Single-item migraine screening tests, self-reported bothersome headache or stripe pattern hypersensitivity?

BACKGROUND: A simple screening tool may potentially help the migraine diagnosis in a primary care setting. The use of single-item tests, such as stripe pattern hypersensitivity test and self-reported bothersome headache (HA) question, as migraine screening tools have not been fully explored. METHODS: Two hundred and fifty-four subjects (patients and companions) were randomly enrolled from an OB/GYN clinic (men 82, women 172; age 38 ± 14). They were instructed to rate the stripe sensitivity level (0-4) and to report any bothersome HA (yes/no). A brief structured HA interview was conducted to describe the HA characteristics and for migraine diagnosis based on the ICHD-IIIß criteria. RESULTS: In a multivariate model, bothersome HA question and stripe pattern hypersensitivity test were both significantly associated with EM+PM+CM (odds ratio: 24.0, P < 0.01 vs 2.6, P = 0.01) or EM (odds ratio: 16.2, P < 0.01 vs 3.0, P < 0.01). Bothersome HA question had a greater screening power than stripe pattern hypersensitivity for screening EM+PM+CM (area under the ROC curve: 0.84 [95% CI 0.78-0.89] vs 0.62 [95% CI 0.55-0.69]) or EM (area under the ROC curve: 0.80 [95% CI 0.73-0.86] vs 0.64 [95% CI 0.56-0.72]). CONCLUSION: When performed in an OB/GYN clinic, self-reported bothersome HA question seemed more powerful than visual stripe pattern test in screening migraine thus could potentially be used as a single-item screening test.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for chronic migraine: efficacy, safety, and tolerability in patients who received all five treatment cycles in the PREEMPT clinical program.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic migraine (CM) is a prevalent and disabling neurological disorder. Phase III REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) clinical program assessed efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX(®)) for prophylaxis of headaches in adults with CM. This secondary analysis assessed patients who received all five treatment cycles and completed the study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PREEMPT (two phase III studies: 24-week double-blind, placebo-controlled [DBPC], parallel-group phase, followed by 32-week open-label [OL] phase) evaluated the efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA in CM (≥15 days/month with headache lasting ≥4 h a day). Patients were randomized (1:1) to onabotulinumtoxinA or placebo every 12 weeks for two cycles, followed by onabotulinumtoxinA for three cycles. Multiple headache symptom measures were evaluated. Results for the completer (five cycles) subgroup of patients are reported. RESULTS: Of 1384 total PREEMPT patients, 1005 received all five treatment cycles (513 received onabotulinumtoxinA only [onabotulinumtoxinA/onabotulinumtoxinA (O/O)] and 492 received two cycles of placebo then three cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA [placebo/onabotulinumtoxinA (P/O)]). Demographics were similar between treatment groups. At Week 56, after all patients were treated with onabotulinumtoxinA, there continued to be significant between-group differences favoring the O/O vs P/O group for the following headache symptom measures: LS mean change from baseline in frequencies of headache days (-12.0 O/O, -11.1 P/O; P = 0.035), migraine days (-11.6 O/O, -10.7 P/O; P = 0.038), and moderate/severe headache days (-11.0 O/O, -10.1 P/O; P = 0.042). For other measures (cumulative hours of headache on headache days, frequency of headache episodes, and percentage with severe Headache Impact Test (HIT)-6 score, and total HIT-6 and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire scores), there were also large mean improvements from baseline. The percent of patients with a ≥50% reduction from baseline in frequency of headache days was significantly greater for the onabotulinumtoxinA-only group at Week 56 (69.6% O/O, 62.8% P/O; P = 0.023). The treatment-related adverse event rate was 28.5% for onabotulinumtoxinA vs 12.4% for placebo in the DBPC phase and 34.8% for patients treated with onabotulinumtoxinA for all five cycles throughout the 56-week trials. CONCLUSIONS: This subgroup analysis demonstrated improvements with onabotulinumtoxinA treatment (five cycles) vs placebo (two cycles)/onabotulinumtoxinA (three cycles) for multiple headache symptom measures and suggests that at Week 56, patients treated earlier with onabotulinumtoxinA had better outcomes. These findings demonstrate the continued need and cumulative benefit over time with continued prophylaxis, an important and clinically pragmatic observation for clinicians and patients.

