Lacosamide Versus Propranolol in Migraine

Safety and Efficacy of Lacosamide Versus Propranolol in Migraine

Investigators aim to compare the effect of lacosamide versus propranolol in migraine by assessing the absolute reduction in MMD in each group, the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Migraine Disorders
• Intervention / Treatment: Drug: Lacosamide tablet; Drug: Propranolol

Detailed Description

Investigators will enroll 600 migraine patients who are diagnosed according to ICHD3-beta criteria in our study and will use a questionnaire to detect their demographic and clinical features (disease duration, attack frequency, and duration, pain intensity assessed by the visual analogic scale and we have two groups the first group will include 300 patients and will receive 50 mg lacosamide twice daily, and the second group will receive propranolol 160 mg per day. Investigators will assess The number of migraine days after three months of treatment and the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency (14). HIT-6 score reduction in each group after three months of treatment. The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring and documenting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in patients through regular follow-up procedures for three months.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 600
• Phase: Phase 3

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Egypt
  • Kafr Ash Shaykh, Egypt, 33511
    • Kafr Elsheikh University Hospital

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Naive migraine patients, according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd edition, aged 18-75 years,

Exclusion Criteria:

• Patients with major neurological disorders such as ( epilepsy, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, multiple sclerosis, mitochondrial diseases, brain tumors, and patients with essential tremors.
• patients with major systemic diseases such as malignancy, collagen, liver, and renal diseases.
• patients with cardiovascular diseases like hypertension (systolic blood pressure of more than 130 and/or diastolic blood pressure of more than 85 mm/Hg on at least three different occasions, diabetes (fasting plasma glucose level >126 mg/dl and/or a casual plasma glucose >200 mg/dl and/or HbA1C more than 6.5.
• patients with valvular and ischemic heart diseases, bradycardia or heart blocks, congestive heart failure
• patients who received prophylactic treatment for migraine,
• patients with any contraindications to drugs used in the study
• patients with bronchial asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Double

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: lacosamide arm; The arm will include 300 migraine patients diagnosed according to ICHD3-beta criteria. All patients will receive Lacosamide 50 mg twice daily for 3 months. We will assess The change in migraine days per 28 days, the number of migraine days after three months of treatment, and the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency (14). HIT-6 score reduction in each group after three months of treatment. The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring and documenting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in patients through regular follow-up procedures for three months.	Drug: Lacosamide tablet; The arm will include 300 migraine patients diagnosed according to ICHD3-beta criteria. We will assess The change in migraine days per 28 days, the number of migraine days after three months of treatment, and the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency (14). HIT-6 score reduction in each group after three months of treatment. The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring and documenting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in patients through regular follow-up procedures for three months.
Experimental: Propranolol group; The arm will include 300 migraine patients diagnosed according to ICHD3-beta criteria. All patients will receive propranolol 160 mg once daily for 3 months. We will assess The change in migraine days per 28 days, the number of migraine days after three months of treatment, and the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency (14). HIT-6 score reduction in each group after three months of treatment. The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring and documenting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in patients through regular follow-up procedures for three months.	Drug: Propranolol; The arm will include 300 migraine patients diagnosed according to ICHD3-beta criteria. We will assess The change in migraine days per 28 days, the number of migraine days after three months of treatment, and the percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency (14). HIT-6 score reduction in each group after three months of treatment. The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring and documenting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in patients through regular follow-up procedures for three months.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
The change in migraine days per 28 days	The investigators will assess the change in migraine days per 28 days in each group.	28 days

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
The percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly migraine days frequency compared to the baseline frequency.	We will assess The percentage of patients who achieved ≥ 50% reduction in the monthly headache days frequency compared to the baseline frequency in each group	3 months
HIT-6 score absolute reduction in each group after three months of treatment	The investigators assessed the absolute reduction in HIT6 score, the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) assessed the burden of headache in each group; the HIT-6 consists of six items: pain, social functioning, role functioning, vitality, cognitive functioning, and psychological distress, the patient answers each of the six related questions using one of the following five responses: "never", "rarely", "sometimes", "very often," or "always." These responses are summed to produce a total HIT-6 score that ranges from 36 to 78, where a higher score indicates a greater impact of headache on the daily life of the respondent. It has four impact grades: little-to-no impact (HIT-6 score: 36-49), moderate impact (HIT-6 score: 50-55), substantial impact (HIT-6 score: 56-59), and severe impact (HIT-6 score: 60-78)	3 months
The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) for three months.	The safety of lacosamide was evaluated by monitoring and documenting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in patients through regular follow-up procedures for three months.	3 months
The total number of migraine days after three months of treatment	The investigators will assess the total migraine days after three months of regular use of 50 mg lacosamide twice daily and or propranolol (160 mg once daily).	3 months

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Kafrelsheikh University
• Investigators: Study Director: Mohamed G. Zeinhom, MD, neurology department kafr el-sheikh university; Principal Investigator: sherihan R. Ahmed, MD, neurology department kafr el-sheikh university

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Lipton RB, Scher AI, Kolodner K, Liberman J, Steiner TJ, Stewart WF. Migraine in the United States: epidemiology and patterns of health care use. Neurology. 2002 Mar 26;58(6):885-94. doi: 10.1212/wnl.58.6.885.
• Lipton RB, Liberman JN, Kolodner KB, Bigal ME, Dowson A, Stewart WF. Migraine headache disability and health-related quality-of-life: a population-based case-control study from England. Cephalalgia. 2003 Jul;23(6):441-50. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.2003.00546.x.
• Mushet GR, Miller D, Clements B, Pait G, Gutterman DL. Impact of sumatriptan on workplace productivity, nonwork activities, and health-related quality of life among hospital employees with migraine. Headache. 1996 Mar;36(3):137-43. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.1996.3603137.x.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): June 1, 2022
• Primary Completion (Actual): July 30, 2023
• Study Completion (Actual): August 30, 2023

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: April 30, 2023
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 30, 2023
• First Posted (Actual): May 10, 2023

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): May 1, 2024
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: April 29, 2024
• Last Verified: April 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Propranolol; migraine; lacosamide
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Brain Diseases; Central Nervous System Diseases; Nervous System Diseases; Headache Disorders, Primary; Headache Disorders; Migraine Disorders; Physiological Effects of Drugs; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Adrenergic Antagonists; Adrenergic Agents; Neurotransmitter Agents; Molecular Mechanisms of Pharmacological Action; Anti-Arrhythmia Agents; Antihypertensive Agents; Vasodilator Agents; Membrane Transport Modulators; Anticonvulsants; Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel Blockers; Sodium Channel Blockers; Propranolol; Lacosamide
• Other Study ID Numbers: 112019

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO
• IPD Plan Description: All the data supporting this research's findings may be available from the principal investigator Mohamed G. Zeinhom upon reasonable request.

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No