PACAP-38 and sex hormones in women with migraine: exploratory analysis of a cross-sectional, matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Endogeneous and exogeneous sex hormones can impact the frequency and severity of migraine attacks, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. In this study, we investigate the relationship between female sex hormones and Pituitary Adenylate Cyclase-Activating Polypeptide-38 (PACAP-38) concentrations in plasma of women with migraine and healthy controls, aiming to elucidate potential hormonal influences on PACAP dynamics and their relevance to migraine pathophysiology. METHODS: This analysis is part of a cross-sectional, matched-cohort study. We recruited two groups of women with episodic migraine: one with a regular menstrual cycle (M-RMC) and another undergoing combined oral contraceptive treatment (M-COC). Additionally, we included corresponding age-matched control groups without migraine for both categories (C-RMC and C-COC). For participants with a RMC, the study visits were scheduled during the perimenstrual period (menstrual cycle day 2 ± 2) and periovulatory period (day 13 ± 2). Participants using COC were examined at day 4 ± 2 of the hormone-free interval and between day 7-14 of the hormone intake phase. During these visits, PACAP-38 concentrations in plasma were measured using a commercial Enzyme-linked-immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kit. RESULTS: The study included 120 women, with 30 participants in each group. Women with migraine and a RMC had significantly higher PACAP-38 plasma concentrations compared to healthy controls at both study visits [day 2 ± 2: M-RMC: 2547.41 pg/ml (IQR 814.27 - 4473.48) vs. C-RMC: 1129.49 pg/ml (IQR 257.34 - 2684.88), p = 0.025; day 13 ± 2: M-RMC: 3098.89 pg/ml (IQR 1186.29 - 4379.47) vs. C-RMC: 1626.89 (IQR 383.83 - 3038.36), p = 0.028]. In contrast, PACAP-38 levels were comparable between migraine and control groups receiving COC. Women with migraine and a RMC exhibited higher PACAP-38 concentrations during menstruation compared to those using COC during the hormone-free interval. CONCLUSION: Systemic PACAP-38 concentrations in women vary based on the presence of migraine diagnosis and their hormonal status.

Open-label trials for CGRP-targeted drugs in migraine prevention: A narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted drugs have proven safe and effective for migraine prevention in large randomized-controlled, double-blind trials with an average duration of six months. Open-label studies may provide additional information on the long-term safety and efficacy of these substances. METHODS: We searched PubMed for open-label trials with calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies and calcitonin gene-related peptide-receptor antagonists. We summarized and critically analyzed the literature in a narrative way. RESULTS: Overall, 13 open-label trials were included in this review (n = 4 for erenumab, n = 4 for galcanezumab, n = 3 for fremanezumab, n = 1 for eptinezumab, n = 1 for atogepant). Open-label trial duration ranged between 12 and 264 weeks. No safety concerns emerged, and the adverse events profile was similar to the double-blind study phase. Discontinuation rates were generally low with >75% of patients remaining in the trials after one year. Efficacy data showed a sustained reduction of migraine frequency throughout the trials, along with a lasting improvement in quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The open-label study program for calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted migraine preventives confirms the favorable safety and efficacy profile of these drugs over time. Treatment adherence appears higher than with previous unspecific migraine preventives. Real-world data and post-marketing surveillance studies may corroborate and complement open-label results.

Clinical evaluation of super-responders vs. non-responders to CGRP(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies: a real-world experience.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials and real-world studies revealed a spectrum of response to CGRP(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in migraine prophylaxis, ranging from no effect at all to total migraine freedom. In this study, we aimed to compare clinical characteristics between super-responders (SR) and non-responders (NR) to CGRP(-receptor) mAbs. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at the Headache Center, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The definition of super-response was a ≥ 75% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD) in the third month after treatment initiation compared to the month prior to treatment begin (baseline). Non-response was defined as ≤ 25% reduction in MHD after three months of treatment with a CGRP-receptor mAb and subsequent three months of treatment with CGRP mAb, or vice versa. We collected demographic data, migraine disease characteristics, migraine symptoms during the attacks in both study groups (SR/NR) as well as the general medical history. SR and NR were compared using Chi-square test for categorical variables, and t-test for continuous variables. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and June 2022, n = 260 patients with migraine received preventive treatment with CGRP(-receptor) mAbs and provided complete headache documentation for the baseline phase and the third treatment month. Among those, we identified n = 29 SR (11%) and n = 26 NR (10%). SR reported more often especially vomiting (SR n = 12/25, 48% vs. NR n = 4/22, 18%; p = 0.031) and typical migraine characteristics such as unilateral localization, pulsating character, photophobia and nausea. A subjective good response to triptans was significantly higher in SR (n = 26/29, 90%) than in NR (n = 15/25, 60%, p = 0.010). NR suffered more frequently from chronic migraine (NR n = 24/26, 92% vs. SR n = 15/29, 52%; p = 0.001), medication overuse headache (NR n = 14/24, 58% versus SR n = 8/29, 28%; p = 0.024), and concomitant depression (NR n = 17/26, 65% vs. SR n = 8/29, 28%; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Several clinical parameters differ between SR and NR to prophylactic CGRP(-R) mAbs. A thorough clinical evaluation prior to treatment initiation might help to achieve a more personalized management in patients with migraine.