Efficacy endpoints in migraine clinical trials: the importance of assessing freedom from pain.

Many efficacy endpoints have been used in clinical trials of acute migraine pharmacotherapy. Headache response or headache relief (i.e., moderate/severe pain reduced to mild/no pain) at a single, specified time-point, traditionally the primary endpoint, and headache recurrence (i.e., return of pain after initial postdose relief) are inadequate. Headache relief does not provide information about pain-free response and counts a partial response as a treatment success. Headache recurrence can reflect sustained efficacy but is confounded by initial response to treatment, because ineffective drugs have low recurrence rates. The International Headache Society (IHS) guidelines state that 2 hour pain-free response and sustained pain-free response (i.e., freedom from pain with no recurrence or use of rescue or study medication 2-24 hours postdose) provide the most clinically relevant information about the efficacy of migraine pharmacotherapy. The pain-free criterion counts partial responses as failures and thus is a more rigorous test of therapeutic benefit than headache relief, and the two endpoints together incorporate the main treatment attributes that determine patient satisfaction. As an example, consider needle-free subcutaneous sumatriptan and oral triptan tablets. An open-label study of needle-free subcutaneous sumatriptan by Cady and colleagues found that 2 hour pain-free response and sustained pain-free response were 64% and 42% respectively. For oral triptan tablets, the 2001 metaanalysis by Ferrari and colleagues reported 2 hour pain-free response rates ranging from 23% to 38% and sustained pain-free response rates ranging from 11% to 26%. The measures of pain-free response 2 hours postdose and sustained pain-free response can differentiate among treatments and be used to guide therapeutic choices.

Emerging target-based paradigms to prevent and treat migraine.

Migraine is a primary brain disorder resulting from altered modulation of normal sensory stimuli and trigeminal nerve dysfunction. The second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2) defines seven subtypes of migraine. Migraine treatment can be acute or preventive. New targeted therapies include 5-HT(1F) receptor agonists, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists, nitric oxide synthetase inhibitors, and ion channel antagonists. A recent development is the creation of antibodies to CGRP and its receptor for migraine prevention.

Occipital nerve stimulation for primary headaches.

Occipital nerve stimulation may be effective for primary headache disorders. Four studies, including two double-blind show, stimulation-controlled studies that were performed for chronic migraine showed evidence of benefit. A separate study suggested a benefit for combined supraorbital and greater occipital nerve stimulation. Anecdotal evidence suggests benefit in hemicrania continua. In chronic cluster headache, several case series have shown improvement, which, combined with the safety of occipital nerve stimulation relative to deep brain stimulation, have led to published reports supporting this as the preferred surgical technique for chronic cluster headache. A few case reports suggest a possible benefit in short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection tearing and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache.

Evidence-based guideline update: pharmacologic treatment for episodic migraine prevention in adults: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the preventive treatment of migraine headache. The clinical question addressed was: What pharmacologic therapies are proven effective for migraine prevention? METHODS: The authors analyzed published studies from June 1999 to May 2009 using a structured review process to classify the evidence relative to the efficacy of various medications available in the United States for migraine prevention. RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The author panel reviewed 284 abstracts, which ultimately yielded 29 Class I or Class II articles that are reviewed herein. Divalproex sodium, sodium valproate, topiramate, metoprolol, propranolol, and timolol are effective for migraine prevention and should be offered to patients with migraine to reduce migraine attack frequency and severity (Level A). Frovatriptan is effective for prevention of menstrual migraine (Level A). Lamotrigine is ineffective for migraine prevention (Level A).

