ReviewNeurology. Clinical practice2020
Treatment of migraine in patients with CADASIL: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Defining patient-reported outcomes and priorities for clinical trials in CADASIL through an international survey.Cerebral circulation - cognition and behavior · 2026Article
- Long-Term Treatment with the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonist Erenumab in CADASIL: Two Case Reports.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Medical Action Ontology: A tool for annotating and analyzing treatments and clinical management of human disease.Med (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Advances in Management of the Stroke Etiology One-Percenters.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMigraine is a common and often refractory feature for individuals with cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL) without consensus guidelines for treatment. Migraine treatment poses a theoretical risk within this unique population with precarious cerebrovascular autoregulation, given the vasomodulatory influence of many antimigraine medications. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluate the frequency and efficacy of treatments for migraine in individuals with CADASIL.
methodsA search protocol was designed to include all available publications reporting antimigraine therapies for CADASIL. Individual responses to medications were categorized as unfavorable, neutral, or favorable. Responses across medication classes were compared using the Mann-Whitney
resultsThirteen studies were included, yielding a cohort of 123 individuals with a median age of 53 years (range: 23-83 years), with 61% (75/123) being women. No controlled trials were identified. Simple analgesics (35.8%, 44/123) and beta-blockers (22.0%, 27/123) were the most common abortive and prophylactic strategies, respectively. Over half (54.4%) of all patients had used more than 1 medication sequentially or concomitantly. Beta-blockers were significantly associated with a neutral or unfavorable response (13.5%, 22/163,
conclusionsMigraine in CADASIL remains a formidable therapeutic challenge, with patients often tried on several medications. Antimigraine prophylaxis with beta-blockers may be contraindicated relative to other common therapies in CADASIL. Controlled studies are needed to rigorously evaluate the safety and efficacy of antimigraine therapies in this population.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.