Involvement of the cerebellum in structural connectivity enhancement in episodic migraine.

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of migraine remains poorly understood, yet a growing number of studies have shown structural connectivity disruptions across large-scale brain networks. Although both structural and functional changes have been found in the cerebellum of migraine patients, the cerebellum has barely been assessed in previous structural connectivity studies of migraine. Our objective is to investigate the structural connectivity of the entire brain, including the cerebellum, in individuals diagnosed with episodic migraine without aura during the interictal phase, compared with healthy controls. METHODS: To that end, 14 migraine patients and 15 healthy controls were recruited (all female), and diffusion-weighted and T1-weighted MRI data were acquired. The structural connectome was estimated for each participant based on two different whole-brain parcellations, including cortical and subcortical regions as well as the cerebellum. The structural connectivity patterns, as well as global and local graph theory metrics, were compared between patients and controls, for each of the two parcellations, using network-based statistics and a generalized linear model (GLM), respectively. We also compared the number of connectome streamlines within specific white matter tracts using a GLM. RESULTS: We found increased structural connectivity in migraine patients relative to healthy controls with a distinct involvement of cerebellar regions, using both parcellations. Specifically, the node degree of the posterior lobe of the cerebellum was greater in patients than in controls and patients presented a higher number of streamlines within the anterior limb of the internal capsule. Moreover, the connectomes of patients exhibited greater global efficiency and shorter characteristic path length, which correlated with the age onset of migraine. CONCLUSIONS: A distinctive pattern of heightened structural connectivity and enhanced global efficiency in migraine patients compared to controls was identified, which distinctively involves the cerebellum. These findings provide evidence for increased integration within structural brain networks in migraine and underscore the significance of the cerebellum in migraine pathophysiology.

Efficacy and Safety of Erenumab for Nonopioid Medication Overuse Headache in Chronic Migraine: A Phase 4, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Importance: Patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse headaches (CM-MOH) represent a particularly burdened subpopulation. This trial provides first, to our knowledge, American Academy of Neurology class I evidence for a preventive therapy in CM-MOH. Objective: To assess erenumab efficacy and safety in patients with nonopioid CM-MOH. Design, Settings, and Participants: This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial took place at 67 centers in North America, Europe, and Australia from October 7, 2019, to November 2, 2022. This report reflects the primary analysis conducted in January 2023, using a database snapshot from December 1, 2022, which contains the complete dataset of the double-blind treatment period (DBTP). Participants included adults with CM-MOH who had 1 or more preventive treatment failure(s). There were 992 participants screened and 620 participants enrolled (584 in nonopioid cohort and 36 in opioid cohort). Interventions: Erenumab, 70 mg, 140 mg, or placebo, once monthly for 24 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was MOH remission at month 6. Secondary end points included change from baseline in mean monthly acute headache medication days (AHMD) at month 6 and sustained MOH remission throughout the DBTP. Safety end points were adverse events and changes in vital signs. Results: The primary analysis population included 584 participants in the nonopioid-treated cohort with a mean age of 44 years and 482 participants were female (82.5%). Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were balanced across groups. At month 6, 134 participants in the erenumab, 140 mg group (69.1%) (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.33-3.05; P < .001 vs placebo) and 117 in the erenumab, 70 mg group (60.3%) (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.92-2.05; P = .13 vs placebo) achieved MOH remission vs 102 participants in the placebo group (52.6%). AHMD use was also reduced in the erenumab groups vs placebo. Least squares mean (standard error) change from baseline in average monthly AHMD was -9.4 (0.4) days in the erenumab, 140 mg group (difference from placebo, -2.7; 95% CI, -3.9 to -1.6; P < .001) and -7.8 (0.4) days in the erenumab, 70 mg group (difference from placebo, -1.2; 95% CI, -2.4 to -0.1; P = .03), vs -6.6 (0.4) days in the placebo group. MOH remission throughout the DBTP was sustained in 119 participants (61.3%,) 96 participants (49.5%), and 73 participants (37.6%) in the erenumab, 140 mg, 70 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of erenumab. Treatment-emergent adverse events incidence in the combined erenumab group was 66.8% (259 participants; constipation 15.2% (59 participants) and COVID-19 13.9% (54 participants) were most common. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, monthly, 140 mg, erenumab injections safely and effectively achieved MOH remission in patients with nonopioid CM-MOH within 6 months. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03971071.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical re-appraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention - part 4: propranolol.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to critically re-appraise the published trials assessing propranolol for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We report methods and results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials of pharmacologic treatments for migraine prophylaxis. We included randomized trials that compared propranolol with placebo for migraine prophylaxis in adults. The outcomes of interest were informed by the Core outcome set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) and include the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, the reduction of monthly migraine days, and the number of adverse events leading to discontinuation. We assessed risk of bias by using a modified Cochrane RoB (risk of bias) 2.0 tool and the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our search yielded twenty trials (n = 1291 patients) eligible for data synthesis and analysis. The analysis revealed a moderate certainty evidence that propranolol leads to a reduction in monthly migraine days versus placebo (-1.27; 95% CI: -2.25 to -0.3). We found moderate certainty evidence that propranolol increases the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo with a relative risk of 1.65 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.93); absolute risk difference: 179 more per 1,000 (95% CI 113 to 256). We found high certainty evidence that propranolol increases the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo with a risk difference of 0.02 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.03); absolute risk difference: 20 more per 1,000 (95% CI 0 to 30). CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis shows that propranolol has a prophylactic role in migraine, with an overall acceptable tolerability profile. Combining these results with its long-standing use and its global availability at a low cost confirms its role as a first line agent in the prophylaxis of migraine.