Evidence-based guideline update: NSAIDs and other complementary treatments for episodic migraine prevention in adults: report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

OBJECTIVE: To provide updated evidence-based recommendations for the preventive treatment of migraine headache. The clinical question addressed was: Are nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or other complementary treatments effective for migraine prevention? METHODS: The authors analyzed published studies from June 1999 to May 2009 using a structured review process to classify the evidence relative to the efficacy of various medications for migraine prevention. RESULTS: The author panel reviewed 284 abstracts, which ultimately yielded 49 Class I or Class II articles on migraine prevention; of these 49, 15 were classified as involving nontraditional therapies, NSAIDs, and other complementary therapies that are reviewed herein. RECOMMENDATIONS: Petasites (butterbur) is effective for migraine prevention and should be offered to patients with migraine to reduce the frequency and severity of migraine attacks (Level A). Fenoprofen, ibuprofen, ketoprofen, naproxen, naproxen sodium, MIG-99 (feverfew), magnesium, riboflavin, and subcutaneous histamine are probably effective for migraine prevention (Level B). Treatments considered possibly effective are cyproheptadine, Co-Q10, estrogen, mefenamic acid, and flurbiprofen (Level C). Data are conflicting or inadequate to support or refute use of aspirin, indomethacin, omega-3, or hyperbaric oxygen for migraine prevention. Montelukast is established as probably ineffective for migraine prevention (Level B).

Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of propranolol added to topiramate in chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of adding propranolol to topiramate in chronic migraine subjects inadequately controlled with topiramate alone. METHODS: This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial conducted through the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Clinical Research Collaboration, expected to randomize 250 chronic migraine subjects inadequately controlled (≥10 headaches/month) with topiramate (50-100 mg/day) to either propranolol LA (long acting) (240 mg/day) or placebo. Primary outcome was 28-day moderate to severe headache rate reduction at 6 months (weeks 16 to 24) compared with baseline (weeks -4 to 0). RESULTS: A planned interim analysis was performed after 48 sites randomized 171 subjects. The data and safety monitoring board recommended ending the trial after determining that it would be highly unlikely for the combination to result in a significant reduction in 28-day headache rate compared with topiramate alone if all 250 subjects were randomized. No safety concerns were identified. At study closure, 191 subjects were randomized. The 6-month reduction in moderate to severe 28-day headache rate and total 28-day headache rate for combination therapy vs topiramate alone was not significantly different: 4.0 vs 4.5 days (moderate to severe 28-day headache rate; p = 0.57) and 6.2 vs 6.1 days (total 28-day headache rate; p = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: This study does not provide evidence that the addition of propranolol LA to topiramate adds benefit when chronic migraine is inadequately controlled with topiramate alone. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that propranolol LA, added to topiramate, is ineffective in chronic migraine patients who fail topiramate monotherapy.

OnabotulinumtoxinA improves quality of life and reduces impact of chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox, Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and headache impact in adults with chronic migraine (CM). METHODS: The Phase III Research Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) clinical program (PREEMPT 1 and 2) included a 24-week, double-blind phase (2 12-week cycles) followed by a 32-week, open-label phase (3 cycles). Thirty-one injections of 5U each (155 U of onabotulinumtoxinA or placebo) were administered to fixed sites. An additional 40 U could be administered "following the pain." Prespecified analysis of headache impact (Headache Impact Test [HIT]-6) and HRQoL (Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 [MSQ]) assessments were performed. Because the studies were similar in design and did not notably differ in outcome, pooled results are presented here. RESULTS: A total of 1,384 subjects were included in the pooled analyses (onabotulinumtoxinA, n = 688; placebo, n = 696). Baseline mean total HIT-6 and MSQ v2.1 scores were comparable between groups; 93.1% were severely impacted based on HIT-6 scores ≥60. At 24 weeks, in comparison with placebo, onabotulinumtoxinA treatment significantly reduced HIT-6 scores and the proportion of patients with HIT-6 scores in the severe range at all timepoints including week 24 (p < 0.001). OnabotulinumtoxinA treatment significantly improved all domains of the MSQ v2.1 at 24 weeks (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of CM with onabotulinumtoxinA is associated with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in headache impact and improvements in HRQoL. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class 1A evidence that onabotulinumtoxinA treatment reduces headache impact and improves HRQoL.

