Treatment of medication overuse headache guideline of the efns headache panel
European Journal of Neurology 2011, 18: 1115–1121
Treatment of medication overuse headache – guideline of theEFNS headache panel
S. Eversa and R. JensenbaDepartment of Neurology, University of Mu¨nster, Mu¨nster, Germany; and bDanish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, GlostrupHospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Background: Medication overuse headache is a common condition with a population-
medication overuse head-
based prevalence of more than 1–2%. Treatment is based on education, withdrawal
ache, withdrawal therapy,
treatment (detoxification), and prophylactic treatment. It also includes management of
withdrawal headache
withdrawal headache.
Aims: This guideline aims to give treatment recommendations for this headache.
Received 28 June 2011
Materials and methods: Evaluation of the scientific literature.
Accepted 29 June 2011
Results: Abrupt withdrawal or tapering down of overused medication is recommended,the type of withdrawal therapy is probably not relevant for the outcome of the patient.
However, inpatient withdrawal therapy is recommended for patients overusing opioids,benzodiazepine, or barbiturates. It is further recommended to start individualizedprophylactic drug treatment at the first day of withdrawal therapy or even before. Theonly drug with moderate evidence for the prophylactic treatment in patients withchronic migraine and medication overuse is topiramate up to 200 mg. Corticosteroids(at least 60 mg prednisone or prednisolone) and amitriptyline (up to 50 mg) are pos-sibly effective in the treatment of withdrawal symptoms. Patients after withdrawaltherapy should be followed up regularly to prevent relapse of medication overuse.
Discussion and conclusion: Medication overuse headache can be treated according toevidence-based recommendations.
This guideline aims to give recommendations for the
The classification of the IHS provides diagnostic crite-
treatment of medication overuse headache (MOH) as
ria for chronic headache which is accompanied by the
classified by the International Headache Society (IHS)
overuse of acute headache drugs such as analgesics,
[1]. Although this headache disorder is frequent and a
triptans, and opioids (Table 1). In the first edition of
major problem in the treatment of patients with chronic
the IHS classification, this headache disorder was
headache, placebo- or sham-controlled double-blind
defined as drug-induced headache implicating that the
trials for a specific treatment of this condition are
frequent drug intake itself is the cause of the headache
almost completely missing. Nearly, all published trials
[2]. In the present classification, medication overuse
are underpowered or have a high number of dropouts.
with all its somatic and psychological implications is
Therefore, these guidelines are based on publications
regarded as an association and possibly not the only
with a low level of evidence and on expert consensus. A
cause of chronic headache [1]. However, it has soon
brief clinical description of this potentially preventable
become obvious that some subtypes were missing and
and treatable type of headache disorder is included.
that headache features of MOH cannot be defined ingeneral. Therefore, a revision of these diagnostic crite-ria was published in 2005 [3]. These criteria are validuntil today although a further revision developed for
Correspondence: Prof. S. Evers, MD PhD, Department of Neurology,University of Mu¨nster, Albert-Schweitzer-Str. 33, 48129 Mu¨nster,
research purposes has been published in 2006 [4].
Germany (tel.: +49 251 8348196; fax: +49 251 8348181; e-mail
The purpose of this article is to give recommenda-
tions for the specific management of MOH including
This is a Continuing Medical Education article, and can be found with
the treatment of withdrawal headache. The recom-
corresponding questions on the Internet at http://www.efns.org/EFNS
mendations are based on the scientific evidence from
Continuing-Medical-Education-online.301.0.html. Certificates forcorrectly answering the questions will be issued by the EFNS.
clinical trials and on the expert consensus by the
2011 The Author(s)European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS
S. Evers and R. Jensen
Table 1 Current diagnostic criteria of the International Headache Society for medication overuse headache (MOH)
Diagnostic criteria
A. Headachea present on ‡15 days/month fulfilling criteria C and DB. Regular overuseb for ‡3 months of one or more drugs that can be taken for acute and/or symptomatic treatment of headachecC. Headache has developed or markedly worsened during medication overuseD. Headache resolves or reverts to its previous pattern within 2 months after discontinuation of overused medicationd
aThe headache associated with medication overuse is variable and often has a peculiar pattern with characteristics shifting, even within the sameday, from migraine like to those of tension-type headache.