CLOCK gene circannual expression in cluster headache.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache is a primary headache disorder characterized by bouts with circadian and circannual patterns. The CLOCK gene has a central role in regulating circadian rhythms. Here, we investigate the circannual CLOCK expression in a population of cluster headache patients in comparison to matched controls. METHODS: Patients with cluster headache were sampled two to four times over at least one year, both in or outside bouts, one week after each solstice and equinox. The expression of CLOCK was measured by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in the peripheral blood. RESULTS: This study included 50 patients and 58 matched controls. Among the patient population, composed of 42/50 males (84%) with an average age of 44.6 years, 45/50 (90%) suffered from episodic cluster headache. Two to four samples were collected from each patient adding up to 161 samples, 36 (22.3%) of which were collected within a bout. CLOCK expression for cluster headache patients was considerably different from that of the control population in winter (p-value mean = 0.006283), spring (p-value mean = 0.000006) and summer (p-value mean = 0.000064), but not in autumn (p-value mean = 0.262272). For each season transition, the variations in CLOCK expression were more pronounced in the control group than in the cluster headache population. No statistically significant differences were found between bout and non-bout samples. No individual factors (age, sex, circadian chronotype, smoking and coffee habits or history of migraine) were related to CLOCK expression. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that CLOCK expression in cluster headache patients fluctuates less throughout the year than in the control population. Bout activity and lifestyle factors do not seem to influence CLOCK expression.

CGRP-targeted medication in chronic migraine - systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic migraine is a highly debilitating condition that is often difficult to manage, particularly in the presence of medication overuse headache. Drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), or its receptor have shown promising results in treating this disorder. METHODS: We searched Pubmed and Embase to identify randomized clinical trials and real-world studies reporting on the use of medication targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in patients with chronic migraine. RESULTS: A total of 270 records were identified. Nineteen studies qualified for the qualitative analysis. Most studies reported on monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP (anti-CGRP mAbs), that overall prove to be effective in decreasing monthly migraine days by half in about 27.6-61.4% of the patients. Conversion from chronic to episodic migraine was seen in 40.88% of the cases, and 29-88% of the patients stopped medication overuse. Obesity seems to be the main negative predictor of response to anti-CGRP mAbs. There is no evidence to suggest the superiority of one anti-CGRP mAb. Despite the lack of strong evidence, the combination of anti-CGRP medication with onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine is likely to bring benefits for resistant cases. Atogepant is the first gepant to demonstrate a significant decrease in monthly migraine days compared to placebo in a recent trial. Further, anti-CGRP mAb and gepants have a good safety profile. CONCLUSION: There is strong evidence from randomized trials and real-world data to suggest that drugs targeting CGRP are a safe and effective treatment for chronic migraine.

Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with migraine often cycle through multiple nonspecific preventive medications due to poor tolerability and/or inadequate efficacy leading to low adherence and increased disease burden. Objective: To compare the efficacy, tolerability, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction between erenumab and nonspecific oral migraine preventive medications (OMPMs) in patients with episodic migraine (EM) who had previously failed 1 or 2 preventive treatments. Design, Setting, and Participants: The 12-month prospective, interventional, global, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sustained benefit of 2 treatment paradigms (erenumab qm vs oral prophylactics) in adult episodic migraine patients (APPRAISE) trial was a 12-month open-label, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 4 randomized clinical trial conducted from May 15, 2019, to October 1, 2021. This pragmatic trial was conducted at 84 centers across 17 countries. Overall, participants 18 years or older with a 12-month or longer history of migraine, and 4 or more but fewer than 15 monthly migraine days (MMDs) were included. Interventions: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive erenumab or OMPMs. Dose adjustment was permitted (label dependent). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the proportion of patients completing 1 year of the initially assigned treatment and achieving a reduction of 50% or greater from baseline in MMDs at month 12. Secondary end points included the cumulative mean change from baseline in MMDs during the treatment period and the proportion of responders according to the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale at month 12 for patients taking the initially assigned treatment. Results: A total of 866 patients were screened, of whom 245 failed the screening and 621 completed the screening and baseline period. Of the 621 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 41.3 [11.2] years; 545 female [87.8%]; 413 [66.5%] in the erenumab group; 208 [33.5%] in the OMPM group), 523 (84.2%) completed the treatment phase, and 98 (15.8%) discontinued the study. At month 12, significantly more patients assigned to erenumab vs OMPM achieved the primary end point (232 of 413 [56.2%] vs 35 of 208 [16.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% CI, 4.28-9.82; P <.001). Compared with OMPMs, treatment with erenumab showed higher responder rate (314 of 413 [76.0%] vs 39 of 208 [18.8%]; OR, 13.75; 95% CI, 9.08-20.83; P <.001) on the PGIC scale (≥5 at month 12). Significant reduction in cumulative average MMDs was reported with erenumab treatment vs OMPM treatment (-4.32 vs -2.65; treatment difference [SE]: -1.67 [0.35] days; P < .001). Substantially fewer patients in the erenumab arm compared with the OMPM arm switched medication (9 of 413 [2.2%] vs 72 of 208 [34.6%]) and discontinued treatment due to adverse events (12 of 408 [2.9%] vs 48 of 206 [23.3%]). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that earlier use of erenumab in patients with EM who failed 1 or 2 previous preventive treatments provided greater and sustained efficacy, safety, and adherence than continuous OMPM. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03927144.

Impact of truncating diffusion MRI scans on diffusional kurtosis imaging.

OBJECTIVE: Diffusional kurtosis imaging (DKI) extends diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), characterizing non-Gaussian diffusion effects but requires longer acquisition times. To ensure the robustness of DKI parameters, data acquisition ordering should be optimized allowing for scan interruptions or shortening. Three methodologies were used to examine how reduced diffusion MRI scans impact DKI histogram-metrics: 1) the electrostatic repulsion model (OptEEM); 2) spherical codes (OptSC); 3) random (RandomTRUNC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pre-acquired diffusion multi-shell data from 14 female healthy volunteers (29±5 years) were used to generate reordered data. For each strategy, subsets containing different amounts of the full dataset were generated. The subsampling effects were assessed on histogram-based DKI metrics from tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) skeletonized maps. To evaluate each subsampling method on simulated data at different SNRs and the influence of subsampling on in vivo data, we used a 3-way and 2-way repeated measures ANOVA, respectively. RESULTS: Simulations showed that subsampling had different effects depending on DKI parameter, with fractional anisotropy the most stable (up to 5% error) and radial kurtosis the least stable (up to 26% error). RandomTRUNC performed the worst while the others showed comparable results. Furthermore, the impact of subsampling varied across distinct histogram characteristics, the peak value the least affected (OptEEM: up to 5% error; OptSC: up to 7% error) and peak height (OptEEM: up to 8% error; OptSC: up to 11% error) the most affected. CONCLUSION: The impact of truncation depends on specific histogram-based DKI metrics. The use of a strategy for optimizing the acquisition order is advisable to improve DKI robustness to exam interruptions.