Integrated headache care.

Patients with chronic or difficult to treat headaches are generally under the care of general practictioners or neurologists in private practice. Some are referred to a headache specialist for evaluation and advice. Treatment is often provided by the referring physician. An alternative is a multidisciplinary headache centre, where care is provided by different disciplines (neurology, behavioural psychology, psychiatry, psychosomatic medicine, physical therapy, sport therapy) across sectors of the healthcare system involving out- and inpatient care and treatment. This is called integrated headache care. This review summarizes experiences in integrated headache care settings in Europe and the USA, describes these settings, and reports outcome data.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 2 trial.

OBJECTIVES: This is the second of a pair of studies designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX) for prophylaxis of headaches in adults with chronic migraine. METHODS: PREEMPT 2 was a phase 3 study, with a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase, followed by a 32-week, open-label phase. Subjects were randomized (1:1) to injections of onabotulinumtoxinA (155U-195U; n = 347) or placebo (n = 358) every 12 weeks for two cycles. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in headache days per 28 days from baseline to weeks 21-24 post-treatment. RESULTS: OnabotulinumtoxinA was statistically significantly superior to placebo for the primary endpoint, frequency of headache days per 28 days relative to baseline (-9.0 onabotulinumtoxinA/-6.7 placebo, p < .001). OnabotulinumtoxinA was significantly favoured in all secondary endpoint comparisons. OnabotulinumtoxinA was safe and well tolerated, with few treatment-related adverse events. Few patients (3.5% onabotulinumtoxinA/1.4% placebo) discontinued due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The results of PREEMPT 2 demonstrate that onabotulinumtoxinA is effective for prophylaxis of headache in adults with chronic migraine. Repeated onabotulinumtoxinA treatments were safe and well tolerated.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 1 trial.

OBJECTIVES: This is the first of a pair of studies designed to assess efficacy, safety and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA (BOTOX) as headache prophylaxis in adults with chronic migraine. METHODS: The Phase III REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy 1 (PREEMPT 1) is a phase 3 study, with a 24-week, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled phase followed by a 32-week, open-label phase. Subjects were randomized (1:1) to injections every 12 weeks of onabotulinumtoxinA (155 U-195 U; n = 341) or placebo (n = 338) (two cycles). The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline in headache episode frequency at week 24. RESULTS: No significant between-group difference for onabotulinumtoxinA versus placebo was observed for the primary endpoint, headache episodes (-5.2 vs. -5.3; p = 0.344). Large within-group decreases from baseline were observed for all efficacy variables. Significant between-group differences for onabotulinumtoxinA were observed for the secondary endpoints, headache days (p = .006) and migraine days (p = 0.002). OnabotulinumtoxinA was safe and well tolerated, with few treatment-related adverse events. Few subjects discontinued due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: There was no between-group difference for the primary endpoint, headache episodes. However, significant reductions from baseline were observed for onabotulinumtoxinA for headache and migraine days, cumulative hours of headache on headache days and frequency of moderate/severe headache days, which in turn reduced the burden of illness in adults with disabling chronic migraine.

Right-to-left shunt is common in chronic migraine.