bOveruse is defined in terms of duration and treatment days per week. What is crucial is that treatment occurs both frequently and regularly, i.e., on2 or more days each week. Bunching of treatment days with long periods without medication intake, practised by some patients, is much less likelyto cause MOH and does not fulfill criterion B.
cMOH can occur in headache-prone patients when acute headache medications are taken for other indications.
dA period of 2 months after cessation of overuse is stipulated in which improvement (resolution of headache, or reversion to its previous pattern)must occur if the diagnosis is to be definite. Prior to cessation, or pending improvement within 2 months after cessation, the diagnosis 8.2.8Probable MOH should be applied. If such improvement does not then occur within 2 months, this diagnosis must be discarded.
8.2.1 Ergotamine-overuse headache
Ergotamine intake on ‡10 days/month on a regular basis for >3 months
8.2.2 Triptan-overuse headache
Triptan intake (any formulation) on ‡10 days/month on a regular basis for >3 months
8.2.3 Analgesic-overuse headache
Intake of simple analgesics on ‡15 days/month on a regular basis for >3 months
8.2.4 Opioid-overuse headache
Opioid intake on ‡10 days/month on a regular basis for >3 months
8.2.5 Combination analgesic-overuse headache
Intake of combination analgesic medicationsa on ‡10 days/month on a regular basis for >3 months
8.2.6 MOH attributed to the combination of acute medications
Intake of any combination of ergotamine, triptans, analgesics, and/or opioids on ‡10 days/month on a regular basis for >3 months withoutoveruse of any single class aloneb
8.2.7 Headache attributed to other medication overuse
Regular overusec for >3 months of a medication other than those described earlier
8.2.8 Probable MOH
A. Headache fulfilling criteria A, C, and D for 8.2 MOH
B. Medication overuse fulfilling criterion B for any one of the subforms 8.2.1–82.7
C. One or other of the following:
1. Overused medication has not yet been withdrawn
2. Medication overuse has ceased within the last 2 months, but headache has not so far resolved or reverted to its previous pattern
aCombination typically implicated are those containing simple analgesics combined with opioids, butalbital, and/or caffeine.
bThe specific subform(s) 8.2.1–8.2.5 should be diagnosed if criterion B is fulfilled in respect of any one or more single class(es) of these medications.
cThe definition of overuse in terms of treatment days per week is probably to vary with the nature of the medication.
respective task force of the EFNS. The definitions of
headache disorders. In addition, a review book was
the recommendation levels follow the EFNS criteria [5].
considered [6].
A literature search was performed using the reference
The development of MOH is mainly reported in
databases MedLine, Science Citation Index, and the
patients with a primary headache disorder such as
Cochrane Library; the key words used were ÔheadacheÕ
migraine and tension-type headache but has also been
together with the term Ômedication overuseÕ or Ôdrug-
reported in smaller series of secondary headaches
inducedÕ (last search in January 2011). All articles
[7–11]. For cluster headache, studies have been pub-
lished showing that these patients can also fulfill the
considered when they described a controlled trial or a
criteria for MOH [12,13]. However, most of these
case report or series on the treatment of one of these
patients had migraine as a comorbid headache or mi-
2011 The Author(s)
European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS European Journal of Neurology 18, 1115–1121
graine in their family history, and many cluster patients
nausea, vomiting, arterial hypotension, tachycardia,
with headache take analgesics, ergotamine derivatives,
sleep disturbances, restlessness, anxiety, and nervous-
or triptans on a daily basis without MOH. Patients with
ness. These symptoms normally last between 2 and
other pain conditions such as rheumatic diseases and no
10 days but can persist for up to 4 weeks. The with-
headache disorder do not develop chronic headache de
drawal headache was shorter in patients having taken
novo when taking analgesics because of their pain
triptans (mean 4.1 days) than ergotamine derivatives
(mean 6.7 days) or NSAIDs (mean 9.5 days) [25].