Working memory during spontaneous migraine attacks: an fMRI study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the neural correlates of working memory during a spontaneous migraine attack compared to the interictal phase, using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). BACKGROUND: Cognitive disturbances are commonly observed during migraine attacks, particularly in the headache phase. However, the neural basis of these changes remains unknown. METHODS: In a fMRI within-subject test-retest design study, eleven women (32 years of age, average) with episodic migraine were evaluated twice, first during a spontaneous migraine attack, and again in a pain-free period. Each session consisted in a cognitive assessment and fMRI while performing a working memory task (N-back). RESULTS: Cognitive test scores were lower during the ictal session than in the pain-free session. Regions typically associated with working memory were activated during the N-back task in both sessions. A voxel wise between session comparison showed significantly greater activation in the left frontal pole and orbitofrontal cortex during the attack relative to the interictal phase. CONCLUSION: Migraine patients exhibited greater activation of the left frontal pole and orbitofrontal cortex while executing a verbal working memory task during a spontaneous migraine attack when compared to the interictal state. Given the association of these regions with pain processing and inhibitory control, these findings suggest that patients recruit inhibitory areas to accomplish the cognitive task during migraine attacks, a neural signature of their cognitive difficulties.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical reappraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention - part 3: topiramate.

OBJECTIVE: Topiramate is a repurposed first-line treatment for migraine prophylaxis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to critically re-appraise the existing evidence supporting the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate. METHODS: A systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for trials of pharmacological treatment in migraine prophylaxis as of August 13, 2022, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Randomized controlled trials in adult patients that used topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of migraine, with placebo as active comparator, were included. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved studies and extracted all data. Outcomes of interest were the 50% responder rates, the reduction in monthly migraine days, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. Results were pooled and meta-analyzed, with sensitivity analysis based on the risk of bias of the studies, the monthly migraine days at baseline, and the previous use of other prophylactic treatments. Certainty evidence was judged according to the GRADE framework. RESULTS: Eight out of 10,826 studies fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria, accounting for 2,610 randomized patients. Six studies included patients with episodic migraine and two with chronic migraine. Topiramate dose ranged from 50 to 200 mg/day, and all studies included a placebo arm. There was a high certainty that topiramate: 1) increased the proportion of patients who achieved a 50% responder rate in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo [relative risk: 1.61 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-2.01); absolute risk difference: 168 more per 1,000 (95% CI: 80 to 278 more)]; 2) was associated with 0.99 (95% CI: 1.41-0.58) fewer migraine days than placebo; 3) and had a higher proportion of patients with adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation [absolute risk difference 80 patients more per 1,000 (95% CI: 20 to 140 more patients)]. CONCLUSIONS: There is high-quality evidence of the efficacy of topiramate in the prophylaxis of migraine, albeit its use poses a risk of adverse events that may lead to treatment discontinuation, with a negative effect on patient satisfaction and adherence to care.

Rethinking headache as a global public health case model for reaching the SDG 3 HEALTH by 2030.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development sets out, through 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a path for the prosperity of people and the planet. SDG 3 in particular aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages and includes several targets to enhance health. This review presents a "headache-tailored" perspective on how to achieve SDG 3 by focusing on six specific actions: targeting chronic headaches; reducing the overuse of acute pain-relieving medications; promoting the education of healthcare professionals; granting access to medication in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC); implementing training and educational opportunities for healthcare professionals in low and middle income countries; building a global alliance against headache disorders. Addressing the burden of headache disorders directly impacts on populations' health, as well as on the possibility to improve the productivity of people aged below 50, women in particular. Our analysis pointed out several elements, and included: moving forward from frequency-based parameters to define headache severity; recognizing and managing comorbid diseases and risk factors; implementing a disease management multi-modal management model that incorporates pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments; early recognizing and managing the overuse of acute pain-relieving medications; promoting undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing medical education of healthcare professionals with specific training on headache; and promoting a culture that favors the recognition of headaches as diseases with a neurobiological basis, where this is not yet recognized. Making headache care more sustainable is an achievable objective, which will require multi-stakeholder collaborations across all sectors of society, both health-related and not health-related. Robust investments will be needed; however, considering the high prevalence of headache disorders and the associated disability, these investments will surely improve multiple health outcomes and lift development and well-being globally.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical re-appraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention-part 2: flunarizine.

