Cosima Locher1,2,3, Joe Kossowsky2,3, Helen Koechlin2,3, Thanh Lan Lam4, Johannes Barthel4, Charles B Berde3, Jens Gaab2, Guido Schwarzer5, Klaus Linde6, Karin Meissner4,7. 1. School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, England. 2. Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Institute of Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany. 5. IMBI Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 6. School of Medicine, Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany. 7. Division of Integrative Health Promotion, Coburg University of Applied Sciences, Coburg, Germany.
Abstract
Importance: Migraine is one of the most common neurologic disorders in children and adolescents. However, a quantitative comparison of multiple preventive pharmacologic treatments in the pediatric population is lacking. Objective: To examine whether prophylactic pharmacologic treatments are more effective than placebo and whether there are differences between drugs regarding efficacy, safety, and acceptability. Data Sources: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, and PsycINFO published through July 2, 2018. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of prophylactic pharmacologic treatments in children and adolescents diagnosed as having episodic migraine were included. Abstract, title, and full-text screening were conducted independently by 4 reviewers. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis network meta-analysis guidelines. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Effect sizes, calculated as standardized mean differences for primary outcomes and risk ratios for discontinuation rates, were assessed in a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were efficacy (ie, migraine frequency, number of migraine days, number of headache days, headache frequency, or headache index), safety (ie, treatment discontinuation owing to adverse events), and acceptability (ie, treatment discontinuation for any reason). Results: Twenty-three studies (2217 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Prophylactic pharmacologic treatments included antiepileptics, antidepressants, calcium channel blockers, antihypertensive agents, and food supplements. In the short term (<5 months), propranolol (standard mean difference, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.03-1.17) and topiramate (standard mean difference, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.03-1.15) were significantly more effective than placebo. However, the 95% prediction intervals for these medications contained the null effect. No significant long-term effects for migraine prophylaxis relative to placebo were found for any intervention. Conclusions and Relevance: Prophylactic pharmacologic treatments have little evidence supporting efficacy in pediatric migraine. Future research could (1) identify factors associated with individual responses to pharmacologic prophylaxis, (2) analyze fluctuations of migraine attack frequency over time and determine the most clinically relevant length of probable prophylactic treatment, and (3) identify nonpharmacologic targets for migraine prophylaxis.
Importance: Migraine is one of the most common neurologic disorders in children and adolescents. However, a quantitative comparison of multiple preventive pharmacologic treatments in the pediatric population is lacking. Objective: To examine whether prophylactic pharmacologic treatments are more effective than placebo and whether there are differences between drugs regarding efficacy, safety, and acceptability. Data Sources: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of studies in MEDLINE, Cochrane, Embase, and PsycINFO published through July 2, 2018. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of prophylactic pharmacologic treatments in children and adolescents diagnosed as having episodic migraine were included. Abstract, title, and full-text screening were conducted independently by 4 reviewers. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis network meta-analysis guidelines. Quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Effect sizes, calculated as standardized mean differences for primary outcomes and risk ratios for discontinuation rates, were assessed in a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were efficacy (ie, migraine frequency, number of migraine days, number of headache days, headache frequency, or headache index), safety (ie, treatment discontinuation owing to adverse events), and acceptability (ie, treatment discontinuation for any reason). Results: Twenty-three studies (2217 patients) were eligible for inclusion. Prophylactic pharmacologic treatments included antiepileptics, antidepressants, calcium channel blockers, antihypertensive agents, and food supplements. In the short term (<5 months), propranolol (standard mean difference, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.03-1.17) and topiramate (standard mean difference, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.03-1.15) were significantly more effective than placebo. However, the 95% prediction intervals for these medications contained the null effect. No significant long-term effects for migraine prophylaxis relative to placebo were found for any intervention. Conclusions and Relevance: Prophylactic pharmacologic treatments have little evidence supporting efficacy in pediatric migraine. Future research could (1) identify factors associated with individual responses to pharmacologic prophylaxis, (2) analyze fluctuations of migraine attack frequency over time and determine the most clinically relevant length of probable prophylactic treatment, and (3) identify nonpharmacologic targets for migraine prophylaxis.
Authors: Donald Lewis; Paul Winner; Joel Saper; Seth Ness; Elena Polverejan; Steven Wang; Caryn L Kurland; Jeff Nye; Eric Yuen; Marielle Eerdekens; Lisa Ford Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Andrea Cipriani; Toshi A Furukawa; Georgia Salanti; Anna Chaimani; Lauren Z Atkinson; Yusuke Ogawa; Stefan Leucht; Henricus G Ruhe; Erick H Turner; Julian P T Higgins; Matthias Egger; Nozomi Takeshima; Yu Hayasaka; Hissei Imai; Kiyomi Shinohara; Aran Tajika; John P A Ioannidis; John R Geddes Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Georgia Salanti; Cinzia Del Giovane; Anna Chaimani; Deborah M Caldwell; Julian P T Higgins Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-07-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Giovanni Prezioso; Agnese Suppiej; Valentina Alberghini; Patrizia Bergonzini; Maria Elena Capra; Ilaria Corsini; Alessandro De Fanti; Elisa Fiumana; Martina Fornaro; Lucia Marangio; Paolo Ricciardelli; Laura Serra; Duccio Maria Cordelli; Susanna Esposito Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-01-19
Authors: Kaitlin A Greene; Carlyn P Gentile; Christina L Szperka; Marcy Yonker; Amy A Gelfand; Barbara Grimes; Samantha L Irwin Journal: Pediatr Neurol Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 3.372
Authors: Joshua Kamins; Rachel Richards; Bradley J Barney; Christopher Locandro; Christina F Pacchia; Andrew C Charles; Lawrence J Cook; Gerard Gioia; Christopher C Giza; Heidi K Blume Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-03-01
Authors: Hadas Nahman-Averbuch; Victor J Schneider; Leigh Ann Chamberlin; Ashley M Kroon Van Diest; James L Peugh; Gregory R Lee; Rupa Radhakrishnan; Andrew D Hershey; Scott W Powers; Robert C Coghill; Christopher D King Journal: Pain Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 7.926