N<sup>α</sup>-Methyl Histamine Safety and Efficacy in Migraine Prophylaxis: Phase III Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The histamine catabolite, Nalpha-methylhistamine, possesses a selective affinity for H3 receptors. For this reason, we considered evaluating the efficacy of this histaminergic H3 agonist in migraine prophylactic treatment. OBJECTIVE: To study the therapeutic potential of the subcutaneous administration of Nalpha-methylhistamine in migraine prophylaxis, in a Phase III clinical pharmacological study. METHODS: Using a controlled double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial for 12 weeks, 60 patients with migraine, who fit the criteria established by the International Headache Society, were selected. The efficacy of subcutaneous administration of Nalpha-methylhistamine 1 to 3 ng twice a week against placebo was studied, evaluating the outcome of headache intensity, frequency, duration, and analgesic intake. RESULTS: Comparison between the groups treated with placebo (n=30) and Nalpha-methylhistamine (n=30), on data collected for the 4th, 8th and 12th weeks of treatment, revealed that Nalpha-methylhistamine exerted a significant (p<0.0001) reduction (compared to placebo) in intensity, frequency, and duration of migraine attacks, as well as on the use of analgesic intake. No significant (p>0.05) adverse experiences or side effects developed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides evidence of the efficacy of Nalpha-methylhistamine, given subcutaneously at doses of 1 to 3 ng twice a week, offering a new therapeutic alternative and laying the clinical and pharmacological groundwork for the use of histaminergic H3-agonists in migraine prophylaxis, which may specifically inhibit the neurogenic edema response involved in migraine pathophysiology.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".