OBJECTIVE: Novel disease-specific and mechanism-based treatments sharing good evidence of efficacy for migraine have been recently marketed. However, reimbursement by insurers depends on treatment failure with classic anti-migraine drugs. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to identify and rate the evidence for efficacy of flunarizine, a repurposed, first- or second-line treatment for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: A systematic search in MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for trials of pharmacological treatment in migraine prophylaxis, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Eligible trials for meta-analysis were randomized, placebo-controlled studies comparing flunarizine with placebo. Outcomes of interest according to the Outcome Set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) were the proportion of patients reaching a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs), and Adverse Events (AEs) leading to discontinuation. RESULTS: Five trials were eligible for narrative description and three for data synthesis and analysis. No studies reported the predefined outcomes, but one study assessed the 50% reduction in monthly migraine attacks with flunarizine as compared to placebo showing a benefit from flunarizine with a low or probably low risk of bias. We found that flunarizine may increase the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo (risk difference: 0.02; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Published flunarizine trials predate the recommended endpoints for evaluating migraine prophylaxis drugs, hence the lack of an adequate assessment for these endpoints. Further, modern-day, large-scale studies would be valuable in re-evaluating the efficacy of flunarizine for the treatment of migraines, offering additional insights into its potential benefits.

Altered functional connectivity in a sensorimotor-insular network during spontaneous migraine attacks: A resting-state FMRI study.

BACKGROUND: Previous functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have identified brain-connectivity alterations across multiple regions in people with migraine when compared to healthy controls. Few studies have focused on such changes throughout the different phases of the migraine cycle. We aimed to investigate functional connectivity during spontaneous occurring episodic migraine attacks, in comparison to interictal periods. METHODS: Eleven women with episodic migraine without aura underwent two sessions of resting-state fMRI, during and outside of a spontaneous migraine attack. Functional connectivity changes were assessed across canonical resting-state networks, identified by independent component analysis. Significantly altered connectivity was correlated with migraine attack symptoms. RESULTS: Decreased functional connectivity between subregions of the sensorimotor network (specifically, the primary somatosensory and motor cortices) and the posterior insula, bilaterally, was found during attacks. In both sessions, the functional connectivity between these regions was lower in patients who usually suffered longer attacks. DISCUSSION: The sensorimotor and insular regions are involved in nociceptive, autonomic, and somatosensory processing so the finding of reduced connectivity between these structures within a migraine attack is likely associated to the perception of pain and the heighten sensitivity to stimuli experienced in this disorder.

Impact of susceptibility-induced distortion correction on perfusion imaging by pCASL with a segmented 3D GRASE readout.

PURPOSE: The consensus for the clinical implementation of arterial spin labeling (ASL) perfusion imaging recommends a segmented 3D Gradient and Spin-Echo (GRASE) readout for optimal signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR). The correction of the associated susceptibility-induced geometric distortions has been shown to improve diagnostic precision, but its impact on ASL data has not been systematically assessed and it is not consistently part of pre-processing pipelines. Here, we investigate the effects of susceptibility-induced distortion correction on perfusion imaging by pseudo-continuous ASL (pCASL) with a segmented 3D GRASE readout. METHODS: Data acquired from 28 women using pCASL with 3D GRASE at 3T was analyzed using three pre-processing options: without distortion correction, with distortion correction, and with spatial smoothing (without distortion correction) matched to control for blurring effects induced by distortion correction. Maps of temporal SNR (tSNR) and relative perfusion were analyzed in eight regions-of-interest (ROIs) across the brain. RESULTS: Distortion correction significantly affected tSNR and relative perfusion across the brain. Increases in tSNR were like those produced by matched spatial smoothing in most ROIs, indicating that they were likely due to blurring effects. However, that was not the case in the frontal and temporal lobes, where we also found increased relative perfusion with distortion correction even compared with matched spatial smoothing. These effects were found in both controls and patients, with no interactions with the participant group. CONCLUSION: Correction of susceptibility-induced distortions significantly impacts ASL perfusion imaging using a segmented 3D GRASE readout, and this step should therefore be considered in ASL pre-processing pipelines. This is of special importance in clinical studies, reporting perfusion across ROIs defined on relatively undistorted images and when conducting group analyses requiring the alignment of images across different subjects.