Migraine evolution after the cessation of CGRP(-receptor) antibody prophylaxis: a prospective, longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines recommend stopping migraine prophylaxis with CGRP(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies after 6-12 months of successful therapy. In this study, we aimed to analyze the course of migraine for four months after the cessation of CGRP(-receptor) antibodies use. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study included patients with migraine who received a CGRP-(receptor) antibody for ≥8 months before treatment cessation. We analyzed headache data in the four-week period prior to mAb treatment initiation (baseline), in the month before the last mAb injection, in weeks 5-8 and 13-16 after last treatment. Primary endpoint of the study was the change of monthly migraine days from the month before last treatment to weeks 13-16. Secondary endpoints were changes in monthly headache days and monthly days with acute medication use. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients equally distributed between prophylaxis with the CGRP-receptor antibody erenumab and the CGRP antibodies galcanezumab or fremanezumab participated in the study. Patients reported 8.2 ± 6.6 monthly migraine days in the month before last treatment. Monthly migraine days gradually increased to 10.3 ± 6.8 in weeks 5-8 (p = 0.001) and to 12.5 ± 6.6 in weeks 13-16 (p < 0.001) after drug cessation. Monthly migraine days in weeks 13-16 were not different from baseline values (-0.8 ± 5.4; p > 0.999). Monthly headache days and monthly days with acute medication use showed a similar pattern. CONCLUSIONS: The cessation of CGRP(-receptor) antibodies migraine prophylaxis was associated with a significant increase of migraine frequency and acute medication intake over time.

Resumption of migraine preventive treatment with CGRP(-receptor) antibodies after a 3-month drug holiday: a real-world experience.

BACKGROUND: Migraine frequency increases after the cessation of successful preventive treatment with CGRP(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the course of migraine after treatment resumption. METHODS: Patients with migraine, who started treatment with the same CGRP(-R) mAb after a three-month drug holiday were included in this analysis. We collected headache data at four prospective visits: 1) during the four weeks before the initial mAb treatment (baseline); 2) during the four weeks before the last mAb injection; 3) in weeks 13-16 of the drug holiday; 4) in weeks 9-12 after treatment restart. Outcomes were the changes in monthly migraine days (MMD), monthly headache days (MHD), monthly days with acute medication use (AMD) and Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) scores across the observation period. RESULTS: This study included 39 patients (erenumab n = 16; galcanezumab/ fremanezumab n = 23). MMD decreased from 12.3 ± 6.3 at the end of the drug holiday to 7.8 ± 5.5 three months after treatment restart (p = 0.001). The improvement after treatment resumption was similar to the response in the initial treatment period (baseline: 12.3 ± 6.3 MMD vs. 7.5 ± 5.2 MMD before treatment interruption). MHD and AMD showed a significant improvement after treatment restart. HIT-6 scores decreased, indicating a diminished impact of headache on everyday life. CONCLUSIONS: Reinitiation of treatment with CGRP(-R) mAbs after a drug holiday leads to a significant reduction of migraine frequency and medication use as well as improvement in quality of life.

Headache onset after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features. METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1st 2020 and August 6th, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset. RESULTS: Out of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18-27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23-35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10-12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40-60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.