Our aim was to determine the prevalence of right-to-left shunt (RtLS) in patients with chronic migraine (CM), and to correlate the presence and grade of RtLS with aura and neurological symptoms, and duration and severity of disease. The prevalence of RtLS in migraine without aura is similar to that of the general population (between 20 and 35%). In migraine with aura, the prevalence is much higher (approximately 50%). The prevalence in CM, with or without aura, is unknown. Consecutive patients between the ages of 18 and 60 years with CM attending a tertiary care specialty headache clinic over an 8-week period were eligible. There were 131 patients in the study. A structured diagnostic interview was performed. Bubble transcranial Doppler with Valsalva manoeuvre determined RtLS presence and grade. Sixty-six percent (86/131) of patients had RtLS, a statistically significantly greater rate than those reported in the general population and in migraine with or without aura (P < 0.001). There was no difference in RtLS rate or grade between those with and those without aura. Specific headache features and the presence of neurological symptoms were similar between those with and those without RtLS. Compared with both the general population and the episodic migraine population (with and without aura), patients with CM, with or without aura, are more likely to have RtLS. The clinical implications of our findings need to be determined.

Short-term frovatriptan for the prevention of difficult-to-treat menstrual migraine attacks.

The efficacy of a 6-day regimen of frovatriptan for menstrual migraine (MM; attacks starting on day -2 to +3 of menses) prevention in women with difficult-to-treat MM was assessed. Women with a documented inadequate response to triptans for acute MM treatment were included in this placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Women were randomized to double-blind treatment for three perimenstrual periods (PMPs) with either frovatriptan 2.5 mg (q.d. or b.i.d.) or placebo initiated 2 days before anticipated MM. The efficacy analysis included 410 women with 85% completing three double-blind PMPs. The mean number of headache-free PMPs was 0.92 with frovatriptan b.i.d., 0.69 with frovatriptan q.d. and 0.42 with placebo [P < 0.001 (b.i.d.) and P < 0.02 (q.d.) vs. placebo]. When migraine occurred, severity was reduced with frovatriptan q.d. (P < 0.001) and b.i.d. (P < 0.001) vs. placebo. Both frovatriptan regimens were well tolerated. In women with difficult-to-treat MM, a 6-day regimen of frovatriptan significantly reduced MM incidence and severity.

Tonabersat, a gap-junction modulator: efficacy and safety in two randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging studies of acute migraine.

Tonabersat is a novel benzopyran derivative that blocks the cortical spreading depression proposed to be associated with migraine attacks. The ability of single oral doses of 15, 25, 40 and 80 mg of tonabersat to relieve the symptoms of moderate to severe migraine was evaluated in 859 migraineurs enrolled in two dose-ranging, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials, one international and the other North American. In the international study, significantly more patients given tonabersat than given placebo experienced relief of headache pain at 2 h (15 mg, 36.8%; 40 mg, 40.7%), the principal efficacy variable, and at 4 h (40 mg, 63.0%) and complete abolition of headache at 4 h (40 mg, 34.3%). None of the primary or secondary efficacy variables indicated significant differences between tonabersat and placebo in the North American study. Tonabersat was generally well tolerated, with dizziness and nausea the most common side-effects. Serious adverse events were uncommon, and no patient withdrew from either study because of adverse events. These results suggest a possible interplay between tonabersat pharmacokinetics (the relatively long time required to reach maximum plasma concentrations) and patient characteristics (previous triptan exposure) in the management of acute migraine attacks. Based on the pharmacokinetics and actions on cortical spreading depression, tonabersat may have potential value in migraine prophylaxis.

Tonabersat, a novel gap-junction modulator for the prevention of migraine.

Migraine is a common, recurrent, primary headache disorder associated with significant morbidity as well as high direct and indirect costs. Despite its impact, only a proportion of migraineurs who meet criteria for prophylactic treatment take preventive medication. Antiepileptic drugs and beta-blockers are among the most used preventive therapies, but their exact mechanisms of action in migraine prophylaxis are unknown. Recent research has pointed to the role of cortical spreading depression in the genesis of migraine aura and pain, with neuronal-glial gap junctions playing a prominent part in cortical spreading depression. Tonabersat is a unique compound with demonstrated activity as a gap-junction inhibitor in animal studies. In preclinical and clinical trials, tonabersat was well tolerated, with no cardiovascular effects; the pharmacokinetic profile suggested its usefulness in the prophylaxis of migraine.

