned, findings can only be considered exploratory. The conduct of this study could prove useful to future clinical development strategies for Alzheimer's disease prevention studies. Funding: Takeda and Zinfandel.

The sumatriptan iontophoretic transdermal system (TDS) (Zecuity, NuPathe, Malvern, PA), a novel approach to the acute treatment of migraine, circumvents the gastrointestinal tract by using low-level electrical energy to transport sumatriptan across the skin. In clinical trials, sumatriptan TDS has provided consistent drug delivery; rapid relief of migraine headache pain and migraine-related nausea; and an excellent safety profile, with a low incidence of triptan-sensation adverse events. Ease of use/application of sumatriptan TDS by migraineurs during an attack is rated highly. Sumatriptan TDS will provide a convenient, acute migraine-specific therapeutic option to the significant subset of patients for whom oral formulations are suboptimal, particularly those with migraine-related nausea (MRN).

Background Recent studies evaluated short-term efficacy and safety of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) of the occipital nerves for managing chronic migraine. We present 52-week safety and efficacy results from an open-label extension of a randomized, sham-controlled trial. Methods In this institutional review board-approved, randomized, multicenter, double-blinded study, patients were implanted with a neurostimulation system, randomized to an active or control group for 12 weeks, and received open-label treatment for an additional 40 weeks. Outcomes collected included number of headache days, pain intensity, migraine disability assessment (MIDAS), Zung Pain and Distress (PAD), direct patient reports of headache pain relief, quality of life, satisfaction and adverse events. Statistical tests assessed change from baseline to 52 weeks using paired t-tests. Intent-to-treat (ITT) analyses of all patients ( N = 157) and analyses of only patients who met criteria for intractable chronic migraine (ICM; N = 125) were performed. Results Headache days were significantly reduced by 6.7 (±8.4) days in the ITT population ( p Conclusion Our results support the 12-month efficacy of PNS of the occipital nerves for headache pain and disability associated with chronic migraine. More emphasis on adverse event mitigation is needed in future research. Trial registration: Clinical trials.gov (NCT00615342).

Objective Probable migraine is a common, disabling migraine subtype fulfilling all but one of the diagnostic criteria for migraine. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan/naproxen sodium for the acute treatment of probable migraine without aura. Methods Patients treated a headache of probable migraine without aura when pain was moderate or severe with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium ( n = 222 intent-to-treat (ITT)) or placebo ( n = 221 ITT/complete case analysis a ) in this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Results Sumatriptan/naproxen sodium was more effective than placebo with respect to the co-primary efficacy endpoints two-hour pain-free response (29% sumatriptan/naproxen sodium vs 11% placebo, p Conclusion Sumatriptan/naproxen sodium is effective in the acute treatment of probable migraine as demonstrated by higher rates of freedom from pain and restoration of function.

Background: Chronic migraine (CM) is a debilitating neurological disorder with few treatment options. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) of the occipital nerves is a potentially promising therapy for CM patients. Methods: In this randomized, controlled multicenter study, patients diagnosed with CM were implanted with a neurostimulation device near the occipital nerves and randomized 2:1 to active ( n = 105) or sham ( n = 52) stimulation. The primary endpoint was a difference in the percentage of responders (defined as patients that achieved a ≥50% reduction in mean daily visual analog scale scores) in each group at 12 weeks. Results: There was not a significant difference in the percentage of responders in the Active compared with the Control group (95% lower confidence bound (LCB) of −0.06; p = 0.55). However, there was a significant difference in the percentage of patients that achieved a 30% reduction ( p = 0.01). Importantly, compared with sham-treated patients, there were also significant differences in reduction of number of headache days (Active Group = 6.1, baseline = 22.4; Control Group = 3.0, baseline = 20.1; p = 0.008), migraine-related disability ( p = 0.001) and direct reports of pain relief ( p = 0.001). The most common adverse event was persistent implant site pain. Conclusion: Although this study failed to meet its primary endpoint, this is the first large-scale study of PNS of the occipital nerves in CM patients that showed significant reductions in pain, headache days, and migraine-related disability. Additional controlled studies using endpoints that have recently been identified and accepted as clinically meaningful are warranted in this highly disabled patient population with a large unmet medical need. Trial registration: Clinical trials.gov (NCT00615342).

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.

Objective.— To assess the long-term tolerability and efficacy of NP101, a novel transdermal sumatriptan patch being developed for the acute treatment of migraine. Background.— Nausea (with or without vomiting) and gastroparesis have been characterized as being among the most problematic challenges affecting migraine care today. Migraine-associated nausea can cause patients to delay or avoid taking oral medication with a resultant loss or reduction of therapeutic efficacy. Migraine-associated gastroparesis can impair absorption and reduce bioavailability of oral migraine medications and thereby reduce and delay therapeutic efficacy. The non-oral triptan formulations that have been used to overcome these challenges are associated with other shortcomings that can limit their use. Designed to overcome these shortcomings and treatment limitations imposed by gastrointestinal signs and symptoms, the NP101 patch avoids the need for oral administration, does not depend upon gastrointestinal absorption, and provides more consistent, predictable plasma concentrations than oral and intranasal formulations of sumatriptan and a lower maximum plasma concentration than sumatriptan injection. Methods.— Patients diagnosed with migraine who had participated in a randomized, double-blind, Phase III study of the NP101 patch were given the option to use NP101 to treat migraine episodes with moderate or severe headache pain for up to 12 months in this open-label trial. Results.— One hundred eighty-three patients applied 2089 study patches. The most common adverse events involved the patch application site (45% of patients). The only non-application-site adverse events reported in >2% of patients were nausea (n = 6, 3.3%), upper respiratory tract infection (n = 6, 3.3%), and nasopharyngitis (n = 4, 2.2%). The incidence of triptan-associated adverse events was 1.6%. Across all visits for investigator assessments, the majority of patients (ranging from 74.7% at Month 1 to 92.2% at Month 9) were scored as having no erythema at patch application sites. For patient assessments, the percentage of patch placement sites scored as having no or minimal redness was 38.2% at the time of patch removal and 65.4% 24 hours after patch activation. Two hours after patch activation across all patch treatments over the 12-month study, 23.8% of initial acute migraine episodes were scored as being free from headache pain, 58.2% as having headache pain relief,78.9% as nausea free, 60.1% as phonophobia free, 53.4% as photophobia free, and 20.7% as migraine free. No evidence of waning tolerability or efficacy was observed over the 12-month study period. Conclusion.— NP101, a transdermal sumatriptan formulation in development for the acute treatment of migraine, demonstrated tolerability and efficacy with successive uses over 12 months in this clinical trial.

