An 18th century understanding of migraine - Samuel Tissot (1728-1797)

During the period 1778-1780 the Swiss physician Samuel A A D Tissot (1728-1797) published his Traite des nerfs et de leur maladies, a work which continued to be available and widely influential until at least the middle of the following century. It contained a long chapter dealing with migraine, based on the earlier literature on the topic and on Tissot's own clinical experience. The work appeared at the beginning of the modern era of interest in migraine, and provided the first reasonably adequate and systematic account of the disorder to become widely available. Its descriptions of migraine phenomena have an enduring validity, though Tissot's ideas on the pathogenesis of the disorder, viz. that it usually arose from stomach disturbance, were not founded on satisfactory evidence and are long since superseded. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Ergot of rye - the first specific for migraine

Over the past decade the various triptan derivatives have been accepted as the most effective available agents for relieving migraine attacks. Prior to that, for a period of half a century, ergotamine was the only 'specific' available for this purpose. In 1918, Stoll had isolated it from the various alkaloids present in extracts of the sclerotia of the fungus Claviceps purpurea (ergot), which grow on rye and, to a lesser extent, on other grasses. By 1925 ergotamine was beginning to be used to treat migraine attacks. However, as ergotamine was present in extracts of ergot, which had been used to treat migraine first, In Italy in 1862, and then by Edward Woakes (11868) in England, and after him by Albert Eulenburg in Germany (1883), the drug had actually come into unrecognised use for the disorder more than half a century before ergotamine itself was known to exist. Unfortunately, because of ergotamine's chemical and pharmacokinetic properties, extracts of ergot of rye were incapable of producing consistent therapeutic results, so that general acceptance that the first specific substance for migraine treatment existed had to wait until pure ergotamine was available for administration. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The pathogenesis of migraine - 17th to early 20th Century understandings

The modern understanding of the pathogenesis of migraine, based on the concept that it is a neurovascular disorder, is often thought to have emerged from the work of Harold Wolff in the period 1932-1962. However, over the preceding 300 years, from William Harvey onwards, various hypotheses of the pathogenesis of migraine had been proposed, a few bearing reasonably strong resemblances to Wolff's ideas, though based on less adequate evidence. Many of these earlier hypotheses regarded migraine either primarily as a vascular (e.g., Willis, Wepfer, Latham) or as a neural disorder (e.g., Harvey, Lieving and his 'nerve storms'). There were also variations around these two major themes and in the 19th Century a number of neurovascufar type hypotheses emerged assigning a major role in migraine pathogenesis to the autonomic nervous system. In addition, during the three centuries there were a number of other hypotheses based on different postulated pathogenic mechanisms, some quite ingenious, which had relatively brief vogues. No hypothesis has yet proved capable of explaining all the features of migraine satisfactorily. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Migraine With Aura and Migraine Without Aura Are Not Distinct Entities: Further Evidence From a Large Dutch Population Study

It is often debated whether migraine with aura (MA) and migraine without aura (MO) are etiologically distinct disorders. A previous study using latent class analysis (LCA) in Australian twins showed no evidence for separate subtypes of MO and MA. The aim of the present study was to replicate these results in a population of Dutch twins and their parents, siblings and partners (N = 10,144). Latent class analysis of International Headache Society (IHS)-based migraine symptoms resulted in the identification of 4 classes: a class of unaffected subjects (class 0), a mild form of nonmigrainous headache (class 1), a moderately severe type of migraine (class 2), typically without neurological symptoms or aura (8% reporting aura symptoms), and a severe type of migraine (class 3), typically with neurological symptoms, and aura symptoms in approximately half of the cases. Given the overlap of neurological symptoms and nonmutual exclusivity of aura symptoms, these results do not support the MO and MA subtypes as being etiologically distinct. The heritability in female twins of migraine based on LCA classification was estimated at .50 (95% confidence intervals [0CI} .27 -.59), similar to IHS-based migraine diagnosis (h(2) = .49, 95% Cl .19-.57). However, using a dichotomous classification (affected-unaffected) decreased heritability for the IHS-based classification (h(2) = .33, 95% Cl .00-.60), but not the LCA-based classification (h(2) = .51, 95% Cl. 23-.61). Importantly, use of the LCA-based classification increased the number of subjects classified as affected. The heritability of the screening question was similar to more detailed LCA and IHS classifications, suggesting that the screening procedure is an important determining factor in genetic studies of migraine.