Other explanations such as stockpiling medications should also be considered. Given the definition of MOH is defined as escalation in migraine associated with increasing use of medication for greater than

3 months, it is difficult to define this patient as having MOH, but this diagnosis cannot be absolutely excluded either. In terms of rescue medication beyond the study medication, during month 1, 7 subjects (2 in group A; 5 in group B) rescued with an antihistamine; 1 an over-the-counter (OTC) analgesic; 2 an opiate agonist. During month 2, 4 subjects (3 in group A; 1 in group B) rescued with an opiate agonist. During month 3, 5 subjects (4 in group A; 1 RG-7388 solubility dmso in group B) rescued with an OTC analgesic; 3 an opiate agonist; 1 a non-opioid analgesic. The same subject in group A used an

opiate agonist as a rescue medication www.selleckchem.com/products/gsk126.html during all 3 months; 4 times in month 1; 6 times in month 2; and once in month 3. There was substantial improvement in total overall MIDAS scores at baseline (visit 2) and at visit 5 for both groups in the per protocol population. The mean score for group A decreased from 76 to 56, whereas the mean score for group B decreased from 81 to 16 (Fig. 6 —). There were 2 serious adverse events (SAEs) reported in this study, but neither was considered to be drug related (Table 3). In group B, one subject was hospitalized for cholecystitis, and another was hospitalized for menorrhagia. Each of the SAEs resolved and both subjects completed the study. Conceivably, menorrhagia could have been worsened by the use of high-dose naproxen sodium, but this was not felt to be the case by the investigator. Both active treatment medications used in the 2 groups were well tolerated. There was no significant difference in adverse events (AEs) between the groups. Total number affected by nonserious adverse event (NSAE) = 15 of 28 (54%) Number affected by NSAE

in group A = 9 of 16 (56%) Number affected by NSAE in group B = 6 of 12 (50%) Total number affected by SAE = 2 of 28 (7%) As a small exploratory pilot study, the results must be medchemexpress interpreted with caution and bear in mind the purpose of this study is to generate hypotheses for further study. It is also paramount to be cognizant of treatments deemed effective in EM cannot be assumed to be effective in CM. It is essential to understand that the evidence base for pharmacological treatment of CM is in its infancy. The results of this study compared the effectiveness of two acute medications used daily and preventively for 1 month followed by using the same 2 acute medications to abort attacks for 2 months. In month 1, when the study medication was used as a daily preventive and, if needed, additionally as an acute intervention, there was a decrease in migraine headache days for both group A and B.