Utility of topiramate for the treatment of patients with chronic migraine in the presence or absence of acute medication overuse.

Chronic migraine has been linked to the excessive use of acute headache medications. Medication overuse (MO) is commonly considered the most significant risk factor for the progression of migraine from an episodic to a chronic condition. Managing MO is a challenge. Discontinuation of the acute medication can result in withdrawal headache, nausea, vomiting and sleep disturbances. This review summarizes the results from two similarly designed, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicentre studies of chronic migraine conducted in the USA and European Union. Both studies demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the migraine preventive medication, topiramate, for the treatment of chronic migraine in patient populations both with and without MO. These studies may have important implications for the future of chronic migraine management, suggesting that detoxification prior to initiating prophylactic therapy may not be required in all patients if MO is present.

Proposals for new standardized general diagnostic criteria for the secondary headaches.

Headache classification is a dynamic process through clinical testing and re-testing of current and proposed criteria. After publication of the second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-II), need arose for revisions in the classification of medication overuse headache and chronic migraine. These changes made apparent a further need for broader revisions to the standard formulation of diagnostic criteria for the secondary headaches. Currently, the fourth criterion makes impossible the definitive diagnosis of a secondary headache until the underlying cause has resolved or been cured or greatly ameliorated by therapy, at which time the headache may no longer be present. Given that the main purpose of diagnostic criteria is to enable a diagnosis at the onset of a disease in order to guide treatment, this is unhelpful in clinical practice. In the present paper we propose maintaining a standard approach to the secondary headaches using a set of four criteria A, B, C and D, but we construct these so that the requirement for resolution or successful treatment is removed. The proposal for general diagnostic criteria for the secondary headaches will be entered into the internet-based version of the appendix of ICHD-II. During 2009 the Classification Committee will apply the general criteria to all the specific types of secondary headaches. These, and other changes, will be included in a revision of the entire classification entitled ICHD-IIR, expected to be published in 2010. ICHD-IIR will be printed and posted on the website and will be the official classification of the International Headache Society. Unfortunately, it will be necessary to translate ICHD-IIR into the many languages of the world, but the good news is that no major changes to the headache classification are then foreseen for the next 10 years. Until the printing of ICHD-IIR, the printed ICHD-II criteria remain in place for all other purposes. We issue a plea to the headache community to use and study these proposed general criteria for the secondary headaches in order to provide more evidence for their utility-before their incorporation in the main body of the classification.

Hemicrania continua: who responds to indomethacin?

Hemicrania continua (HC) is a primary headache disorder characterized by a continuous, moderate to severe, unilateral headache and defined by its absolute responsiveness to indomethacin. However, some patients with the clinical phenotype of HC do not respond to indomethacin. We reviewed the records of 192 patients with the putative diagnosis of HC and divided them into groups based on their headaches' response to indomethacin. They were compared for age, gender, presence or absence of specific autonomic symptoms, medication overuse, rapidity of headache onset, and whether or not the headaches met criteria for migraine when severe. Forty-three patients had an absolute response and 122 patients did not respond to adequate doses of indomethacin. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of age, sex, presence of rapid-onset headache, or medication overuse. Autonomic symptoms, based on a questionnaire, did not predict response. Eighteen patients could not complete a trial of indomethacin due to adverse events. Nine patients could not be included in the HC group despite improvement with indomethacin: one patient probably had primary cough headache, another paroxysmal hemicrania; three patients improved but it was uncertain if they were absolutely pain free, and four patients dramatically improved but still had a baseline headache. We found no statistically significant differences between patients who did and did not respond to indomethacin. All patients with continuous, unilateral headache should receive an adequate trial of indomethacin. Most patients with unilateral headache suggestive of HC did not respond to indomethacin.