The population-based 1-year prevalence of MOH in
The outcome of withdrawal therapy in patients with
different countries ranges from 0.7% to 1.7% with a
MOH followed up by a neurologist as compared to a
female preponderance between 62% and 92% [18].
primary care physician did not differ significantly for
The incidence of MOH has not been studied in specific
population-based studies. In a study on episodic
headache days [26]. Therefore, it is suggested that a
migraineurs, the 1-year incidence of chronic headache
primary care physician can follow these patients after
including MOH was 14% [19]. Amongst all patients in
detoxification, which was made in this study in hospital,
headache clinics or centers of tertiary care, patients
as well as a neurologist or a pain specialist.
with MOH are one of the largest patient group. In
With regard to non-pharmacological approaches of
Europe up to 30% and in the USA even more than
treating MOH, combined short-term psychodynamic
50% of the patients in such centers present with MOH
psychotherapy and pharmacological therapy improved
[18,20]. In India, for example, only 3.1% of the
headache in MOH, and the combination of both had
patients in a headache clinic fulfill the criteria for
been superior to pharmacological therapy alone for
reducing long-term relapses and reduction in quality of
In principle, all acute drugs for the treatment of
life in a non-randomized study [27]. In another study,
headache have been described to cause MOH (i.e.,
120 uncomplicated patients with MOH were treated with
ergotamine derivatives, barbiturates, triptans, analge-
three different modalities: (i) only strong advice to
sics both simple and combined, opioids, benzodiaze-
withdraw overused medication; (ii) standard outpatient
pines; possibly also caffeine). Today, simple analgesics
detoxification programme (rapid withdrawal of over-
and triptans are the most frequent drugs taken by
used medication plus oral prednisolone for 8 days plus
patients with MOH [20,22].
personalized prophylactive drugs); (iii) inpatient pro-gramme (rapid withdrawal of overused medication plusoral prednisolone for 8 days plus personalized prophyl-
Withdrawal treatment
active drugs plus parenteral fluid and antiemetics plus
There is evidence, although not overwhelming and
close observation for 8 days). The percentages of
unanimously shown in prospective trials, that with-
patients achieving successful withdrawal and the head-
drawal therapy is the best treatment for MOH.
ache frequency were not different between the groups
However, all experts and headache centers agree that
during the follow-up period of 60 days after withdrawal
withdrawal therapy should be offered to patients with
MOH. The goal of this treatment is not only to detoxify
A direct comparison between inpatient withdrawal
the patients and to stop the chronic headache but also,
and outpatient withdrawal treatment showed that both
probably, to improve responsiveness to acute or pro-
methods revealed a significant decrease in headache
phylactic drugs [23].
days per month after 12 months and a reduction in thescores of migraine disability without superiority of onemethod [29]. Following this study, the outpatient with-
Withdrawal procedure
drawal is less expensive and as successful in a motivated
The recommended procedures for withdrawal of
patient group than inpatient withdrawal. Advantages of
patients with MOH vary, and no study has compared
the inpatient withdrawal are the close monitoring of
abrupt withdrawal treatment with tapered withdrawal
medication intake and the clinical state, professional
in prospective randomized trials. Most headache spe-
psychological support, an immediate treatment of
cialists favor the abrupt discontinuation of pain
withdrawal symptoms, and eventually the administra-
medication under the impression that abrupt with-
tion of intravenous drugs. Overusing opioids, barbitu-
drawal is associated with faster resolution of the drug-
rates, or benzodiazepines, psychological problems,
induced pain-coping behavior [24]. However, tapered
severe medical comorbidities, severe withdrawal symp-
withdrawal seems to be recommendable for opioids, for
toms (e.g., vomiting, status migrainosus), or previous
barbiturates, and for benzodiazepines. Main with-
medication withdrawal failure are reasons for inpatient
drawal symptoms are worsening of the headache,
treatment according to expert consensus or national
2011 The Author(s)European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS European Journal of Neurology 18, 1115–1121
S. Evers and R. Jensen
guidelines [30–32]. However, this recommendation is
patients (between 63% and 69% of all patients in the
not supported by randomized prospective trials.
different treatment arms) is given, the studies give evi-
A recent prospective, multicenter study investigated
dence that onabotulinum toxin A is efficacious in the
three relatively small groups: (i) only personalized pre-
reduction of headache days in MOH. In summary, it is
ventive medication from day 1 (n = 17); (ii) abrupt
suggested that detoxification prior to initiating pro-
withdrawal plus rescue medication (n = 20); (iii) no
phylactic therapy may not be required in all patients
preventive medication plus no advice to stop overused
with MOH [39], whereas other studies support the
drugs (n = 19) [33]. The primary end-point, change in
importance of initial detoxification [20,23,37].