(Headache 2011;51:1078-1086) Background.— Therapeutic needs of migraineurs vary considerably from patient to patient and even attack to attack. Some attacks require high-end therapy, while other attacks have treatment needs that are less immediate. While triptans are considered the “gold standard” of migraine therapy, they do have limitations and many patients are seeking other therapeutic alternatives. In 2005, an open-label study of feverfew/ginger suggested efficacy for attacks of migraine treated early during the mild headache phase of the attack. Methods/Materials.— In this multi-center pilot study, 60 patients treated 221 attacks of migraine with sublingual feverfew/ginger or placebo. All subjects met International Headache Society criteria for migraine with or without aura, experiencing 2-6 attacks of migraine per month within the previous 3 months. Subjects had

(Headache 2011;51:961-970) Objective.— To investigate a broad definition of migraine resolution that extends beyond specific migraine-associated diagnostic symptoms as measured by the Completeness of Response Survey. Methods.— Conducted at 8 sites, 135 subjects treated migraines with SumaRT/Nap over 2 months. To measure subjects' experiences with SumaRT/Nap compared to their usual migraine medication, the Headache Impact Test, Revised Patient Perception of Migraine Questionnaire, and Completeness of Response Survey were administered at baseline and at 2 months. Results.— The effects of the study medicine compared to the subjects' usual migraine medicine reached statistical significance in decreasing headache severity, lessening of associated symptoms, and attaining complete relief with a single dose (60.04% of attacks resolved at 2 hours post-treatment). Conclusion.— Compared to a subject's usual treatment, SumaRT/Nap used early and consistently for treatment of acute migraine offers important clinical improvements, including lessening of associated symptoms beyond International Headache Society criteria.

Stimulant-using men who have sex with men (MSM) are at increased risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission, and are more likely to practice unprotected anal sex than MSM who do not use methamphetamine and/or crack cocaine. In this paper the authors report on interviews with stimulant-using men who have sex with men who have participated in Crystal Meth Anonymous and other 12-step groups, focusing on those who did not have unprotected anal intercourse during a 6-month follow-up period and their reasons for doing so. The authors find 4 common themes cited: a diminished sexual drive; exclusive sex with a primary partner; greater sense of responsibility/commitment to safer sex; and most commonly of the four, an overall healthier sex life. Participants’ use of terms such as “healthy,” “enjoyable,” and “fulfilling” to describe sex not on stimulants, and avoidance of these terms for sex on stimulants, suggests a distinct dimension of sexual experience.

Objective.—The objective of this open-label study was to evaluate the efficacy of switching patients who had a previous unsatisfactory response to rizatriptan to eletriptan 40 mg. Background.—The characteristics of individual migraine patients can vary tremendously and can have a significant impact on treatment outcomes. In addition, clinical experience has demonstrated that the triptans are not identical or interchangeable and that patients who respond poorly or who are dissatisfied with one agent can derive benefit by being switched to another agent within the triptan class. Methods.—Patients were eligible if they met International Headache Society criteria for migraine, with a frequency of 1 to 6 migraine attacks per month, and had documented “unsatisfactory treatment response” to rizatriptan within the past year (54% on the melt formulation; 46% on tablets). Reasons for dissatisfaction with rizatriptan (>1 could be cited) included inadequate (84%) or slow onset (50%) of pain relief, high recurrence rate (69%), and lack of improvement in associated symptoms (60%). One hundred twenty-three patients were eligible for treatment. Patients were instructed to take eletriptan 40 mg as soon as they were certain that their headache was a migraine, regardless of level of pain severity (8% treated headaches that were mild). Results.—Headache response at 2 hours (first-attack data) was 64%. Absence of nausea (from baseline to 2 hours) increased from 50% to 78%, absence of photophobia from 30% to 72%, and absence of phonophobia from 39% to 77%. Functional response at 2 hours was 63%, with 41% of patients reporting normal functioning. Treatment with eletriptan 40 mg was associated with a 27% to 40% reduction in migraine attack-related functional impairment, as measured by the PQ-7. Recurrence rates were 36.6%. Overall, 72% of patients rated eletriptan as a “good-to-excellent” treatment, and 78% reported overall satisfaction with the degree of headache relief. Conclusion.—The results of this study suggest that eletriptan is an efficacious treatment option for patients who are dissatisfied with their response to rizatriptan.

To evaluate whether frovatriptan would provide greater relief if given early during a migraine attack.Adults with a history of migraine of at least 1 year, and who had 2-8 headaches in the previous month were recruited from 19 US centres for a prospective, placebo-controlled crossover study over 2 migraine attacks. Dose 1 was taken at the onset of mild migraine headache, Dose 2 was taken at least 2 h later if the headache progressed to moderate/severe. Patients were randomized to receive Dose 1 frovatriptan then Dose 2 placebo or Dose 1 placebo followed by Dose 2 frovatriptan. Treatment order was reversed for the second attack. This schedule enabled a comparison of frovatriptan with placebo and a comparison of early and later treatment with frovatriptan.Freedom from pain at 2 h for frovatriptan versus placebo as Dose 1; use of Dose 2 and/or rescue medication, pain severity, functional impairment and headache recurrence.In 241 patients who each treated 2 migraine attacks, Dose 1 frovatriptan was more effective than placebo in terms of the proportion of patients who were pain free at 2 h (28% vs 20%, p = 0.04). This benefit was sustained up to 4 h post-dose (p = 0.003). Early use of frovatriptan significantly reduced re-medication (p0.001). Twenty-four-hour headache recurrence was low in both early (4%) and later use (6%) groups. Sustained pain-free response occurred in 40% of frovatriptan early use patients compared with 31% of later use patients (p0.05). Early use prevented headache progression: 69%-78% had mild/no headache 2-4 h after Dose 1 frovatriptan compared with 54%-63% taking Dose 1 placebo (p0.001). Early use reduced pain burden and functional disability (por = 0.001). More patients rated early use of frovatriptan as excellent or good (57% vs 46%).Early use of frovatriptan resulted in a higher, earlier and sustained pain-free response, prevented progression to moderate/severe headache and reduced pain burden and functional disability.

