Chronic Migraine: A Narrative Review on the Use of Botulinum Toxin with Clinical Indications and Future Directions.

Chronic migraine belongs to the "chronic long-duration headaches", and it is associated to high burden and significant economic impact. Treatment for both episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) is based on the management of acute attacks and their prevention. For moderate/severe attacks, pharmacological therapies are triptans, dihydroergotamine nasal sprays or injections or neuroleptics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and corticosteroids. Chronic migraine belongs to the "chronic long-duration headaches", and it is associated to high burden and significant economic impact. Treatment for both episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) is based on the management of acute attacks and their prevention. For moderate/severe attacks, pharmacological therapies are triptans, dihydroergotamine nasal sprays or injections or neuroleptics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and corticosteroids. The pathophysiology of CM is characterized by an abnormal activation of the trigemino-vascular system in the meninges causing a neurogenic inflammation, which explains the use of anti-inflammatory during attacks. It seems that the objective of the preventive therapy with the botulin toxin OnaBoNT-A consists in interrupting the release of CGRP and other neuropeptides as well as the activation of C-fiber nociceptor and of the nearby A-delta fibers. The protocol for migraine treatment with OnaBoNT-A injections consists of 31-39 pericranial injection sites involving seven muscle groups bilaterally in specific areas of the head and neck, with a total dose of between 155 and 195 units, every three months. The severe adverse events reported with high doses of botulin toxin for spasticity, have not been reported for CM treated with OnabotA at the labeled dose. The established improvement with onabotulinumtoxinA treatment in CM patients had a positive impact not only in reduction monthly headache days but also in improving quality of life, with reduction in both healthcare resource utilisation (HRU) and work impairment. Aim of this review was to give an overview on the use of BoNT-A in patients with CM, giving practical advices on the clinical indications.

Dihydroergotamine (DHE) - Then and Now: A Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a narrative review of clinical development programs for non-oral, non-injectable formulations of dihydroergotamine (DHE) for the treatment of migraine. BACKGROUND: Dihydroergotamine was one of the first "synthetic drugs" developed in the 20th century for treating migraine. It is effective and recommended for acute migraine treatment. Since oral DHE is extensively metabolized, it must be given by a non-oral route. Intravenous DHE requires healthcare personnel to administer, subcutaneous/intramuscular injection is challenging to self-administer, and the approved nasal spray formulation exhibits low bioavailability and high variability that limits its efficacy. Currently there are several attempts underway to develop non-oral, non-injected formulations of DHE. METHOD: A systematic search of MEDLINE/PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, then narrative review of identified reports, focusing on those published in the last 10 years. RESULTS: Of 1881 references to DHE from a MEDLINE/PubMed search, 164 were from the last 10 years and were the focus of this review. Further cross reference was made to ClinicalTrials.gov for 19 clinical studies, of which some results have not yet been published, or are studies that are currently underway. Three nasal DHE products are in clinical development, reawakening interest in this route of delivery for migraine. Other routes of DHE administration have been, or are being, explored. CONCLUSION: There is renewed appreciation for DHE and the need for non-oral, non-injected delivery is now being addressed.

Intravenous Migraine Treatment in Children and Adolescents.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pediatric migraine is a common, chronic, and disabling neurological disorder in children and adolescents. Outpatient management is not always effective, and intravenous migraine management may be necessary for headache treatment in the pediatric emergency department. Most current treatment is based on retrospective evidence and there is a lack of well-designed randomized double-blinded controlled pediatric studies. Intravenous drug treatment agents including intravenous fluids, prochlorperazine, diphenhydramine, metoclopramide, dexamethasone, magnesium, valproate and propofol, and dihydroergotamine are reviewed in this paper. RECENT FINDINGS: Nineteen studies were reviewed including one prospective randomized double-blind; one single-blinded randomized; one prospective; and one open-label, randomized clinical trial. Most studies were retrospective and the quality of the studies was limited. No definite conclusions can be drawn from the studies, but appropriate prospective trials between major pediatric headache institutions will move pediatric intravenous migraine management forward.