headache days, did, however, not differ significantlybetween all three groups. Because of the more pro-
Treatment of withdrawal headache
nounced reduction in the headache index of the firstgroup in comparison with the second group, there
Because most drugs helpful for the treatment of with-
might be an advantage for a personalized preventive
medication without abrupt withdrawal. In another
corticosteroids were regarded as an option for the
study, advice alone was successful as withdrawal ther-
treatment of withdrawal headache [40,41]. The only
apy in nearly all patients with simple MOH but sig-
controlled, randomized, double-blind study that inves-
nificantly less successful in patients with complicated
tigated oral prednisolone during the first 6 days after
MOH [34]. Further larger, prospective trials are neces-
medication withdrawal revealed no effect on a com-
sary to answer these questions.
bined primary end-point. Of total 97 patients, 49
Studies on a specific preventive therapy of MOH are
received prednisolone (60 mg on days 1 and 2, 40 mg
missing. Therefore, the choice of the preventive agent in
on days 3 and 4, and 20 mg on days 5 and 6) and 48
MOH should be based on the primary headache (e.g.,
placebo [42]. Conversely, a large open-label trial on
migraine vs. tension-type headache), the possible side
patients with chronic daily headache and medication
effects of the drugs, the comorbidities, and the patientÕs
overuse showed that treatment with 60 mg prednisone
preference and previous therapeutic experience. Several
for 2 days and tapering down by 20 mg every other day
open-label trials showed positive effects of different
effectively reduced rebound headache and withdrawal
substances such as valproic acid and topiramate in the
symptoms [43]. Recently, in a small proof-of-concept
prophylactic treatment of chronic daily headache with
study, nine patients each with MOH received either
excessive medication intake. A double-blind trial in
placebo or 100 mg prednisone for 5 days [44]. The
patients with the specific diagnosis of chronic migraine
duration of withdrawal headache was significantly
and medication overuse showed a significant reduction
lower in the prednisone group as compared to the
in the mean number of migraine days per month by
placebo group. Taken these results together, there
topiramate (range 50–200 mg/day) in comparison with
might be an efficacy of corticosteroids on withdrawal
placebo ()3.5 ± 6.3 vs. )0.2 ± 4.7; P < 0.05). How-
symptoms in patients with MOH but high-quality
ever, side effects were reported by 75% of the patients
placebo-controlled trials are needed.
in the topiramate group compared with 37% in the
There are no other controlled trials on the specific
placebo group [35]. The headache reduction was nev-
treatment of withdrawal headache or of other symp-
ertheless not big enough to change the chronic head-
toms during withdrawal therapy. One open study
ache into an episodic form. In a similar study on
suggested the combination of intravenous hydration,
chronic migraine, topiramate achieved a significant
dexamethasone, metoclopramide, and benzodiazepines
reduction in migrainous days per month by 6.4 as
for 7–15 days [41]. Very early studies suggested that
compared to placebo which achieved a reduction by
also (subcutaneous) sumatriptan, naproxen (500 mg),
4.7 days/month [36].
and amitriptyline (10–50 mg) were effective in amelio-
In a large-scale study of 335 patients with MOH from
rating withdrawal headache [40,45,46]. However, all
the Danish Headache centre, where abrupt detoxifica-
these studies were not placebo controlled. Therefore, by
tion was initiated, the headache frequency was reduced
expert consensus, headache drugs and analgesics are
by 67% in migraine patients and by 37% in those with
not recommended for the treatment of headache during
combined migraine and tension-type headache after a 2-
withdrawal therapy except single intravenous adminis-
month observation period without prophylactic medi-
trations in very severe cases.