Objective.—A phase II, randomized, double-blind, crossover study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of 100-mg diclofenac sodium softgel (formulated using ProSorb technology) with or without 100-mg caffeine versus placebo in migraineurs during migraine attacks. Background.—Diclofenac has been demonstrated to be an effective migraine treatment in several placebo-controlled studies. A rapidly absorbed softgel of diclofenac has been shown to be effective in the rapid relief of acute pain, and may have advantages in migraine treatment. In addition, caffeine has consistently been shown to increase both the efficacy and speed of onset of concurrently administered analgesics. The ability of caffeine to both enhance and accelerate analgesic effects has been documented with a variety of different medications (ie, aspirin, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, and ergotamine). Methods.—The 3-period crossover study was designed to compare diclofenac softgel 100 mg, diclofenac softgel 100 mg plus caffeine 100 mg, and placebo in the acute treatment of migraine. Subjects treated one moderate or severe attack with each study medication. The primary efficacy parameter was the percentage of subjects with headache relief at 60 minutes as defined by a reduction of headache severity from moderate or severe at baseline to absent or mild compared with placebo. Though the sample size estimate required that 72 subjects treat 3 separate attacks, 51 subjects treated 1 migraine attack, 44 treated 2 attacks, and 39 treated 3 attacks. Results.—In the placebo group, 6 (14%) of 43 subjects reported headache relief at 60 minutes versus 12 (27%) of 45 subjects in the diclofenac softgel group, and 19 (41%) of 46 subjects in the diclofenac softgel plus caffeine group. Differences were statistically significant for the diclofenac softgel plus caffeine group versus placebo (odds ratio, 4.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 13.7). Rescue medication was used by 27 (63%) of 43 subjects treated with placebo, 15 (33%) of 45 subjects treated with diclofenac softgel, and 14 (30%) of 46 subjects treated with diclofenac softgel plus caffeine. This result is highly statistically significant (χ22= 11.56, P= .003). Both the diclofenac plus caffeine (P < .03) and diclofenac only (P < .03) groups were significantly different from the placebo group in terms of the visual analog scale score at 60 minutes. Conclusions.—The major finding of the present study is that diclofenac softgel plus caffeine produces statistically significant benefits relative to placebo at 60 minutes. Diclofenac softgel alone did not differ significantly from placebo, perhaps due to limits in sample size. Nonsignificant trends support the analgesic adjuvant benefit of caffeine when added to diclofenac softgels.

Objective.—To determine the optimal dose and tolerability of frovatriptan in the acute treatment of migraine. Background.—Frovatriptan has a distinctive pharmacological and pharmacokinetic profile compared with sumatriptan. A previous study has shown that frovatriptan doses of 2.5, 5, 10, 20, and 40 mg are equally effective in relieving headache with no evidence of a dose-response relationship. The incidence of adverse events tended to increase with doses of 10 mg and above. Methods.—This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group multicenter trial. Patients (n=635) took a single oral dose of placebo or frovatriptan, 0.5, 1, 2.5, or 5 mg, at the onset of a moderate or severe migraine headache and recorded headache intensity, functional impairment, and migraine-associated symptoms over 24 hours. Results.—Frovatriptan 2.5 mg produced clinically and statistically significant headache relief 2 hours postdose, whereas the effect of lower doses was not significantly different from that of placebo at that time point. The 2.5-mg dose also produced significant symptom relief and improvement in functional impairment. All doses of frovatriptan were well tolerated, and the majority of adverse events were of mild or moderate severity. Conclusion.—It is concluded that the 2.5-mg dose of frovatriptan offers optimal efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of acute migraine. Higher doses do not appear to confer greater efficacy and are associated with an increased incidence of adverse effects.

Introduction In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, single-dose study ( n = 1555), a fixed combination of acetaminophen 500 mg, acetylsalicylic acid 500 mg, and caffeine 130 mg (AAC) was compared with ibuprofen 400 mg (IB) and placebo (PLA) for acute treatment of migraine. Subjects and methods An exploratory post-hoc analysis compared AAC with IB and PLA in the subset of patients with severe pain at baseline ( n = 660). Results At most time points, AAC and IB relieved the pain and associated symptoms of severe migraine significantly better than PLA ( p ≤ 0.05). AAC was significantly superior to IB for pain relief at 45 minutes and at one, two, three, and four hours postdose ( p Conclusions In patients with severe baseline migraine pain, AAC and IB are significantly more effective than PLA, and AAC provides significantly faster and more effective pain relief than IB.

A new era of analgesia began with the discovery of aspirin in 1899. Since that time, many newer NSAIDs (non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs) have been discovered and utilized in clinical practice. The mechanism of anti-inflammatory action of NSAIDs is believed to result from inhibition of the enzyme cyclooxygenase (COX), discovered in the 1970s. This enzyme represents the key ratelimiting step in the production of prostaglandins (PGs) from arachidonic acid. Since PGs are essential for normal gastrointestinal, renal, and platelet function, as well as mediating the inflammatory process, inhibition of cyclooxygenase has both beneficial and deleterious effects. The beneficial effect, obviously, is inhibition of the inflammatory process, while the harmful effects comprise an increased incidence of upper gastrointestinal toxicity (ulceration, perforation, and bleeding) as well as possible renal and platelet dysfunction. In the late 1980s, it was discovered that two isoforms of cyclooxygenase existed (COX-1 and COX-2). COX-1 represents a constitutive form that is expressed in most tissues. In contrast, COX-2 is induced at sties of inflammation and also occurs under normal circumstances in the brain and renal tissues. Since COX-2 levels increase dramatically during acute and chronic inflammation, it was hypothesized that the COX-2 inhibitors might offer significant antiinflammatory qualities with reduced toxicity and may have utility in central nervous system mediated conditions other than peripheral pain, including dementias such as Alzheimer's disease and headache, specifically, migraine headache.