Effectiveness of Oxygen and Other Acute Treatments for Cluster Headache: Results From the Cluster Headache Questionnaire, an International Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects of acute cluster headache medications in a large international sample, including recommended treatments such as oxygen, commonly used medications such as opioids, and emerging medications such as intranasal ketamine. Particular focus is paid to a large subset of respondents 65 years of age or older. BACKGROUND: Large international surveys of cluster headache are rare, as are examinations of treatments and side effects in older cluster headache patients. This article presents data from the Cluster Headache Questionnaire, with respondents from over 50 countries and with the vast majority from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. METHODS: This internet-based survey included questions on cluster headache diagnostic criteria, which were used as part of the inclusion/exclusion criteria for the study, as well as effectiveness of medications, physical and medical complications, psychological and emotional complications, mood scores, and difficulty obtaining medications. The diagnostic questions were also used to create a separate group of respondents with probable cluster headache. Limitations to the methods include the use of nonvalidated questions, the lack of a formal clinical diagnosis of cluster headache, and the grouping of some medications (eg, all triptans as opposed to sumatriptan subcutaneous alone). RESULTS: A total of 3251 subjects participated in the questionnaire, and 2193 respondents met criteria for this study (1604 cluster headache and 589 probable cluster headache). Of the respondents with cluster headache, 68.8% (1104/1604) were male and 78.0% (1245/1596) had episodic cluster headache. Over half of respondents reported complete or very effective treatment for triptans (54%, 639/1139) and oxygen (54%, 582/1082). Between 14 and 25% of respondents reported complete or very effective treatment for ergot derivatives (dihydroergotamine 25%, 42/170; cafergot/ergotamine 17%, 50/303), caffeine and energy drinks (17%, 7/41), and intranasal ketamine (14%, 5/37). Less than 10% reported complete or very effective treatment for opioids (6%, 30/541), intranasal capsaicin (5%, 7/151), and intranasal lidocaine (2%, 5/241). Adverse events were especially low for oxygen (no or minimal physical and medical complications 99%, 1077/1093; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 97%, 1065/1093), intranasal lidocaine (no or minimal physical and medical complications 97%, 248/257; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 98%, 251/257), intranasal ketamine (no or minimal physical and medical complications 95%, 38/40; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 98%, 39/40), intranasal capsaicin (no or minimal physical and medical complications 91%, 145/159; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 94%, 150/159), and caffeine and energy drinks (no or minimal physical and medical complications 89%, 39/44; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 91%, 40/44). This is in comparison to ergotamine/cafergot (no or minimal physical and medical complications 83%, 273/327; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 89%, 290/327), dihydroergotamine (no or minimal physical and medical complications 81%, 143/176; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 91%, 160/176), opioids (no or minimal physical and medical complications 76%, 416/549; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 77%, 423/549), or triptans (no or minimal physical and medical complications 73%, 883/1218; no or minimal psychological and emotional complications 85%, 1032/1218). A total of 139 of 1604 cluster headache respondents (8.7%) were age 65 and older and reported similar effectiveness and adverse events to the general population. The 589 respondents with probable cluster headache reported similar medication effectiveness to respondents with a full diagnosis of cluster headache. CONCLUSIONS: Oxygen is reported by survey respondents to be a highly effective treatment with few complications in cluster headache in a large international sample, including those 65 years or over. Triptans are also very effective with some side effects, and newer medications deserve additional study. Patients with probable cluster headache may respond similarly to acute medications as patients with a full diagnosis of cluster headache.

Inpatient Pediatric Migraine Treatment: Does Choice of Abortive Therapy Affect Length of Stay?

