Dataset Information

Acetazolamide for the prophylaxis of migraine in CADASIL: a preliminary experience.

ABSTRACT: Cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) is an inherited microangiopathy caused by NOTCH3 mutations. It is characterized by migraine, with or without aura, ischemic events, psychiatric and cognitive disturbances. There is no approved treatment for migraine prophylaxis in CADASIL, but acetazolamide has been anecdotally reported to be effective. We retrospectively reviewed our database of patients with a genetic diagnosis of CADASIL to identify how many of them were treated with acetazolamide for the prophylaxis of migraine. The efficacy and the tolerability of this treatment were checked looking at the clinic reports. Acetazolamide was prescribed in seven patients; the mean duration of treatment was 6 months, and the daily dose ranged from 125 to 500 mg. Three patients had a total and sustained remission, while in two patients a reduction in attacks and an improvement of the headache intensity were recorded. In one of these, acetazolamide was deliberately taken only during the migraine attack and the beneficial effect started 1 h after administration. In two patients, the drug did not produce any beneficial effect. Mild side effects were recorded in two patients. Our preliminary experience expands previous reports and confirms the possible efficacy of acetazolamide in CADASIL migraine. Based on these data, a randomized controlled trial seems worthy to be carried out to test the efficacy and safety of this drug.

SUBMITTER: Donnini I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3356473 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Acetazolamide for the prophylaxis of migraine in CADASIL: a preliminary experience.

Donnini Ida I Nannucci Serena S Valenti Raffaella R Pescini Francesca F Bianchi Silvia S Inzitari Domenico D Pantoni Leonardo L

The journal of headache and pain 20120225 4

Cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) is an inherited microangiopathy caused by NOTCH3 mutations. It is characterized by migraine, with or without aura, ischemic events, psychiatric and cognitive disturbances. There is no approved treatment for migraine prophylaxis in CADASIL, but acetazolamide has been anecdotally reported to be effective. We retrospectively reviewed our database of patients with a genetic diagnosis of CADASIL to id ...[more]

PMID: 22367627

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Migraine is common in Cerebral Autosomal Dominant Arteriopathy with Subcortical Infarcts and Leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) but its treatment responses are not well described, and its relationship to stroke risk unknown. Encephalopathy is a less common presentation; it has been suggested it is related to migraine. We characterised migraine patterns and treatment responses in CADASIL, and examined associations between migraine and both stroke risk and encephalopathy. METHODS:300 symptomatic CADASIL patients were prospectively recruited from a national referral clinic over a nineteen year period, from 1996 to 2015. Data was collected using a standardised questionnaire. Migraine was classified according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). A cross-sectional analysis was carried out on the data collected. RESULTS:Migraine was present in 226 (75.3%), and the presenting feature in 203 (67.7%). It was usually accompanied by aura (89.8%). Patients showed variable responses to a variety of drugs for migraine. Of 24 given triptans, 45.5% had consistent or partial responses. None had complications following triptans. Thirty-three (11.0%) patients experienced encephalopathy lasting on average 8.1 ± 3.4 days. Patients with migraine with aura had higher odds of encephalopathy (OR = 5.4; 95%CI 1.6-28.4; p = 0.002). Patients with confusional aura had higher odds of encephalopathy than those with other aura types (OR = 2.5, 95%CI = 1.0-5.8, p = 0.04). There was also no increase in risk of encephalopathy with sex or age at onset of migraine. Migraineurs had a lower stroke risk than non-migraineurs (HR = 0.46, 95%CI 0.3-0.6, p = 2.1x10-6). CONCLUSIONS:Migraine with aura is a prominent feature of CADASIL. Treatment responses are similar to those seen in the general migraine population and no complications were observed with triptans. Migraine with aura was associated with increased risk of encephalopathy suggesting they may share pathophysiological mechanisms. There was no increased stroke risk associated with migraine, but risk appeared to be reduced although this finding needs confirming.

