4.7 Article

Subcutaneous histamine versus sodium valproate in migraine prophylaxis:: a randomized, controlled, double-blind study

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 14, Issue 10, Pages 1079-1084

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2007.01744.x

Keywords

histamine; histaminergic H3-agonists; H3-receptors; migraine prophylaxis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Histamine has a selective affinity for H3-receptors and it may specifically inhibit the neurogenic edema response involved in migraine pathophysiology. The objective of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic potential of subcutaneous administration of histamine in migraine prophylaxis, compared with oral administration of sodium valproate, in an open clinical trial. Ninety-two patients with migraine were selected under criteria established by the International Headache Society and enrolled in a 12-week double-blind controlled clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of subcutaneous administration of histamine (1-10 ng twice a week; n = 46) compared with oral administration of sodium valproate (500 mg daily dose; n = 46). The variables studied were headache intensity, frequency, duration, analgesic intake and migraine disability assessment (MIDAS). Two-tailed Student's t- test was used to compare means and the Mann-Whitney U and ANOVA tests were used. The data collected during the 4th, 8th and 12th weeks of treatment revealed that histamine caused a significantly greater reduction (P < 0.001) in intensity and duration of migraine attacks as well as in analgesic intake. No difference was detected in the frequency of attacks or in MIDAS. The present study provides evidence of the superior efficacy of histamine applied subcutaneously in migraine prophylaxis when compared with sodium valproate taken orally. Subcutaneously applied histamine may represent a novel and effective therapeutic alternative in resistant migraine patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available