OBJECTIVE: To describe the inpatient management of pediatric migraine and the association between specific medications and hospital length of stay (LOS). STUDY DESIGN: Historical cohort study review of patients age <19 years of age admitted to a single tertiary care children's hospital between 2010 and 2015 for treatment of migraine headache. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 58 encounters with an average patient age of 14.3 years (SD 3.2 years) with a female predominance (62%). The mean number of inpatient medications received by patients was 3 (range 1-7), with dopamine antagonists and dihydroergotamine used most commonly (67% and 59% of encounters, respectively). The average LOS was 56 hours (95% CI 48.2-63.2) and did not vary by medication received, although patients who received an opioid had a significantly longer LOS (79.2 vs 47.9 hours respectively; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Children admitted to the hospital for treatment of migraine headache frequently require a large number of medications over an average hospital LOS of more than 2 days without apparent differences based on medication received other than prolonged stays for subjects who received opioids.

Drugs for the acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Numerous medications are available for the acute treatment of migraine in adults, and some have now been approved for use in children and adolescents in the ambulatory setting. A systematic review of acute treatment of migraine medication trials in children and adolescents will help clinicians make evidence-informed management choices. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of pharmacological interventions by any route of administration versus placebo for migraine in children and adolescents 17 years of age or less. For the purposes of this review, children were defined as under 12 years of age and adolescents 12 to 17 years of age. SEARCH METHODS: We searched seven bibliographic databases and four clinical trial registers as well as gray literature for studies through February 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included prospective randomized controlled clinical trials of children and adolescents with migraine, comparing acute symptom relieving migraine medications with placebo in the ambulatory setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and reviewed the full text of potentially eligible studies. Two independent reviewers extracted data for studies meeting inclusion criteria. We calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for dichotomous data. We calculated the risk difference (RD) and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for proportions of adverse events. The percentage of pain-free patients at two hours was the primary efficacy outcome measure. We used adverse events to evaluate safety and tolerability. Secondary outcome measures included headache relief, use of rescue medication, headache recurrence, presence of nausea, and presence of vomiting. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We identified a total of 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of migraine symptom-relieving medications, in which 9158 children and adolescents were enrolled and 7630 (range of mean age between 8.2 and 14.7 years) received medication. Twenty-four studies focused on drugs in the triptan class, including almotriptan, eletriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, sumatriptan + naproxen sodium, and zolmitriptan. Other medications studied included paracetamol (acetaminophen), ibuprofen, and dihydroergotamine (DHE). More than half of the studies evaluated sumatriptan. All but one study reported adverse event data. Most studies presented a low or unclear risk of bias, and the overall quality of evidence, according to GRADE criteria, was low to moderate, downgraded mostly due to imprecision and inconsistency. Ibuprofen was more effective than placebo for producing pain freedom at two hours in two small studies that included 162 children (RR 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 3.04) with low quality evidence (due to imprecision). Paracetamol was not superior to placebo in one small study of 80 children. Triptans as a class of medication were superior to placebo in producing pain freedom in 3 studies involving 273 children (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.62, NNTB 13) (moderate quality evidence) and 21 studies involving 7026 adolescents (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.47, NNTB 6) (moderate quality evidence). There was no significant difference in the effect sizes between studies involving children versus adolescents. Triptans were associated with an increased risk of minor (non-serious) adverse events in adolescents (RD 0.13, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.18, NNTH 8), but studies did not report any serious adverse events. The risk of minor adverse events was not significant in children (RD 0.06, 95% CI - 0.04 to 0.17, NNTH 17). Sumatriptan plus naproxen sodium was superior to placebo in one study involving 490 adolescents (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.78 to 5.94, NNTB 6) (moderate quality evidence). Oral dihydroergotamine was not superior to placebo in one small study involving 13 children. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low quality evidence from two small trials shows that ibuprofen appears to improve pain freedom for the acute treatment of children with migraine. We have only limited information on adverse events associated with ibuprofen in the trials included in this review. Triptans as a class are also effective at providing pain freedom in children and adolescents but are associated with higher rates of minor adverse events. Sumatriptan plus naproxen sodium is also effective in treating adolescents with migraine.