Caffeine is a ubiquitous substance. From a historical standpoint, caffeine is one of the oldest substances consumed by man in the form of coffee beans, teas, guanara beans and mate. Caffeine is commonly found in many analgesic products as an adjuvant. Caffeine is almost completely absorbed in the GI tract. Since caffeine is lipid soluble, it is rapidly absorbed into the brain where it becomes active within 6-8 min. Caffeine has some analgesic properties itself and because of its rapid absorption and distribution, is useful as an adjuvant in combination analgesic medications. Because of the wide availability in beverages and medications, concerns regarding overuse resulting in caffeinism, dependence, habituation and addiction have been raised. Extensive review of the literature reveals that occurrence of these conditions resulting from the use of caffeine is minimal and, therefore, caffeine is effective and safe as an analgesic adjuvant.

Since the sexual revolution of the 1960s, medical complications of sexual activity and sexual side effects related to use of medications have become a significant part of healthcare practice. Specifically, there has been an expanding interest in the treatment of headaches and their relationship to sexual function. Most sexual side effects associated with headache treatment are benign and can be managed with reassurance or changes in medication regimens. However, sudden headache should always be investigated carefully to rule out a dangerous intracranial event.

Objective: To examine the benefits of acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine (AAC) in the treatment of severe, disabling migraine attacks, in a population of migraine sufferers for whom over-the-counter (OTC) medications are appropriate. Background: Subjects ( n = 1220) who met the International Headache Society criteria for migraine with or without aura were included in three independent clinical studies. Designl Methods: Post-hoc analysis of 172 subjects who met the criteria for severe, disabling migraine reported a history of migraine attacks characterized by at least severe pain and severe disability, and treated attacks with severe pain and at least severe disability. Subjects who usually vomited with 20% or more of their migraine attacks, and those with incapacitating disability (subjects who required bed rest for more than 50% of their attacks) were not eligible for enrollment. Results: From 1 h and continuing through 6 h postdose, the proportion of responders was significantly greater ( p≤0.01) for AAC than placebo. The pain intensity difference from baseline was significantly greater ( p≤0.05) for AAC than placebo from 0.5 h through 6 h. The proportion of subjects reporting improvement in functional disability, photophobia, and phonophobia was significantly greater for AAC than placebo from 2 h through 6 h postdose. Conclusions: The nonprescription combination of AAC was well tolerated and effective.

Rizatriptan is a novel, selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonist with a rapid onset of action after oral dosing for the acute treatment of migraine. We conducted a long-term (up to 1 year), multicenter, randomized study in 1831 patients treating more than 46,000 attacks to compare the efficacy and tolerability of rizatriptan 5 mg and 10 mg to standard care medications routinely used for the acute treatment of migraine attacks. Both doses of rizatriptan were highly effective, without evidence of tachyphylaxis. Rizatriptan 10 mg was consistently superior (P < 0.05), both to the 5-mg dose and to standard care, in providing relief in 90% of attacks, with 50% pain-free by 2 hours after dosing. The most common dose-related adverse events were nausea, somnolence, and asthenia/fatigue. Based on this large, multicenter, long-term trial, rizatriptan is an important new oral agent for the acute treatment of migraine.

Rizatriptan is a selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonist with rapid oral absorption and early onset of action in the acute treatment of migraine. This double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study compared rizatriptan 5 mg versus sumatriptan 25 mg, and rizatriptan 10 mg versus sumatriptan 50 mg. A total of 1329 patients were allocated to one of five groups for treatment of two attacks: rizatriptan 5 mg/sumatriptan 25 mg; sumatriptan 25 mg/rizatriptan 5 mg; rizatriptan 10 mg/sumatriptan 50 mg; sumatriptan 50 mg/rizatriptan 10 mg; placebo/placebo. For each attack, patients rated headache severity, presence of associated symptoms, and functional disability prior to dosing and at intervals through 4 hours thereafter. Patients also rated their satisfaction with medication. Rizatriptan 5 mg and 10 mg provided faster relief of headache pain and greater relief of migraine symptoms than the 25-mg and 50-mg doses of sumatriptan, respectively. The response to rizatriptan was better than sumatriptan on additional measures including functional disability and satisfaction with medication. All active treatments were highly effective compared to placebo and acted as early as 30 minutes after dosing. All active treatments were well-tolerated and showed comparable safety profiles.

Butorphanol tartrate is a synthetic mixed agonist-antagonist opioid analgesic. Its transnasal dosage form, which may be self-administered when the use of an opioid analgesic is appropriate, was previously shown to provide rapid relief of migraine pain. In this double-blind, parallel-group, outpatient study, we compared butorphanol nasal spray 1 mg followed in 1 hour by an optional second 1-mg dose with the orally administered analgesic, Fiorinal with Codeine (one capsule containing butalbital 50 mg, caffeine 40 mg, aspirin 325 mg, and codeine phosphate 30 mg). Patients (N=321) were assigned by randomization to one of two treatment groups (butorphanol or Fiorinal with Codeine) and instructed to self-administer medication when migraine pain reached an intensity of moderate or severe and to record study-related events in a diary for 24 hours posttreatment. Efficacy analyses were performed on data from 275 patients who took study medication and returned a patient diary; 136 in the butorphanol group and 139 in the Fiorinal with Codeine group. During the first 2 hours after treatment, butorphanol was more effective than Fiorinal with Codeine in treating migraine pain as measured by pain intensity difference scores, percentage of responders (pain decreased to mild or none), percentage of pain-free patients, and degree of pain relief, with a more rapid time to onset of 15 minutes. A similar percentage of patients in the two groups used rescue medication during the first 4 hours, after which more butorphanol-treated than Fiorinal with Codeine-treated patients used rescue medication. Butorphanol patients had more side effects, less improvement in digestive symptoms, and less improvement in functional ability than Fiorinal with Codeine patients.

This article reviews two interesting topics in migraine treatment research. First, the effectiveness of sumatriptan is compared with that of the newer 5HT1D-agonists. Second, recent discoveries regarding the effect of magnesium on brain chemistry have yielcled evidence that this element may have a role in migraine. We offer our findings and opinion on this subject.

