MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long‐Term Migraine Prevention With Topiramate: Open‐Label Extension of Pivotal Trials

2006· article· en· W1964880531 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alan M. Rapoport, Alexander Mauskop, Hans‐Christoph Diener, S. Schwalen, J. Pfeil

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopiramateMigrainePlaceboMedicineAuraClinical trialRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaInternal medicineEpilepsyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that topiramate is an effective and generally well-tolerated migraine preventive therapy when used for up to 14 months. BACKGROUND: Topiramate 100 and 200 mg/d significantly reduced mean monthly migraine frequency during 2 large, 26-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. Only a small number of clinical trials have examined the long-term (> or =1 year) effectiveness and safety of migraine preventive therapies. METHODS: Five hundred sixty-seven patients with an established history of migraine with or without aura were enrolled in this 8-month, open-label extension of 2 large (49 US and 52 US and Canadian medical centers), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, 26-week trials of identical design. To be eligible for the open-label extension, patients were required to have either completed the double-blind phase of the 2 pivotal migraine prevention trials or withdrew after 4 weeks due to lack of efficacy. All eligible patients, regardless of type or dose of study medication (topiramate or placebo) received in the double-blind phase, were titrated to a clinically effective dose of open-label topiramate based on physician judgment of patient response. Efficacy of topiramate was measured as the change in mean monthly migraine frequency. RESULTS: The mean topiramate dose during the open-label extension phase was 124.7 mg/d and 150.3 mg/d for patients on placebo (n = 159) or topiramate (n = 408), respectively, during the double-blind phase (N = 567, 91% female, mean age 39.4 years). Patients on topiramate for up to 14 months had 2.2 +/- 2.4 (mean +/- SD) migraines per month after completion of the open-label extension phase (3.4 +/- 2.6 at double-blind endpoint). Patients on topiramate during the open-label extension phase only (placebo during the double-blind phase) had 3.0 +/- 2.9 migraines per month at open-label extension endpoint (4.9 +/- 3.0 migraines per month at double-blind endpoint). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events during the double-blind phase were 22.2% for patients on topiramate and 11.0% for patients on placebo. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events during the open-label extension phase were 8.6% for those patients who had already received topiramate during the double-blind phase and 20.9% for those patients who had previously received placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving topiramate experienced a sustained reduction in migraine frequency for up to 14 months. The effectiveness and safety of topiramate was consistent with that observed during 2 26-week pivotal trials.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations74
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face PainSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207