The comparative effectiveness of migraine preventive drugs: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: While there are several trials that support the efficacy of various drugs for migraine prophylaxis against placebo, there is limited evidence addressing the comparative safety and efficacy of these drugs. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to facilitate comparison between drugs for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to August 13, 2022, for randomized trials of pharmacological treatments for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to screen references, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and rated the certainty (quality) of evidence as either high, moderate, low, or very low using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We identified 74 eligible trials, reporting on 32,990 patients. We found high certainty evidence that monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene related peptide or its receptor (CGRP(r)mAbs), gepants, and topiramate increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo. We found moderate certainty evidence that beta-blockers, valproate, and amitriptyline increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, and low certainty evidence that gabapentin may not be different from placebo. We found high certainty evidence that, compared to placebo, valproate and amitriptyline lead to substantial adverse events leading to discontinuation, moderate certainty evidence that topiramate, beta-blockers, and gabapentin increase adverse events leading to discontinuation, and moderate to high certainty evidence that (CGRP(r)mAbs) and gepants do not increase adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: (CGRP(r)mAbs) have the best safety and efficacy profile of all drugs for migraine prophylaxis, followed closely by gepants.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical re-appraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention-part 1: amitriptyline.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to critically re-appraise the published trials assessing amitriptyline for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We report our methods and results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials of pharmacologic treatments for migraine prophylaxis. We included randomized trials that compared amitriptyline with placebo for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Our outcomes of interest were informed by the Outcome Set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) and include the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in migraine days per month, migraine days per month, and adverse events leading to discontinuation. We assessed risk of bias by using a modified Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool and the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our search yielded 10.826 unique records, of which three trials (n = 622) were eligible for data synthesis and analysis. We found moderate certainty evidence that amitriptyline increases the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo (relative risk: 1.60 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.19); absolute risk difference: 165 more per 1,000 (95% CI 47 more to 327 more). We found moderate certainty evidence that amitriptyline increases the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo (risk difference: 0.05 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.10); absolute risk difference: 50 more per 1,000 (95% CI 10 more to 100 more). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that amitriptyline may have a prophylactic role in migraine patients, however these results are far from robust. This warrants further large-scale research to evaluate the role of amitriptyline in migraine prevention.

Cranial Autonomic Symptoms and Neck Pain in Differential Diagnosis of Migraine.

Cranial autonomic symptoms and neck pain have been reported to be highly prevalent in migraine, although they are rarely considered in clinical evaluation. The aim of this review is to focus on the prevalence, pathophysiology, and clinical characteristics of these two symptoms, and their importance in the differential diagnosis between migraines and other headaches. The most common cranial autonomic symptoms are aural fullness, lacrimation, facial/forehead sweating, and conjunctival injection. Migraineurs experiencing cranial autonomic symptoms are more likely to have more severe, frequent, and longer attacks, as well as higher rates of photophobia, phonophobia, osmophobia, and allodynia. Cranial autonomic symptoms occur due to the activation of the trigeminal autonomic reflex, and the differential diagnosis with cluster headaches can be challenging. Neck pain can be part of the migraine prodromal symptoms or act as a trigger for a migraine attack. The prevalence of neck pain correlates with headache frequency and is associated with treatment resistance and greater disability. The convergence between upper cervical and trigeminal nociception via the trigeminal nucleus caudalis is the likely mechanism for neck pain in migraine. The recognition of cranial autonomic symptoms and neck pain as potential migraine features is important because they often contribute to the misdiagnosis of cervicogenic problems, tension-type headache, cluster headache, and rhinosinusitis in migraine patients, delaying appropriate attack and disease management.

European Headache Federation (EHF) consensus on the definition of effective treatment of a migraine attack and of triptan failure.

