Evidence Hub

Meta-analysis of the relationship between multiple sclerosis and migraine

Pakpoor J, Handel AE, Giovannoni G, Dobson R, Ramagopalan SV

PloS one, 2012

261,563 participants · 73 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies investigating a proposed association between multiple sclerosis (MS) and migraine have produced conflicting results and a great range in the prevalence rate of migraine in MS patients. By meta-analysing all available data we aimed to establish an overall estimate of any association in order to more accurately inform clinicians and care-givers about a potential association between MS and migraine.

METHODS: Pubmed and EMBASE were searched to identify suitable studies. Studies were included if they were a case-control study or cohort study in which controls were not reported to have another neurological condition, were available in English, and specified migraine as a headache sub-type. The odds ratio (OR) of migraine in MS patients vs. controls was calculated using the inverse variance with random effects model in Review Manager 5.1.

RESULTS: Eight studies were selected for inclusion, yielding a total of 1864 MS patients and 261563 control subjects. We found a significant association between migraine and MS (OR = 2.60, 95% CI 1.12-6.04), although there was significant heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis showed that migraine without aura was associated with MS OR = 2.29 (95% CI 1.14-4.58), with no significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS: MS patients are more than twice as likely to report migraine as controls. Care providers should be alerted to ask MS patients about migraine in order to treat it and potentially improve quality of life. Future work should…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 261,563 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free