Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Neurology 11/2020

15.06.2020 | Original Communication

Candesartan in migraine prevention: results from a retrospective real-world study

verfasst von: Roberta Messina, Carlo P. Lastarria Perez, Massimo Filippi, Peter J. Goadsby

Erschienen in: Journal of Neurology | Ausgabe 11/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Randomized studies have reported a positive effect of candesartan, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist, in migraine prevention. The aim of our study was to explore patient subjective efficacy of candesartan in a real-world sample of migraine patients and try to identify predictors of candesartan response. We audited the clinical records of 253 patients who attended the King’s College Hospital, London, from February 2015 to December 2017, looking specifically at their response to candesartan. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of headache benefit. Odds ratios (OR) with confidence intervals (CI) 95% were calculated. Eighty-one patients (chronic migraine, n = 68) were included in the final analysis. Thirty-eight patients reported a positive response to candesartan, while 43 patients did not have a meaningful therapeutic effect. The median dose of candesartan was 8 mg and the median treatment period was 6 months. In a univariate logistic regression model, the presence of daily headache was associated with reduced odds of headache benefit (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16–0.96, p = 0.04). In multivariate logistic regression model, younger age (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87–0.98, p = 0.006) and longer disease duration (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01–1.12, p = 0.03) were associated with a good response to candesartan, while the presence of daily headache was associated with reduced odds of headache benefit (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04–0.71, p = 0.01). Having failed up to nine preventives in patients did not predict a treatment failure with candesartan as well. Candesartan yields clinical benefits in difficult-to-treat migraine patients, irrespective of previous failed preventives.
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Dodick DW (2019) CGRP ligand and receptor monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: evidence review and clinical implications. Cephalalgia 39(3):445–458PubMedCrossRef Dodick DW (2019) CGRP ligand and receptor monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: evidence review and clinical implications. Cephalalgia 39(3):445–458PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat American Headache Society (2019) The American Headache Society position statement on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice. Headache 59(1):1–18 American Headache Society (2019) The American Headache Society position statement on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice. Headache 59(1):1–18
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Tronvik E, Stovner LJ, Helde G, Sand T, Bovim G (2003) Prophylactic treatment of migraine with an angiotensin II receptor blocker: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 289(1):65–69PubMedCrossRef Tronvik E, Stovner LJ, Helde G, Sand T, Bovim G (2003) Prophylactic treatment of migraine with an angiotensin II receptor blocker: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 289(1):65–69PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Stovner LJ, Linde M, Gravdahl GB, Tronvik E, Aamodt AH, Sand T et al (2014) A comparative study of candesartan versus propranolol for migraine prophylaxis: a randomised, triple-blind, placebo-controlled, double cross-over study. Cephalalgia 34(7):523–532PubMedCrossRef Stovner LJ, Linde M, Gravdahl GB, Tronvik E, Aamodt AH, Sand T et al (2014) A comparative study of candesartan versus propranolol for migraine prophylaxis: a randomised, triple-blind, placebo-controlled, double cross-over study. Cephalalgia 34(7):523–532PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Owada K (2004) Efficacy of candesartan in the treatment of migraine in hypertensive patients. Hypertens Res 27(6):441–446PubMedCrossRef Owada K (2004) Efficacy of candesartan in the treatment of migraine in hypertensive patients. Hypertens Res 27(6):441–446PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Messina R, Lastarria C, Filippi M, Goadsby PJ (2018) Predicting treatment response to candesartan in migraine patients. Eur J Neurol 25(Suppl 2):112 Messina R, Lastarria C, Filippi M, Goadsby PJ (2018) Predicting treatment response to candesartan in migraine patients. Eur J Neurol 25(Suppl 2):112
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Silberstein SD (2015) Preventive migraine treatment. Continuum 21(4):973–989PubMed Silberstein SD (2015) Preventive migraine treatment. Continuum 21(4):973–989PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Headache Classification Committee of the IHS (2013) The international classification of headache disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). Cephalalgia 33(9):629–808CrossRef Headache Classification Committee of the IHS (2013) The international classification of headache disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). Cephalalgia 33(9):629–808CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Eross EJ, Gladstone JP, Lewis S, Rogers R, Dodick DW (2005) Duration of migraine is a predictor for response to botulinum toxin type A. Headache 45(4):308–314PubMedCrossRef Eross EJ, Gladstone JP, Lewis S, Rogers R, Dodick DW (2005) Duration of migraine is a predictor for response to botulinum toxin type A. Headache 45(4):308–314PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Dominguez C, Pozo-Rosich P, Torres-Ferrus M, Hernandez-Beltran N, Jurado-Cobo C, Gonzalez-Oria C et al (2018) OnabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine: predictors of response. A prospective multicentre descriptive study. Eur J Neurol 25(2):411–416PubMedCrossRef Dominguez C, Pozo-Rosich P, Torres-Ferrus M, Hernandez-Beltran N, Jurado-Cobo C, Gonzalez-Oria C et al (2018) OnabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine: predictors of response. A prospective multicentre descriptive study. Eur J Neurol 25(2):411–416PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Reuter U, Goadsby PJ, Lanteri-Minet M, Wen S, Hours-Zesiger P, Ferrari MD et al (2018) Efficacy and tolerability of erenumab in patients with episodic migraine in whom two-to-four previous preventive treatments were unsuccessful: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b study. Lancet 392(10161):2280–2287PubMedCrossRef Reuter U, Goadsby PJ, Lanteri-Minet M, Wen S, Hours-Zesiger P, Ferrari MD et al (2018) Efficacy and tolerability of erenumab in patients with episodic migraine in whom two-to-four previous preventive treatments were unsuccessful: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b study. Lancet 392(10161):2280–2287PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Ferrari MD, Diener HC, Ning X, Galic M, Cohen JM, Yang R et al (2019) Fremanezumab versus placebo for migraine prevention in patients with documented failure to up to four migraine preventive medication classes (FOCUS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial. Lancet 394(10203):1030–1040PubMedCrossRef Ferrari MD, Diener HC, Ning X, Galic M, Cohen JM, Yang R et al (2019) Fremanezumab versus placebo for migraine prevention in patients with documented failure to up to four migraine preventive medication classes (FOCUS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial. Lancet 394(10203):1030–1040PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Mulleners WM, Kim BK, Láinez MJ, Lanteri-Minet M, Aurora SK, Nichols RM et al (2019) A randomized, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab in patients with treatment-resistant migraine: double-blind results from the CONQUER study. Cephalalgia 39(1S):366 Mulleners WM, Kim BK, Láinez MJ, Lanteri-Minet M, Aurora SK, Nichols RM et al (2019) A randomized, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab in patients with treatment-resistant migraine: double-blind results from the CONQUER study. Cephalalgia 39(1S):366
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Tribl GG, Schnider P, Wober C, Aull S, Auterith A, Zeiler K et al (2001) Are there predictive factors for long-term outcome after withdrawal in drug-induced chronic daily headache? Cephalalgia 21(6):691–696PubMedCrossRef Tribl GG, Schnider P, Wober C, Aull S, Auterith A, Zeiler K et al (2001) Are there predictive factors for long-term outcome after withdrawal in drug-induced chronic daily headache? Cephalalgia 21(6):691–696PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Candesartan in migraine prevention: results from a retrospective real-world study
verfasst von
Roberta Messina
Carlo P. Lastarria Perez
Massimo Filippi
Peter J. Goadsby
Publikationsdatum
15.06.2020
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Journal of Neurology / Ausgabe 11/2020
Print ISSN: 0340-5354
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1459
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-020-09989-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 11/2020

Journal of Neurology 11/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Neurologie

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Neurologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.