The Use of a Pediatric Migraine Practice Guideline in an Emergency Department Setting.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a standardized pediatric migraine practice guideline in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Migraine Clinical Practice Guideline (MCPG) was created in collaboration with the Division of Pediatric Neurology and Pediatric Emergency Medicine. The MCPG was established on evidence-based data and best practice after a review of the literature. The MCPG was implemented for patients with a known diagnosis of migraine headaches and a verbal numeric pain score (VPS) greater than 6 on a 0 to 10 scale. Patients received intravenous saline, ketorolac, diphenhydramine, and either metoclopramide or prochlorperazine. After 40 minutes, another VPS was obtained, and if no improvement, a repeat dose of metoclopramide or prochlorperazine was administered. If after 40 minutes and minimal pain relief occurred, a consult to neurology was made. A chart review of patients enrolled in the MCPG from April 2004 to April 2013 was conducted. We recorded demographic data, vital signs, ED length of stay, initial VPS, last recorded VPS, adverse events, and admission rate. Nonparametric statistics were performed. RESULTS: A total of 533 charts were identified with a discharge diagnosis of migraine headache of which 266 were enrolled in the MCPG (179 females and 87 males). Mean (SD) age was 13.9 (3.1). Mean (SD) initial VPS was 7.8 (2.0). Mean (SD) discharge VPS was 2.1 (2.8), representing a 73% reduction of pain. Twenty patients (7.5%) were admitted for status migrainosus; mean (SD) age was 14.0 (3.5) years and mean (SD) VPS was 6.3 (2.8). Mean (SD) length of stay in ED was 283 (107) minutes. No adverse events were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our MCPG was clinically safe and effective in treating children with acute migraine headaches. Our data add to the dearth of existing published literature on migraine treatment protocols in the ED setting. We recommend additional prospective and comparative studies to further evaluate the effectiveness of our protocol in this patient population.

Episodic acute migraine treatment.

The ideal migraine medication would provide rapid "one and done" treatment of migraine for all sufferers. Unfortunately, no such intervention is available. While most people respond to triptans or DHE, some will need to combine these with an NSAID, or will choose to use an NSAID alone because of personal preference or for medical reasons. Dopamine blockers are another option, and combined with any of the other treatments or used alone, may be particularly useful in those with vascular disease.

Dihydroergotamine mesylate nasal spray: an acute treatment option for migraine in adults.

INTRODUCTION: Although the landscape of migraine symptomatic treatment has been enriched by novel effective drugs, it is mandatory to critically reappraise older molecules to ascertain whether they could still represent reliable alternatives in specific endophenotypes of patients or migraine attacks. Among these, dihydroergotamine (DHE) nasal spray has been shown to be effective and is characterized by greater tolerability and manageability than the parenteral DHE formulation. AREAS COVERED: In this narrative review, the authors describe the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of DHE nasal spray and explore the results of the trials which explored its efficacy, safety and tolerability as migraine symptomatic treatment. They also discuss the limitations of the classically used device and the attempts that several companies are carrying out to generate devices warranting a more reproducible drug absorption. EXPERT OPINION: DHE nasal spray could be considered as rescue treatment in patients who have failed other symptomatic therapeutic strategies. Nevertheless, in the perspective of tailored therapy, the intranasal route of administration and the consequent rapid onset of action may represent benefits putatively making DHE a treatment of choice for challenging migraine attacks such as those with nocturnal onset or quickly reaching the climax of both headache and neurovegetative associated symptoms.

The 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D agonists in acute migraine therapy: Ergotamine, dihydroergotamine, and the triptans.