Summary Background Three small trials suggest that intravenous immunoglobulin can affect biomarkers and symptoms of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. We tested the safety, effective dose, and infusion interval of intravenous immunoglobulin in such patients. Methods We did a multicentre, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at seven sites in the USA and five in Germany. Participants with probable Alzheimer's disease aged 50–85 years were randomly assigned (by a computer-generated randomisation sequence, with block sizes of eight) to infusions every 4 weeks (0·2, 0·5, or 0·8 g intravenous immunoglobulin per kg bodyweight, or placebo) or infusions every 2 weeks (0·1, 0·25, or 0·4 g/kg, or placebo). Patients, caregivers, investigators assessing outcomes, and staff at imaging facilities and the clinical research organisation were masked to treatment allocation, but dispensing pharmacists, the statistician, and the person responsible for final PET analyses were not. Treatment was masked with opaque pouches and infusion lines. The primary endpoint was median area under the curve (AUC) of plasma amyloid β (Aβ) 1–40 between the last infusion and the final visit (2 weeks or 4 weeks depending on infusion interval) in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00812565) and controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN64846759). Findings 89 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 58 were enrolled and 55 included in the primary analysis. Median AUC of plasma Aβ 1–40 was not significantly different for intravenous immunoglobulin compared with placebo for five of the six intervention groups (–18·0 [range −1347·0 to 1068·5] for 0·2 g/kg, −364·3 [–5834·5 to 1953·5] for 0·5 g/kg, and −351·8 [–1084·0 to 936·5] for 0·8 g/kg every 4 weeks vs −116·3 [–1379·0 to 5266·0] for placebo; and −13·8 [–1729·0 to 307·0] for 0·1 g/kg, and −32·5 [–1102·5 to 451·5] for 0·25 g/kg every 2 weeks vs 159·5 [51·5 to 303·0] for placebo; p>0·05 for all). The difference in median AUC of plasma Aβ 1–40 between the 0·4 g/kg every 2 weeks group (47·0 [range −341·0 to 72·5]) and the placebo group was significant (p=0·0216). 25 of 42 (60%) patients in the intervention group versus nine of 14 (64%) receiving placebo had an adverse event. Four of 42 (10%) patients in the intravenous immunoglobulin group versus four of 14 (29%) receiving placebo had a serious adverse event, including one stroke in the intervention group. Interpretation Intravenous immunoglobulin may have an acceptable safety profile. Our results did not accord with those from previous studies. Longer trials with greater power are needed to assess the cognitive and functional effects of intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Funding Octapharma AG.

Therapeutic needs of migraineurs vary considerably from patient to patient and even attack to attack. Some attacks require high-end therapy, while other attacks have treatment needs that are less immediate. While triptans are considered the "gold standard" of migraine therapy, they do have limitations and many patients are seeking other therapeutic alternatives. In 2005, an open-label study of feverfew/ginger suggested efficacy for attacks of migraine treated early during the mild headache phase of the attack.In this multi-center pilot study, 60 patients treated 221 attacks of migraine with sublingual feverfew/ginger or placebo. All subjects met International Headache Society criteria for migraine with or without aura, experiencing 2-6 attacks of migraine per month within the previous 3 months. Subjects had15 headache days per month and were not experiencing medication overuse headache. Inclusion required that subjects were able to identify a period of mild headache in at least 75% of attacks. Subjects were required to be able to distinguish migraine from non-migraine headache. Subjects were randomized 3:1 to receive either sublingual feverfew/ginger or a matching placebo and were instructed but not required to treat with study medication at the earliest recognition of migraine.Sixty subjects treated 208 evaluable attacks of migraine over a 1-month period; 45 subjects treated 163 attacks with sublingual feverfew/ginger and 15 subjects treated 58 attacks with a sublingual placebo preparation. Evaluable diaries were completed for 151 attacks of migraine in the population using feverfew/ginger and 57 attacks for those attacks treated with placebo. At 2 hours, 32% of subjects receiving active medication and 16% of subjects receiving placebo were pain-free (P= .02). At 2 hours, 63% of subjects receiving feverfew/ginger found pain relief (pain-free or mild headache) vs 39% for placebo (P= .002). Pain level differences on a 4-point pain scale for those receiving feverfew/ginger vs placebo were -0.24 vs -0.04 respectively (P= .006). Feverfew/ginger was generally well tolerated with oral numbness and nausea being the most frequently occurring adverse event.Sublingual feverfew/ginger appears safe and effective as a first-line abortive treatment for a population of migraineurs who frequently experience mild headache prior to the onset of moderate to severe headache.

▪ As waste management planners seek to divert increasing amounts of materials from the municipal and commercial streams, the value of regions conducting inventories of organic residuals that could be composted becomes apparent. Since 1960, various research studies have analyzed the potential for applying urban wastes on agricultural lands, either directly or after composting. Specific studies described in this report were conducted in New Jersey, Maine and the Omaha, Nebraska — Council Bluffs, Iowa region.

• Sumatriptan, a specific serotonin 1 -like receptor agonist, was studied in the acute treatment of migraine. Two hundred forty-two adult migraineurs participated in a randomized, double-blind study in which one dose of I, 2, 3, 4, 6, or 8 mg of subcutaneous sumatriptan succinate was evaluated in sequential ascending fashion. At each dose level, a placebo group was included. Efficacy was defined as reduction of moderate or severe pain to mild or no pain, without the use of rescue medication. Headache relief rates showed an approximate dose-response relationship and at 1 hour were as follows: placebo, 24%; 1 mg, 43%; 2 mg, 57%; 3 mg, 57%; 4 mg, 50%; 6 mg, 73%; and 8 mg, 80%. Relief of nausea and improvement in clinical disability were also approximately dose related. Adverse events were dose related; the most common types were injection site reactions and tingling. The 6-mg dose was as effective as the 8-mg dose but was associated with fewer adverse effects and so is optimal.