cation [37]. In a recent project with two large studies onthe efficacy of onabotulinum toxin A in the treatment of
Prognosis of withdrawal therapy
chronic migraine, also patients with medication overusewere treated [38]. Although no specific data on the
The relapse rate of MOH is about 30% (range between
efficacy of onabotulinum toxin in this specific group of
14% and 41%) after 1 year regardless whether inpa-
2011 The Author(s)
European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS European Journal of Neurology 18, 1115–1121
Table 2 Recommendations for the treatment of medication overuse headache (MOH). The level of recommendation is classified as follows
Level A: established as effective, ineffective, or harmful by at least one convincing class I study or at least two consistent, convincing class II studiesLevel B: probably effective, ineffective, or harmful by at least one convincing class II study or overwhelming class III evidenceLevel C: possibly effective, ineffective, or harmful by at least two convincing class III studiesGood practice point: lack of evidence but consensus within the task force
1) Patients with MOH should be offered advice and teaching to encourage withdrawal treatment. (B)2) There is no general evidence whether abrupt or tapering withdrawal treatment should be preferred. For the overuse of analgesics, ergotamine
derivatives, or triptans, abrupt withdrawal is recommended. For the overuse of opioids, benzodiazepines, or barbiturates, tapering down of themedication should be offered. (good practice point)
3) The type of withdrawal treatment (inpatient, outpatient, advice alone) does not influence the success of the treatment and the relapse rate in
4) In patients with opioid, benzodiazepine, or barbiturate overuse, with severe psychiatric or medical comorbidity or with failure of a previous
outpatient withdrawal treatment, inpatient withdrawal treatment should be offered. (good practice point)
5) Individualized preventive medication should be started at the first day of withdrawal treatment or even before if applicable. (C)6) Topiramate 100 mg (up to 200 mg maximum) per day is probably effective in the treatment of MOH. (B)7) Corticosteroids (at least 60 mg prednisone or prednisolone) and amitriptyline (up to 50 mg) are possibly effective in the treatment of withdrawal
symptoms. (good practice point)
8) Patients after withdrawal therapy should be followed up regularly to prevent relapse of medication overuse. (good practice point)
tient, outpatient, or advice alone treatment were
Specific pattern in children and adolescents
applied [18]. Further, the relapse rates do not differsignificantly when a short or a long observation period
Several studies showed that MOH also exists in children
is used, and most studies indicate that the eventual
and adolescents [18]. Population-based epidemiological
relapse occurs at an early stage (i.e., within few months)
studies detected a 1-year prevalence of 0.3–0.5% in
after detoxification. In one study, for example, the
adolescents all of them overusing over the counter
relapse rate was 23% both after 2 months and after
(OTC) analgesics (mainly combined analgesics) [54,55].
1 year in the same sample; [47] in another example, the
Children also benefit from withdrawal therapy [56].
relapse rate was 41% after 1 year and 44% after 4 years
However, only very few data are available on the best
[48]. Overall, the detoxification is fairly successful in
treatment in this age group. One month after with-
most patients, and all patients with MOH should be
drawal therapy, about 53% of all children had a
informed and encouraged to discontinue their overuse.
reduction in headache frequency by more than 90%
In the general population, simple advice regarding
regardless whether they were on preventive medication
MOH was sufficient to result in a successful treatment
or not; the only predictor for a poor outcome after
of MOH in 76% of all patients after 1.5 years [49].
withdrawal therapy was a duration of MOH longer
In an Italian study on different ways of withdrawal
than 2 years [57].
therapy, a long duration of migraine before medicationoveruse, a higher frequency of migraine after with-
drawal therapy, and a greater number of previouspreventive treatments were associated with a higher risk
As described earlier, only very few controlled and/or
for relapse of MOH [50]. In other studies, predictors of
randomized trials are available to give evidence-based
relapse were male sex, intake of combination analgesics
recommendations for the treatment of MOH. There-
after withdrawal therapy, nicotine and alcohol con-
fore, the conclusions of this guideline are of low evi-
sumption, and taking the former medication again after
dence or are good practice points as agreed by expert
withdrawal therapy [51,52]. Recently, use of codeine-
consensus. A summary of our clinical recommendations
containing drugs, low self-reported sleep quality, and
are presented in Table 2.
high self-reported bodily pain as measured by thequality of life tool SF-36 were predictors for a poor
outcome [53]. In some studies, the prognosis was betterfor patients with migraine as the underlying primary
1. Headache Classification Subcommittee. The international
headache disorder than for patients with tension-type
classification of headache disorders. Cephalalgia 2004;24(Suppl. 1): 1–160.