The advent of the triptans revolutionized acute migraine treatment. The older migraine-specific drugs, the ergot alkaloids (ergotamine and dihydroergotamine), also relieve migraine attacks through agonism at the 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D receptors, but the triptans have much greater specificity for these receptors. Unlike the ergot alkaloids, the triptans do not activate many other receptor types, and therefore are much better tolerated. This reduction in side effects greatly enhanced their clinical utility as it allowed a far greater proportion of patients to take a full therapeutic dose. As a result, the clinical use of ergotamine is minimal today, although dihydroergotamine still has a significant clinical role. There is extensive evidence that the seven triptans available today, sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, rizatriptan, eletriptan, naratriptan, almotriptan, and frovatriptan, are effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Available formulations include oral tablets, orally dissolving tablets, subcutaneous injections, nasal sprays, and in some countries, rectal suppositories. For optimal benefit, therapy needs to be individualized for a given patient both regarding the triptan chosen and the formulation. This chapter discusses the ergot alkaloids and the triptans, including mechanism of action, evidence for efficacy, clinical use, and adverse effects.

Dihydroergotamine protects against ischemic stroke by modulating microglial/macrophage polarization and inhibiting inflammation in mice.

OBJECTIVES: The search for drugs that can protect the brain tissue and reduce nerve damage in acute ischemic stroke has emerged as a research hotspot. We investigated the potential protective effects and mechanisms of action of dihydroergotamine against ischemic stroke. METHODS: C57BL/6 mice were subjected to middle cerebral artery occlusion (MCAO), and dihydroergotamine at a dose of 10 mg/kg/day was intraperitoneally injected for 14 days. Adhesive removal and beam walking tests were conducted 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 14 days after MCAO surgery. Thereafter, the mechanism by which dihydroergotamine regulates microglia/macrophage polarization and inflammation and imparts ischemic stroke protection was studied using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, immunofluorescence staining, and western blotting. RESULTS: From the perspective of a drug repurposing strategy, dihydroergotamine was found to inhibit oxygen-glucose deprivation damage to neurons, significantly improve cell survival rate, and likely exert a protective effect on ischemic brain injury. Dihydroergotamine significantly improved neural function scores and survival rates and reduced brain injury severity in mice. Furthermore, dihydroergotamine manifests its protective effect on ischemic brain injury by reducing the expression of TNF-α and IL-1ß in mouse ischemic brain tissue, inhibiting the polarization of microglia/macrophage toward the M1 phenotype and promoting polarization toward the M2 phenotype. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to demonstrate the protective effect of dihydroergotamine, a first-line treatment for migraine, against ischemic nerve injury in vitro and in vivo.

Relatively slow and long-lasting antimigraine effect of dihydroergotamine is most likely due to basic pharmacological attributes of the drug: a review.

INTRODUCTION: If a drug has a slow dissociation from the receptor this can result in a long duration of effect and a slow effect. The long duration of the antimigraine effect of dihydroergotamine (DHE) has been reported previously whereas a possible slow onset of DHE's antimigraine effect, which is the subject of this review, has only rarely been mentioned. METHODS: Eight randomised, controlled trials (RCT) with DHE for acute treatment with migraine were selected from the literature. The speed of the effect of DHE in migraine was evaluated by plotting the effect up to four hours against time. FINDINGS: Subcutaneous DHE 1 mg was inferior to subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg for headache relief for the first two hours but equally effective after three hours. After intranasal DHE 2 mg the mean therapeutic gain increased slowly up to four hours. For orally inhaled DHE 0.5 mg there was a considerable time lag between therapeutic gain (maximum after two hours) and plasma concentrations of DHE (Tmax = 12 min). CONCLUSION: DHE has a slow dissociation from the receptor; and this basic attribute of the drug is the most likely cause of the general relatively slow anti-migraine effect of DHE.

What's new in the migraine attack treatment.

This short review aims to give a focus on news in the migraine attack treatment and discusses the CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants), the 5-HT1F receptors agonists (ditans), the transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of migraine attack with aura, innovative delivery systems for sumatriptan and the oral inhalation of dihydroergotamine.

INP104: a drug evaluation of a nonoral product for the acute treatment of migraine.