Objective.— To evaluate whether access to more liberal quantities of rizatriptan improves clinical outcome in patients with episodic migraine. Background.— Currently many pharmacy benefit programs limit the number of triptan tablets/injections per month based on perceived cost savings and the belief that too-frequent use of triptans may lead to medication overuse headache and headache chronification. Methods.— This observer-blind, randomized, parallel-group study enrolled 197 subjects with migraine with or without aura. Subjects completed a 3-month baseline period to establish migraine frequency and then were randomly assigned to receive 9 (formulary limit [FL]) or 27 (clinical limit [CL]) tablets of 10 mg rizatriptan orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) per month for 3 months. The primary endpoint was change in the mean number of migraine days from the baseline to treatment period. Results.— There was no statistically significant difference between the FL and CL groups in mean number of migraine days (FL-CL LS mean: −0.08 [−0.39, 0.23]; P = .613). Subjects in the CL group treated attacks at lower headache severity. No CL subjects were reported to have developed chronic migraine despite utilization of greater than 10 rizatriptan ODT tablets per month. Rizatriptan was generally well tolerated by both groups. Conclusion.— Providing a greater quantity of rizatriptan ODT 10 mg did not reduce the number of migraine days compared with providing 9 tablets per month for this population with episodic migraine with a frequency of 3-8 migraines per month. Regardless of quantity provided, rizatriptan was generally well tolerated.

Guidelines for the management of migraine recommend that treatment approaches be tailored to patients' individual goals and needs. Because of significant interpatient and intrapatient variability in migraine attributes, treatment strategies suitable for some patients or migraine episodes are not necessarily suited to others. As never before, the current migraine armamentarium allows flexible, individualized therapy for meeting such goals and needs. This paper discusses pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches to customizing migraine therapy to the needs of the individual patient. Migraine management, while not complicated, is an ongoing process, requiring partnership of the physician and patient. In addition to the use of triptans as first-line therapy for acute treatment, preventive treatment strategies, including the relatively new approach of intermittent or pulsed prevention, can be useful. Besides pharmacotherapy, the nonpharmacologic aspects of migraine management should be an integral part of treatment. Patients should be monitored frequently so that treatment response can be determined and therapy adjusted as appropriate.

Although headache is the most common sequelae of head injury, the posttraumatic headache is associated frequently with dizziness, irritability, lack of concentration, and intolerance to alcohol ingestion as a part of a symptom complex known as the postconcussion syndrome. This article clarifies the definitions of acute traumatic headache, posttraumatic headache, and the postconcussion syndrome and improves diagnostic ability, making the assessment and treatment of patients with these three conditions more accurate and effective.

This study examines 12-step groups for recovery from methamphetamine and cocaine use that are attended by men having sex with men and the impact of attendance on HIV risk behavior. Participants in Crystal Meth Anonymous and other 12-step groups were interviewed up to 3 months since their last substance use. Sixty-two initial interviews, and ethnographic observations, were conducted. With entry into the program, mean reported sexual partners fell from around seven to one per month and the proportion having unprotected anal intercourse declined from 70% to 24%. HIV-positive men were more likely than HIV-negative men to report unprotected anal intercourse when using stimulants but less likely in recovery. Qualitative data suggest a transition from cocaine to methamphetamine in Chicago, and that reduction in partners is due to fear of relapsing in sexual situations rather than program teachings. These programs do however facilitate discussions around drug use and sexual issues.

Objective.—Compare the effectiveness of a combination analgesic containing acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine to that of ibuprofen in the treatment of migraine. Methods.—Multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, single-dose study. A total of 1555 migraineurs were included in the analysis. No patients were excluded solely because of severity of symptoms or degree of disability. A single 2-tablet dose for each of the 3 treatment groups: a combination product containing acetaminophen 250 mg, aspirin 250 mg, and caffeine 65 mg per tablet (AAC); ibuprofen 200 mg per tablet (IB); or matching placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the weighted sum of pain relief (PAR) scores at 2 hours postdose (TOTPAR2) and an important secondary endpoint was the time to onset of meaningful relief. Results.—There were 669 patients in the AAC group, 666 patients in the IB group, and 220 patients in the placebo group. The 3 treatment groups had similar demographic profiles, migraine histories, and baseline symptom profiles. While both active treatments were significantly better than placebo in relieving the pain and associated symptoms of migraine, AAC was superior to IB for TOTPAR2, as well as for PAR, time to onset of meaningful PAR, pain intensity reduction, headache response, and pain free. The mean TOTPAR2 scores for AAC, IB, and placebo were 2.7, 2.4, and 2.0, respectively (AAC vs. IB, P < .03). The median time to meaningful PAR for AAC was 20 minutes earlier than that of IB (P < .036). Conclusion.—AAC and IB are safe, cost-effective treatments for migraine; AAC provides significantly superior efficacy and speed of onset compared with IB.

To address the need for a rigorous, direct comparison of prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) migraine drugs and to expand the database on early treatment of migraine.Most people who experience migraine use OTC medications to treat their symptoms, but no head-to-head clinical trials comparing these agents with prescription migraine therapies have been published. In addition, even though most migraineurs treat early in the attack, few studies have been conducted to reflect this treatment pattern.We compared a combination of nonprescription migraine medication (acetaminophen 500 mg, aspirin 500 mg, and caffeine 130 mg) with a prescription migraine product (50 mg sumatriptan) in a randomized, controlled clinical trial in which subjects treated at the first sign of a migraine attack. Subjects who reported vomiting during more than 20% of migraine episodes or who required bedrest during more than 50% of migraine episodes were excluded from the study. Of the 188 subjects randomized, 171 took study medication and were included in the analysis.The combination of acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine was significantly more effective (P.05) than sumatriptan in the early treatment of migraine, as shown by superiority in summed pain intensity difference, pain relief, pain intensity difference, response, sustained response, relief of associated symptoms, use of rescue medication, disability relief, and global assessments of effectiveness. An additional, larger clinical trial is needed to confirm these results.