BACKGROUND: Triptans are migraine-specific acute treatments. A well-accepted definition of triptan failure is needed in clinical practice and for research. The primary aim of the present Consensus was to provide a definition of triptan failure. To develop this definition, we deemed necessary to develop as first a consensus definition of effective treatment of an acute migraine attack and of triptan-responder. MAIN BODY: The Consensus process included a preliminary literature review, a Delphi round and a subsequent open discussion. According to the Consensus Panel, effective treatment of a migraine attack is to be defined on patient well-being featured by a) improvement of headache, b) relief of non-pain symptoms and c) absence of adverse events. An attack is considered effectively treated if patient's well-being, as defined above, is restored within 2 hours and for at least 24 hours. An individual with migraine is considered as triptan-responder when the given triptan leads to effective acute attack treatment in at least three out of four migraine attacks. On the other hand, an individual with migraine is considered triptan non-responder in the presence of failure of a single triptan (not matching the definition of triptan-responder). The Consensus Panel defined an individual with migraine as triptan-resistant in the presence of failure of at least 2 triptans; triptan refractory, in the presence of failure to at least 3 triptans, including subcutaneous formulation; triptan ineligibile in the presence of an acknowledged contraindication to triptan use, as specified in the summary of product characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The novel definitions can be useful in clinical practice for the assessment of acute attack treatments patients with migraine. They may be helpful in identifying people not responding to triptans and in need for novel acute migraine treatments. The definitions will also be of help in standardizing research on migraine acute care.

Gestational exposure to erenumab-The outcome of three pregnancies.

Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody (mAb) approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. While preclinical studies on calcitonin gene-related peptide mAbs did not identify any reproductive toxicity, pregnant and breastfeeding women were excluded from the pivotal human studies, and therefore the safety of calcitonin gene-related peptide medications in this population must be studied. So far, postmarketing data of accidental exposures have not brought to light any specific toxicities. Three women treated with erenumab in our series conceived while exposed to the drug. All had previous successful pregnancies, were on erenumab for more than 6 months, and had ≥80% reduction in headache frequency. The one who stopped erenumab only 1 month before conceiving had a spontaneous abortion during the first trimester due to a gestational trophoblastic neoplasia and has since conceived with an uneventful gestation. The other two women stopped treatment during the first trimester, and both pregnancies went to term with no complications. All babies have shown normal development. No plausible explanation relates the mechanism of action of erenumab and the serious complication that occurred in one patient. Continuous follow-up and reporting of all exposures are encouraged to gather safety data on pregnant and nursing women and on the development of the newborns. So far, immediately stopping the drug is advised and may contribute to decreasing the potential risks.

Use of Non-pharmacological Therapies in Individuals With Migraine Eligible for Treatment With Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-Signaling: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

Introduction: Accessibility of treatment with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) signaling pathway is impeded by regulatory restrictions. Affected individuals may seek out other services including non-pharmacological therapies. Thus, we found it timely to ascertain the use of non-pharmacological therapies in individuals with treatment-resistant migraine eligible for and naïve to treatment with CGRP-signaling targeting monoclonal antibodies. Methods: We conducted a single-center cross-sectional observational study of patients eligible for and naïve to treatment with monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor. We recorded demographical information (gender, age, educational level, employment status, and income), disease burden (frequency of headache days and migraine days), previous use of preventive pharmacological medications for migraine, and use of non-pharmacological therapies over the past 3 months including frequency of interventions, costs, and patient-reported assessment of efficacy on a 6-point scale (0: no efficacy, 5: best possible efficacy). Results: We included 122 patients between 17 June 2019 and 6 January 2020; 101 (83%) were women and the mean age was 45.2 ± 13.3 years. One-third (n = 41 [34%]) had used non-pharmacological therapy within the past 3 months. Among these participants, the median frequency of different interventions was 1 (IQR: 1-2), the median number of monthly visits was 2.3 (IQR: 1.3-4), mean and median monthly costs were 1,086 ± 1471, and 600 (IQR: 0-1200) DKK (1 EUR = ~7.5 DKK), respectively, and median patient-reported assessment of the efficacy of interventions was 2 (IQR: 0-3). Conclusion: Even in a high-income country with freely accessible headache services and universal healthcare coverage, there was a non-negligible direct cost in parallel with low satisfaction for non-pharmacological therapies among patients at a tertiary headache center.