Migraine is a highly prevalent, disabling neurological disorder that is also associated with gastrointestinal symptoms, autonomic dysfunction and allodynia. Despite the availability of multiple acute agents for migraine, an unmet need remains for effective, well-tolerated drugs that are nonoral and noninvasive. Here, we provide a drug evaluation of INP104, a novel drug-device combination product of dihydroergotamine (DHE) mesylate - a molecule with a long history of efficacy familiar to headache specialists - which is delivered to the difficult-to-reach upper nasal space where it is rapidly and consistently absorbed via Precision Olfactory Delivery (POD®). In clinical trials, INP104 exhibited favorable pharmacokinetics, a well-tolerated safety profile, and rapid symptom relief, highlighting its potential as a suitable acute therapy for migraine.

Migraine is a very common headache disorder that often presents with pain and gastrointestinal symptoms. There are many available treatments for migraine, but some patients still need an option that works well for them, that is noninvasive, or does not need to be taken orally. Here we provide a drug evaluation of INP104, an approved acute treatment for migraine that combines a drug and a device: the medication dihydroergotamine (DHE) mesylate, which has been used for decades for treating acute symptoms of migraine, and the Precision Olfactory Delivery (POD^®) device, which delivers DHE mesylate to the hard-to-reach upper regions of the nose. Targeting this region helps medication to be absorbed faster and more consistently. In clinical trials, INP104 demonstrated favorable drug properties, came with few adverse events, and provided fast relief from migraine symptoms.

Observational Analysis of the Costs Associated with Acute Treatment of Breakthrough Migraine Attacks in Medicaid Patients Using Preventive Therapies.

INTRODUCTION: Medications for preventive treatment of migraine reduce migraine frequency, usually measured by a reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD), but generally do not eliminate the need for acute treatment. To assess the economic impact of treatment-related reductions in frequency, methodological guidance recommends capturing cost differences along the spectrum of MMD. OBJECTIVE: Characterize monthly migraine medication costs along the spectrum of MMD for patients using calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for prevention. METHODS: Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data (SDUD) were used to identify formulations and per-unit costs for oral, intranasal, and parenteral migraine-specific medications for acute and preventive treatment used by fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid enrollees in 2020. National drug codes of relevant therapies were used to match SDUD to formulation characteristics including substance, route of administration, and branded/generic marketing status. Mean per-unit cost and the formulation's share of total prescriptions were estimated. Monthly medication costs were modeled based on formulations' per-unit costs and frequency of acute medication use during clinical trials of CGRP mAbs. RESULTS: In the SDUD, there were 563,338 prescriptions for migraine-specific acute medications; triptans accounted for 97.37%. Triptan formulations prescribed were 83.78% oral tablet, 10.89% orally disintegrating tablet, 2.60% intranasal, and 2.73% parenteral. Dihydroergotamine accounted for < 1% of total prescriptions and had the highest per-unit cost ($443.50, branded intranasal). There were 97,119 prescriptions for CGRP mAbs, the majority for erenumab (45.73%) or galcanezumab (45.24%). Modeled monthly acute and preventive medication costs ranged from approximately $550 in patients with the fewest MMD treated with oral triptans to > $1500 in patients with the most MMD treated with dihydroergotamine. CONCLUSION: In consideration of the migraine-specific acute medications used in FFS Medicaid 2020, for patients using CGRP mAbs for prevention, medication costs may vary significantly with the number of breakthrough attacks treated per month and the type of migraine-specific acute therapy used.

Dihydroergotamine mesylate enhances the anti-tumor effect of sorafenib in liver cancer cells.