Background.—More than 50% of migraine sufferers rely on over-the-counter medications for the treatment of migraine. Along with other over-the-counter products, aspirin is considered by the US Headache Consortium to be an option for first-line migraine treatment. This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin versus placebo for the acute treatment of a single acute attack of migraine. Methods.—This prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy of a single, 1000-mg dose of aspirin for the treatment of acute moderate to severe migraine, with or without aura. Subjects recorded all study evaluations in a diary at baseline and at .5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 24 hours after treatment. Pain was rated on a 4-point ordinal scale from no pain to severe pain. The primary efficacy end point was headache response at 2 hours. Secondary efficacy parameters included reduction of nausea, photophobia and phonophobia, pain intensity difference, and headache recurrence at 24 hours. Results.—Of 485 subjects enrolled, 409 took study medication and 401 treated a confirmed migraine attack (201 with aspirin and 200 with placebo). Baseline demographic and migraine characteristics were not significantly different between groups. The 2-hour headache response rate was 52% with aspirin versus 34% with placebo (P < .001). Aspirin was significantly more effective than placebo for pain reduction beginning 1 hour after dosing (P < .001) and continuing throughout the 6-hour evaluation period. Significantly (P < .05), more subjects were pain free from the 1-hour evaluation through the 6-hour evaluation. Of the aspirin-treated subjects, 20% were pain free at 2 hours versus only 6% of placebo-treated subjects. At 24 hours, the headache recurrence rate was 21.8% for aspirin (23 of 105 subjects) and 27.7% for placebo (19 of 68 subjects). Only 34% of aspirin-treated subjects needed rescue medication at 24 hours compared with 52% of placebo-treated subjects (P < .001). Aspirin was well tolerated, and adverse events were not significantly different between groups. Conclusions.—This study demonstrates that aspirin is safe and effective for treatment of acute migraine in appropriately selected patients.

Objective: To investigate the clinical profile of rofecoxib, a long-acting (≈17-hour half-life) selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor, for the acute treatment of migraine.Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted. Patients age ≥18 treated a moderate or severe migraine headache with placebo (n = 182), rofecoxib 25 mg (n = 183), or rofecoxib 50 mg (n = 192). The primary efficacy measure was headache relief (mild or no pain) 2 hours after dose.Results: The proportions of patients with migraine headache relief at 2 hours after dose were 34.3% for placebo, 54.0% for rofecoxib 25 mg (p < 0.001 vs placebo), and 56.7% for rofecoxib 50 mg (p < 0.001 vs placebo). Rofecoxib 25 and 50 mg were superior to placebo in providing pain freedom at 2 hours, 24-hour sustained headache relief, and 24-hour sustained pain freedom; in reducing photophobia, phonophobia, nausea (50 mg only), and functional disability at 2 hours after dose; and in improving some quality-of-life scores over 24 hours. More patients on rofecoxib 50 mg reported adverse events (39.6%) than patients on rofecoxib 25 mg (26.8%) or placebo (23.6%) regardless of drug relatedness; however, the incidences of drug-related adverse events were similar between treatment groups. These adverse events were generally mild or moderate in severity. The most commonly reported adverse events were dry mouth, dizziness, somnolence, nausea, dyspepsia, paresthesia, and asthenia, with similar incidences between treatment groups.Conclusion: Rofecoxib 25 and 50 mg were effective and generally well tolerated for the acute treatment of migraine attacks.

Evidence suggests that statin therapy reduces the risk of stroke in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD), but its benefit for patients with cerebrovascular disease and no history of CHD remains uncertain. The Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction in Cholesterol Levels (SPARCL) Study is a prospective, multi-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial designed to evaluate the effects of atorvastatin 80 mg/day in patients who previously experienced a stroke or transient ischaemic attack, but who have no known CHD. A total of 4,732 patients have been enrolled, and the data collection phase of the study is expected to be completed by October 2004. SPARCL is the first study primarily designed to prospectively evaluate the effect of statin treatment in secondary stroke prevention.

Objective.—To evaluate the effectiveness of rizatriptan for acute migraine treatment and patient satisfaction with the drug in usual clinical practice settings. Background.—Although rizatriptan has been shown to effectively relieve migraine symptoms in clinical trials, we wished to assess its utility in typical patient care settings. Design.—Multicenter, open-label design involving the patients of practicing clinicians. Methods.—Adult migraineurs treated two migraine attacks with either rizatriptan 10-mg standard tablets or rizatriptan 10-mg orally disintegrating tablets in a crossover manner. Participants had not taken rizatriptan previously and chose which formulation to take first. Patients reported their treatment experiences via an interactive voice response system approximately 24 hours after treatment. Prior migraine treatment experiences were reported by patients on a baseline questionnaire completed at participating clinics. We used conditional logistic regression analysis adjusted for treatment sequences to test the statistical significance of comparisons with results recorded on the baseline questionnaire. Results.—Of the 5388 patients enrolled, 3953 (73%) completed at least one follow-up and 3183 (59%) completed two follow-up reports. Patients reported the following outcomes for attacks treated with the rizatriptan tablet and orally disintegrating tablet formulations, respectively, compared with their prior responses to oral usual care medications (P

Frovatriptan is a potent 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist and has the highest 5-HT(1B) potency in the triptan class. preclinical pharmacology studies demonstrated that frovatriptan is apparently cerebro-selective. In clinical pharmacology studies, frovatriptan was shown to have a long-terminal elimination half-life of 26 h and to be well-tolerated across a broad dose range of 1-100 mg. Frovatriptan has no inhibiting or inducing effects on cytochrome P450 isoenzymes and is only slightly bound to plasma proteins; thus it has a low potential for drug interactions. No dosage adjustments are necessary based on age or renal or hepatic impairment. Efficacy studies show significantly higher response rates compared with placebo and the lowest reported range of headache recurrence rates in the triptan class. Safety studies show a side effect profile similar to placebo. The combination of cerebro-selectivity, long half-life, reliable efficacy, low recurrence rates and good tolerability make frovatriptan a valuable new choice for acute treatment of migraine. Frovatriptan may be particularly well suited to patients with migraine of long duration, those prone to recurrence and those troubled by "triptan-type" side effects.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of extended-release divalproex sodium compared with placebo in prophylactic monotherapy treatment of migraine headache.This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Subjects with more than two migraine headache attacks during a 4-week baseline were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio at each center to receive either extended-release divalproex sodium or matching placebo once daily for 12 weeks. Subjects initiated treatment on 500 mg once daily for 1 week, and the dose was then increased to 1,000 mg once daily with an option, if intolerance occurred, to permanently decrease the dose to 500 mg during the second week. Reduction from baseline in 4-week migraine headache rate was the primary efficacy variable. Migraine headaches separated by a24-hour headache-free interval were counted as single migraines in calculating migraine headache rates. Tolerance and safety were also evaluated.The mean reductions in 4-week migraine headache rate were 1.2 (from a baseline mean of 4.4) in the extended-release divalproex sodium group and 0.6 (from a baseline mean of 4.2) in the placebo group (p = 0.006); reductions with extended-release divalproex sodium were significantly greater than with placebo in all three 4-week segments of the treatment period. No significant differences were detected between treatment groups in either the overall incidence or in the incidence of any specific treatment-emergent adverse event; 8% of subjects treated with extended-release divalproex sodium and 9% of those treated with placebo discontinued for adverse events.Extended-release divalproex sodium is an efficacious, well-tolerated, safe, and easy-to-use once-a-day prophylactic antimigraine medication.