headache and for ergotamine or triptan withdrawal
2. Headache Classification Committee. Classification and
than for analgesic withdrawal [37,48]. It is likely that
diagnostic criteria for headache disorders, cranial neuralgias
the different results in these studies with respect to
and facial pain. Cephalagia 1988; 8(Suppl. 7): 1–96.
predictors of relapse are because of different study
3. Silberstein SD, Olesen J, Bousser MG, et al.; Interna-
designs and different background populations.
tional Headache Society The International Classification
2011 The Author(s)European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS European Journal of Neurology 18, 1115–1121
S. Evers and R. Jensen
of Headache Disorders, 2nd Edition (ICHD-II) – revision
23. Zeeberg P, Olesen J, Jensen R. Discontinuation of medi-
of criteria for 8.2 Medication-overuse headache. Cepha-
cation overuse in headache patients: recovery of thera-
lalgia 2005; 25: 460–465.
peutic responsiveness. Cephalalgia 2006; 26: 1192–1198.
4. Headache Classification Committee. New appendix cri-
24. Rossi P, Jensen R, Nappi G, Allena M; the COMOES-
teria open for a broader concept of chronic migraine.
TAS Consortium. A narrative review on the management
Cephalalgia 2006; 26: 742–746.
of medication overuse headache: the steep road from
5. Brainin M, Barnes M, Baron JC, et al. Guidance for the
experience to evidence. J Headache Pain 2009; 10: 407–
preparation of neurological management guidelines by
EFNS scientific task forces – revised recommendations
25. Katsarava Z, Fritsche G, Muessig M, Diener HC,
2004. Eur J Neurol 2004; 11: 577–581.
Limmroth V. Clinical features of withdrawal headache
6. Olesen J, Goadsby PJ, Ramadan NM, Tfelt-Hansen P,
following overuse of triptans and other headache drugs.
Welch KMA, eds. The Headaches, 3rd edn. Philadelphia:
Neurology 2001; 57: 1694–1698.
Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, 2006
26. Bøe MG, Salvesen R, Mygland A. Chronic daily headache
7. Bauer B, Evers S, Lindo¨rfer HW, Schuierer G, Henning-
with medication overuse: predictors of outcome 1 year
sen H, Husstedt IW. Headache caused by a sphenoid
after withdrawal therapy. Eur J Neurol 2009; 16: 705–712.
mucocele but presenting as an ergotamine-induced head-
27. Altieri M, Di Giambattista R, Di Clemente L, et al.
ache. Headache 1997; 376: 460–462.
Combined pharmacological and short-term psychody-
8. Baandrup L, Jensen R. Chronic post-traumatic headache
namic psychotherapy for probable medication overuse
– a clinical analysis in relation to the International
headache: a pilot study. Cephalalgia 2009; 29: 293–299.
Headache Classification 2nd Edition. Cephalalgia 2005;
28. Rossi P, Di Lorenzo C, Faroni J, Cesarino F, Nappi G.
25: 132–138.
Advice alone vs. structured detoxification programmes for
9. Wolfe S, Van Stavern G. Characteristics of patients pre-
medication overuse headache: a prospective, randomized,
senting with ocular pain. Can J Ophthalmol 2008; 43: 432–
open-label trial in transformed migraine patients with low
medical needs. Cephalalgia 2006; 26: 1097–1105.
10. Cady RK, Schreiber CP. Sinus problems as a cause of
29. Grazzi L, Andrasik F, Usai S, Bussone G. In-patient vs.
headache refractoriness and migraine chronification. Curr
day-hospital withdrawal treatment for chronic migraine
Pain Headache Rep 2009; 13: 319–325.
with medication overuse and disability assessment: results
11. Willer L, Jensen R, Juhler M. Medication overuse as a
at one-year follow-up. Neurol Sci 2008; 29(Suppl. 1): 161–
cause of chronic headache in shunted hydrocephalus
patients. JNNP 2010; 81: 1261–1264.
30. Paemelaire K, Crevitis L, Goadsby PH, Kaube H. Prac-
12. Evers S, Bauer B, Suhr S. Ergotamine-induced headache
tical management of medication overuse headache. Acta
associated with cluster headache. Neurology 1996; 46:
Neurol Belg 2006; 106: 43–51.