Liver cancer is the most common and frequentlyoccurring cancer. In addition to radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery are recommended as part of liver cancer treatment. The efficacy of sorafenib and sorafenib-based combination treatment against tumors has been verified. Although, clinical trials have revealed that some individuals are not sensitive to sorafenib therapy, and current therapeutic approaches are ineffective. Consequently, it is urgent to explore effective drug combinations and innovative techniques for increasing the effectiveness of sorafenib in the curing of liver tumor. Herein, we show that dihydroergotamine mesylate (DHE), an anti-migraine agent, could effectively suppress liver cancer cells proliferation by inhibiting STAT3 activation. However, DHE can enhance the protein stability of Mcl-1 by activating ERK, making DHE less effective in apoptosis induction. Specifically, DHE enhances the effects of sorafenib on liver cancer cells, such as decreased viability and increased apoptosis. Furthermore, the mixture of sorafenib and DHE could enhance DHE-triggered STAT3 suppression and inhibit DHE-mediated ERK-Mcl-1 pathway activation. In vivo, the combination of sorafenib with DHE produced a substantial synergy in suppressing tumour growth and causing apoptosis, ERK inhibition and Mcl-1 degradation. These findings suggest that DHE can effectively inhibit cell proliferation and enhance sorafenib anti-cancer activity in liver cancer cells. The current study provides some new insights that DHE asa novel anti-liver cancer therapeutic agent has been shown to improve treatment outcomes of sorafenib, which might be helpful in order to advance sorafenib in liver cancer therapeutics.

Headache in three new cases of Harlequin syndrome with accompanying pharmacological comparison with migraine.

BACKGROUND: Harlequin syndrome (HS) is a rare autonomic disorder characterised by unilateral diminished sweating and flushing of the face in response to heat or exercise. Some patients with HS complain of headache. METHODS: We present three new cases to characterise their headache phenotype and pharmacology and review the literature of cases where headache was described. RESULTS Two out of the three patients presented with episodes of unilateral headache associated with exercise: in one case the headache had migrainous features and was contralateral to the side where the flushing occurred, whereas the second patient, who had had migraine attacks in the past, had a brief throbbing headache, with no associated symptoms, ipsilateral to the facial flushing. The third woman had migraine but the attacks were not associated with HS. Pharmacological characterisation suggested the HS and migraine were biologically distinct. HS was not triggered by nitroglycerin and was unaffected by sumatriptan, dihydroergotamine and ergotamine. HS and migraine did not occur together. In the literature, we found six patients with both HS and headache, five of whom had migraine. CONCLUSIONS: These data do not show any correlation between the phenotypic expression of migraine and HS suggesting the syndromes are pathogenetically independent.

Rescue therapy for acute migraine, part 1: triptans, dihydroergotamine, and magnesium.

OBJECTIVE: To review and analyze published reports on the acute treatment of migraine headache with triptans, dihydroergotamine (DHE), and magnesium in emergency department, urgent care, and headache clinic settings. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched using the terms "migraine" and "emergency," and "therapy" or "treatment." Reports from emergency department and urgent care settings that involved all routes of medication delivery were included. Reports from headache clinic settings were included only if medications were delivered by a parenteral route. RESULTS: Acute rescue treatment studies involving the triptans were available for injectable and nasal sumatriptan, as well as rizatriptan. Effectiveness varied widely, even when the pain-free and pain-relief statistics were evaluated separately. As these medications are known to work best early in the migraine, part of this variability may be attributed to the timing of triptan administration. Multiple studies compared triptans with anti-emetics, dopamine antagonists, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The overall percentage of patients with pain relief after taking sumatriptan was roughly equivalent to that recorded with droperidol and prochlorperazine. Sumatriptan was equivalent to DHE when only paired comparisons were performed. While the data extracted suggest that magnesium may be effective in treating all symptoms in patients experiencing migraine with aura across all migraine patients, its effectiveness seems to be limited to treating only photophobia and phonophobia. CONCLUSIONS: Although there are relatively few studies involving health-care provider-administered triptans or DHE for acute rescue, they appear to be equivalent to the dopamine antagonists for migraine pain relief. The relatively rare inclusion of a placebo arm and the frequent use of combination medications in active treatment arms complicate the comparison of single agents with each other.