Objective.—To determine the optimum dose of frovatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine. Background.—Frovatriptan is a new triptan developed for the acute treatment of migraine. The dose-response characteristics and safety of frovatriptan have been investigated across a broad range of doses from 0.5 to 40 mg. Design.—Two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trials, with a total of 1453 patients, were performed to determine the optimal dose of the 5-HT1B/1D agonist, frovatriptan, for the acute treatment of migraine. The dose ranges studied were 2.5 to 40 mg in the high-dose study and 0.5 to 5 mg in the low-dose study. Results.—At 2 hours postdosing for initial moderate or severe headache (International Headache Society grades 2 or 3), there was an approximate two-fold difference in the proportion of patients taking frovatriptan doses of 2.5 to 40 mg with mild or no headache compared to placebo. Frovatriptan doses of 0.5 mg and 1 mg were not more effective than placebo at 2 hours postdose, and 2.5 mg was identified as the lowest effective dose for the relief of migraine and accompanying symptoms. Above 2.5 mg, no dose-response relationship was observed for any efficacy parameters. There was an increase in the incidence of adverse events from 10 mg and above, but the vast majority were rated as mild in severity and did not impact upon tolerability in a significant manner. Conclusions.—Frovatriptan was well tolerated throughout the dose range of 0.5 to 40 mg. The 2.5-mg dose confers the optimal balance of efficacy and tolerability for the acute treatment of migraine.

Objective.—To confirm the clinical efficacy of frovatriptan 2.5 mg. Background.—Frovatriptan is a new 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)1B/1D receptor agonist being developed for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura. Results from preclinical and clinical pharmacology studies showed frovatriptan to be a potent 5-HT1B receptor agonist with a long terminal elimination half-life (26 hours) and a broad therapeutic index. Design.—Three randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group trials, in a total of 2676 patients, were performed to confirm the clinical efficacy of frovatriptan 2.5 mg for the acute treatment of migraine. Results.—In all three studies, headache response 2 hours after frovatriptan dosing was significantly greater than that seen with placebo (P.001) with approximately a two-fold measure of effect over placebo for headache response at 2 and 4 hours postdosing. Time to headache response occurred within 1.5 hours in a substantial proportion of patients. The incidence of 24-hour headache recurrence with frovatriptan was low (10% to 25%). Frovatriptan therapy also was associated with a high degree of patient satisfaction. Conclusions.—Frovatriptan represents a consistently effective acute treatment for migraine and accompanying symptoms.

Chronic migraine (CM) is a debilitating neurological disorder with few treatment options. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) of the occipital nerves is a potentially promising therapy for CM patients.In this randomized, controlled multicenter study, patients diagnosed with CM were implanted with a neurostimulation device near the occipital nerves and randomized 2:1 to active (n = 105) or sham (n = 52) stimulation. The primary endpoint was a difference in the percentage of responders (defined as patients that achieved a ≥50% reduction in mean daily visual analog scale scores) in each group at 12 weeks.There was not a significant difference in the percentage of responders in the Active compared with the Control group (95% lower confidence bound (LCB) of -0.06; p = 0.55). However, there was a significant difference in the percentage of patients that achieved a 30% reduction (p = 0.01). Importantly, compared with sham-treated patients, there were also significant differences in reduction of number of headache days (Active Group = 6.1, baseline = 22.4; Control Group = 3.0, baseline = 20.1; p = 0.008), migraine-related disability (p = 0.001) and direct reports of pain relief (p = 0.001). The most common adverse event was persistent implant site pain.Although this study failed to meet its primary endpoint, this is the first large-scale study of PNS of the occipital nerves in CM patients that showed significant reductions in pain, headache days, and migraine-related disability. Additional controlled studies using endpoints that have recently been identified and accepted as clinically meaningful are warranted in this highly disabled patient population with a large unmet medical need.Clinical trials.gov (NCT00615342).

Objective Debates about the suspected association between kidney disease and use of analgesics have led to concern about whether caffeine could stimulate an undesirable overuse of phenacetin-free combined analgesics. A committee was asked to critically review the pertinent literature and to suggest guides for clinical practice and for consideration of international regulatory authorities. Participants A group of international scientists, jointly selected by the regulatory authorities of Germany, Switzerland, and Austria and the pharmaceutical industry. Evidence All invited experts evaluated relevant literature and reports and added further information and comments. Conclusions Caffeine has a synergistic effectiveness with analgesics. Although caffeine has a dependence potential, the potential is low. Experimental data regarding dependence potential for caffeine alone may not correspond to the conditions in patients with pain. Withdrawal is not likely to cause stimulation or sustainment of analgesic intake. For drug-induced headache, no single or combined analgesic was consistently identified as causative, and no evidence exists for a special role of caffeine. Strong dependence behavior was observed only in patients using phenacetin-containing preparations, coformulated with antipyretics/analgesics and caffeine. This finding may have led to the impression that caffeine stimulates overuse of analgesics. Summary Although more experimental and long-term data would be desirable to show possible mechanisms of dependence and to offer unequivocal proof of safety, the committee concluded that the available evidence does not support the claim that analgesics coformulated with caffeine, in the absence of phenacetin, stimulate or sustain overuse. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2000) 68, 457–467; doi: 10.1067/mcp.2000.110974