31. Obermann M, Katsarava Z. Management of medication
13. Paemeleire K, Bahra A, Evers S, Matharu M, Goadsby
overuse headache. Expert Rev Neurother 2007; 7: 1145–
PJ. Medication-overuse headache in patients with cluster
headache. Neurology 2006; 67: 109–113.
32. Straube A, May A, Kropp P, et al. Therapie prima¨rer
14. Lance F, Parkes C, Wilkinson M. Does analgesic abuse
cause headaches de novo? Headache 1988; 28: 61–62.
chronischer Kopfschmerz vom Spannungstyp und andere
15. Wilkinson SM, Becker WJ, Heine JA. Opiate use to
control bowel motility may induce chronic daily headache
2007; 26: 186–199.
in patients with migraine. Headache 2001; 41: 303–309.
33. Hagen K, Albretsen C, Vilming ST, et al. Management of
16. Bahra A, Walsh M, Menon S, Goadsby PJ. Does chronic
medication overuse headache: 1-year randomized multi-
daily headache arise de novo in association with regular
centre open-label trial. Cephalalgia 2009; 29: 221–232.
use of analgesics? Headache 2003; 43: 179–190.
34. Rossi P, Faroni JV, Nappi G. Short-term effectiveness of
17. Zwart JA, Dyb G, Hagen K, Svebak S, Stovner LJ,
simple advice as a withdrawal strategy in simple and
Holmen J. Analgesic overuse among subjects with head-
complicated medication overuse headache. Eur J Neurol
ache, neck, and low-back pain. Neurology 2004; 62: 1540–
2011; 18: 396–401.
35. Diener HC, Bussone G, Van Oene JC, Lahaye M,
18. Evers S, Marziniak M. Clinical features, pathophysiology,
Schwalen S, Goadsby PJ; TOPMAT-MIG-201(TOP-
and treatment of medication-overuse headache. Lancet
CHROME) Study Group. Topiramate reduces headache
Neurol 2010; 9: 391–401.
days in chronic migraine: a randomized, double-blind,
19. Katsarava Z, Schneeweiss S, Kurth T, et al. Incidence and
placebo-controlled study. Cephalalgia 2007; 27: 814–823.
predictors for chronicity of headache in patients with
36. Silberstein SD, Lipton RB, Dodick DW, et al.; Topira-
episodic migraine. Neurology 2004; 62: 788–790.
mate Chronic Migraine Study Group Efficacy and safety
20. Jensen R, Zeeberg P, Dehlendorff C, Olesen J. Predictors
of topiramate for the treatment of chronic migraine: a
of outcome of the treatment programme in a multidisci-
plinary headache centre. Cephalalgia 2010; 30: 1214–1224.
Headache 2007; 47: 170–180.
21. Ravishankar K. Medication overuse headache in India.
37. Zeeberg P, Olesen J, Jensen R. Probable medication-
Cephalalgia 2008; 28: 1223–1226.
overuse headache: the effect of a 2-month drug-free peri-
22. Bigal ME, Serrano D, Buse D, Scher A, Stewart WF,
od. Neurology 2006; 66: 1894–1898.
Lipton RB. Acute migraine medications and evolution
38. Dodick DW, Turkel CC, DeGryse RE, et al. Onabotuli-
from episodic to chronic migraine: a longitudinal popu-
lation-based study. Headache 2008; 48: 1157–1168.
from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled
2011 The Author(s)
European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS European Journal of Neurology 18, 1115–1121
phases of the PREEMPT clinical program. Headache 2010;
criteria: 1-year follow-up study (CARE I protocol). Cep-
50: 921–936.
halalgia 2009; 29: 233–243.
39. Diener HC, Dodick DW, Goadsby PJ, et al. Utility of
48. Katsarava Z, Muessig M, Dzagnidze A, Fritsche G,
topiramate for the treatment of patients with chronic
Diener HC, Limmroth V. Medication overuse headache:
migraine in the presence or absence of acute medication
rates and predictors for relapse in a 4-year prospective
overuse. Cephalalgia 2009; 29: 1021–1027.
study. Cephalalgia 2005; 25: 12–15.