Project description:BackgroundAcupuncture is often used for migraine prophylaxis but its effectiveness is still controversial. This review (along with a companion review on 'Acupuncture for tension-type headache') represents an updated version of a Cochrane review originally published in Issue 1, 2001, of The Cochrane Library.ObjectivesTo investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than 'sham' (placebo) acupuncture; and c) as effective as other interventions in reducing headache frequency in patients with migraine.Search strategyThe Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Trials Register were searched to January 2008.Selection criteriaWe included randomized trials with a post-randomization observation period of at least 8 weeks that compared the clinical effects of an acupuncture intervention with a control (no prophylactic treatment or routine care only), a sham acupuncture intervention or another intervention in patients with migraine.Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers checked eligibility; extracted information on patients, interventions, methods and results; and assessed risk of bias and quality of the acupuncture intervention. Outcomes extracted included response (outcome of primary interest), migraine attacks, migraine days, headache days and analgesic use. Pooled effect size estimates were calculated using a random-effects model.Main resultsTwenty-two trials with 4419 participants (mean 201, median 42, range 27 to 1715) met the inclusion criteria. Six trials (including two large trials with 401 and 1715 patients) compared acupuncture to no prophylactic treatment or routine care only. After 3 to 4 months patients receiving acupuncture had higher response rates and fewer headaches. The only study with long-term follow up saw no evidence that effects dissipated up to 9 months after cessation of treatment. Fourteen trials compared a 'true' acupuncture intervention with a variety of sham interventions. Pooled analyses did not show a statistically significant superiority for true acupuncture for any outcome in any of the time windows, but the results of single trials varied considerably. Four trials compared acupuncture to proven prophylactic drug treatment. Overall in these trials acupuncture was associated with slightly better outcomes and fewer adverse effects than prophylactic drug treatment. Two small low-quality trials comparing acupuncture with relaxation (alone or in combination with massage) could not be interpreted reliably.Authors' conclusionsIn the previous version of this review, evidence in support of acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis was considered promising but insufficient. Now, with 12 additional trials, there is consistent evidence that acupuncture provides additional benefit to treatment of acute migraine attacks only or to routine care. There is no evidence for an effect of 'true' acupuncture over sham interventions, though this is difficult to interpret, as exact point location could be of limited importance. Available studies suggest that acupuncture is at least as effective as, or possibly more effective than, prophylactic drug treatment, and has fewer adverse effects. Acupuncture should be considered a treatment option for patients willing to undergo this treatment.

Project description:IntroductionMigraine prophylactic therapy has changed over recent years with the development and approval of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway. As new therapies emerged, leading headache societies have been providing guidelines on the initiation and escalation of such therapies. However, there is a lack of robust evidence looking at the duration of successful prophylaxis and the effects of therapy discontinuation. In this narrative review we explore both the biological and clinical rationale for prophylactic therapy discontinuation to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.MethodsThree different literature search strategies were conducted for this narrative review. These include i) stopping rules in comorbidities of migraine in which overlapping preventives are prescribed, notably depression and epilepsy; ii) stopping rules of oral treatment and botox; iii) stopping rules of antibodies targeting the CGRP (receptor). Keywords were utilized in the following databases: Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core collection, Cochran Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar.DiscussionReasons to guide decision-making in stopping prophylactic migraine therapies include adverse events, efficacy failure, drug holiday following long-term administration, and patient-specific reasons. Certain guidelines contain both positive and negative stopping rules. Following withdrawal of migraine prophylaxis, migraine burden may return to pre-treatment level, remain unchanged, or lie somewhere in-between. The current suggestion to discontinue CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after 6 to 12 months is based on expert opinion, as opposed to robust scientific evidence. Current guidelines advise the clinician to assess the success of CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after three months. Based on excellent tolerability data and the absence of scientific data, we propose if no other reasons apply, to stop the use of mAbs when the number of migraine days decreases to four or fewer migraine days per month. There is a higher likelihood of developing side effects with oral migraine preventatives, and so we suggest stopping these drugs according to the national guidelines if they are well tolerated.ConclusionTranslational and basic studies are warranted to investigate the long-term effects of a preventive drug after its discontinuation, starting from what is known about the biology of migraine. In addition, observational studies and, eventually, clinical trials focusing on the effect of discontinuation of migraine prophylactic therapies, are essential to substantiate evidence-based recommendations on stopping rules for both oral preventives and CGRP(-receptor) targeted therapies in migraine.

Dataset Information

Acetazolamide for the prophylaxis of migraine in CADASIL: a preliminary experience.

Publications

Acetazolamide for the prophylaxis of migraine in CADASIL: a preliminary experience.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets