Pediatric migraine prevention requires systematic evaluation of multiple therapeutic options, each targeting different pathophysiological mechanisms. Current guidelines recommend preventive therapy when migraines are frequent, severe, and cause significant functional impairment or inadequate acute treatment response.1
Available preventive strategies demonstrate varying efficacy profiles across different patient populations.2 Traditional options including simple analgesics, triptans, ergot alkaloids, antiepileptic drugs, beta-blockers, antihistamines, and tricyclic antidepressants show varied efficacy, and have not all been well-studied in pediatric populations.2 Newer biologic agents targeting neuropeptide pathways and combination therapy with vitamin supplementation offer additional therapeutic mechanisms.2,3 Treatment selection should consider individual patient factors rather than following rigid hierarchical approaches.
Comorbidities play an equally important role in shaping therapeutic decisions. Cardiovascular conditions, sleep disorders, mood disorders, cognitive concerns, and other coexisting health issues can inform whether oral preventives, such as beta-blockers or antiepileptics, may be beneficial, or whether newer biologic agents targeting neuropeptide pathways might provide a better fit.2 Additionally, emerging research shows sex-specific links to migraines that may drive future therapeutic decision-making, including variants in serotonin transporter gene and C677T polymorphisms.2 Past treatment experiences also guide future choices; a lack of benefit with one mechanism does not preclude success with another, highlighting the importance of flexibility in therapeutic sequencing.
Practical considerations further influence treatment planning. Factors such as route of administration, frequency of dosing, and monitoring requirements can weigh heavily in the decision-making process, especially in adolescent populations where adherence is critical. For some families, daily oral medications are acceptable; for others, monthly injections and quarterly infusions each offer distinct advantages for sustained engagement with therapy.4
Ultimately, the expanding preventive landscape emphasizes the need for personalized, rather than prescriptive, approaches. Ongoing comparative effectiveness and health economics research continues to refine how clinicians weigh efficacy, tolerability, quality of life, and healthcare resource utilization when guiding families through available options.4,5
Comparative effectiveness research continues to inform optimal treatment sequencing and combination strategies.2-5 Economic analyses should consider total healthcare costs rather than medication acquisition costs alone, incorporating quality of life and functional outcomes across all therapeutic options.
Take our pediatric migraine quiz to see how your knowledge compares to your peers.