40. Bonuccelli U, Nuti A, Lucetti C, Pavese N, DellÕAgnello
49. Grande RB, Aaseth K, Benth JSˇ, Lundqvist C, Russell
G, Muratorio A. Amitriptyline and dexamethasone
MB. Reduction in medication-overuse headache after
combined treatment in drug-induced headache. Cepha-
short information. The Akershus study of chronic head-
lalgia 1996; 16: 198–200.
ache. Eur J Neurol 2011; 18: 129–137.
41. Trucco M, Meineri P, Ruiz L, Gionco M; Gruppo Neu-
50. Rossi P, Faroni JV, Nappi G. Medication overuse head-
rologico Ospedaliero Interregionale per lo Studio delle
ache: predictors and rates of relapse in migraine patients
Cefalee (Neurological Hospital Interregional Group for
with low medical needs. A 1-year prospective study.
the Study of Headaches). Medication overuse headache:
Cephalalgia 2008; 28: 1196–1200.
withdrawal and prophylactic therapeutic regimen. Head-
51. Suhr B, Evers S, Bauer B, Gralow I, Grotemeyer KH,
ache 2010; 50: 989–997.
Husstedt IW. Drug-induced headache: long-term results
42. Bøe MG, Mygland A, Salvesen R. Prednisolone does not
of stationary versus ambulatory withdrawal therapy.
reduce withdrawal headache: a randomized, double-blind
Cephalalgia 1999; 19: 44–49.
study. Neurology 2007; 69: 26–31.
52. Sances G, Ghiotto N, Galli F, et al. Risk factors in
43. Krymchantowski AV, Barbosa JS. Prednisone as initial
medication-overuse headache: a 1-year follow-up study
treatment of analgesic-induced daily headache. Cephalal-
(care II protocol). Cephalalgia 2010; 30: 329–336.
gia 2000; 20: 107–113.
53. Bøe MG, Salvesen R, Mygland A. Chronic daily headache
44. Pageler L, Katsarava Z, Diener HC, Limmroth V.
with medication overuse: a randomized follow-up by
Prednisone vs. placebo in withdrawal therapy following
neurologist or PCP. Cephalalgia 2009; 29: 855–863.
medication overuse headache. Cephalalgia 2008; 28:
54. Wang SJ, Fuh JL, Lu SR, Juang KD. Chronic daily
headache in adolescents: prevalence, impact, and medi-
45. Diener HC, Haab J, Peters C, Ried S, Dichgans J, Pilgrim
cation overuse. Neurology 2006; 66: 193–197.
A. Subcutaneous sumatriptan in the treatment of head-
55. Dyb G, Holmen TL, Zwart JA. Analgesic overuse among
ache during withdrawal from drug-induced headache.
adolescents with headache: the Head-HUNT-Youth
Headache 1991; 31: 205–209.
Study. Neurology 2006; 66: 198–201.
46. Hering R, Steiner TJ. Abrupt outpatient withdrawal of
56. Hershey AD. Chronic daily headache in children. Expert
medication in analgesic-abusing migraineurs. Lancet 1991;
Opin Pharmacother 2003; 4: 485–491.
337: 1442–1443.
57. Kossoff EH, Mankad DN. Medication-overuse headache
47. Ghiotto N, Sances G, Galli F, et al. Medication overuse
in children: is initial preventive therapy necessary? J Child
headache and applicability of the ICHD-II diagnostic
Neurol 2006; 21: 45–48.
2011 The Author(s)European Journal of Neurology 2011 EFNS European Journal of Neurology 18, 1115–1121
Source: http://joint-congress-of-european-neurology.org/fileadmin/user_upload/guidline_papers/EFNS_guideline_2011_treatment_of_medication_overuse_headache.pdf
Original Article Frequency of Tumor Lysis Syndrome in Aggressive and Slow Introduction Chemotherapy in Children with ALL Hashemi A 1, Shahvazian N 2, Zarezade A 2, Shakiba M 3, Atefi A 4 1- Department of Pediatrics, Hematology, Oncology and Genetics Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Yazd, Iran 2- General Practitioner , Yazd, Iran 3- Department of Pediatrics, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Yazd, Iran 4- Hematology, Oncology and Genetics Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Yazd, Iran
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY NEWS CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE skilled in the art by totalizing the whole statement in Amendment Requirements of Chinese Patent Applications the originally attached description, etc. If, therefore, an Compared with Those of amendment does not introduce new technical matters in Japanese Patent Applications