Patients' and Health Care Workers' Perception of Migraine Images on the Internet: Cross-sectional Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: The representation of migraine in the media is stereotypical. Standard images of migraine attacks display stylish young women holding their head in a pain pose. This representation may contribute to the social stigmatization of patients with migraine. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to analyze how patients with migraine and health care workers perceive online images of migraine. METHODS: The study consisted of an anonymous web-based survey of patients with migraine at the Headache Center of Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin (migraine group) and employees and students at our university (health care group). A total of 10 frequently used Adobe Stock photos of migraine attacks were presented to the participants. Each photo was rated on a scale of 0% to 100% based on how closely it resembled a realistic migraine attack (realism score). Patients with migraine also indicated how much each photo corresponded to their own experience of migraine as a percentage (representation score). We calculated the mean realism and representation scores for all photos and conducted further analyses using the categories male or female models, younger or older models, and unilateral or bilateral pain pose. RESULTS: A total of 367 patients with migraine and 331 health care employees and students completed the survey. In both groups, the mean realism score was <50% (migraine group: 47.8%, SD 18.3%; health care group: 46.0%, SD 16.2%). Patients with migraine identified their own migraine experience in these photos to a lesser degree (mean representation score 44.4%, SD 19.8%; P<.001 when compared to the realism score). Patients and health care workers considered photos with male models to be more realistic than photos with females (P<.001) and photos with older models to be more realistic than those with younger people (P<.001). In the health care group only, a bilateral pain posture was deemed more realistic than a unilateral pose (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Standard images of migraine attacks are considered only slightly or moderately realistic by patients and health care workers. Some characteristics perceived as more realistic such as male sex or older age are in contrast with migraine epidemiology. A more accurate representation of migraine in the media could help to raise awareness for migraine and reduce the associated stigma.

Deterioration of headache impact and health-related quality of life in migraine patients after cessation of preventive treatment with CGRP(-receptor) antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Migraine preventive treatment with CGRP(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has a positive effect on patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The German treatment guidelines recommend discontinuing successful treatment with CGRP(-receptor) mAbs after 6-12 months. We aimed to evaluate headache-specific and generic HRQoL for three months after discontinuation of CGRP(-receptor) mAb treatment. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, longitudinal cohort study, including patients with migraine after 8-12 months of therapy with a CGRP(-R) mAb and before a planned discontinuation attempt. HRQoL was assessed at the time of the last mAbs injection (V1), eight weeks later (V2), and sixteen weeks later (V3). For headache-specific HRQoL, we used the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6). Generic HRQoL was determined with the EuroQol-5-Dimension-5-Level (ED-5D-5L) form, and the Short-Form 12 (SF-12), which comprises a Physical Component Summary (PCS-12) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS-12). Questionnaires' total scores were compared across the three observation points using nonparametric procedures. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of n = 61 patients (n = 29 treated with the CGRP-receptor mAb erenumab and n = 32 with the CGRP mAbs galcanezumab or fremanezumab). The HIT-6 sum score was 59.69 ± 6.90 at V1 and increased by 3.69 ± 6.21 at V3 (p < 0.001), indicating a greater headache impact on patients' lives. The mean total EQ-D5-L5 score declined from 0.85 ± 0.17 at V1 by - 0.07 ± 0.18 at V3 (p = 0.013). Both Mental and Physical Component Scores of the SF-12 worsened significantly during treatment discontinuation: The PCS-12 total score decreased by - 4.04 ± 7.90 from V1 to V3 (p = 0.013) and the MCS-12 score by - 2.73 ± 9.04 (p = 0.003). Changes in all questionnaires' scores but the MCS-12 were already significant in the first month of the drug holiday (V2). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a significant decline in headache impact and generic HRQoL of migraine patients after treatment discontinuation of a CGRP(-R) mAb. The observed deterioration is above the established minimally clinically important differences for each of the questionnaires and can therefore be considered clinically meaningful. Monitoring HRQoL during a discontinuation attempt could facilitate the decision whether or not to resume preventive treatment with CGRP(-R) mAbs.

Change of CGRP Plasma Concentrations in Migraine after Discontinuation of CGRP-(Receptor) Monoclonal Antibodies.

Discontinuation of treatment with monoclonal antibodies (mAb) targeting the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) pathway leads to an increase in migraine frequency. We aimed to assess changes in free and total CGRP plasma concentrations after the discontinuation of CGRP(-receptor) mAbs. This prospective analysis included 59 patients with migraine (n = 25 erenumab, n = 25 galcanezumab, n = 9 fremanezumab) who discontinued mAbs after ≥8 months of treatment. Patients were visited at the time of the last mAb injection (V1) and 16 weeks later (V2). For control, 30 migraine patients without preventive drug therapy were included. We measured free CGRP plasma concentrations in the erenumab and fremanezumab group and total CGRP concentrations in the galcanezumab group. Free CGRP plasma concentrations did not change after treatment discontinuation [erenumab: V1 31.2 pg/mL (IQR 25.8−45.6), V2 30.3 pg/mL (IQR 22.9−47.6), p = 0.65; fremanezumab V1 29.4 pg/mL (IQR 16.4−61.9), V2 34.4 (19.2−62.0), p = 0.86]. Controls had similar CGRP values of 32.6 pg/mL (IQR 21.3−44.6). Total CGRP concentrations in the galcanezumab group were 5439.3 pg/mL (2412.7−6338.1) at V1, and decreased to 1853.2 pg/mL (1136.5−3297.0) at V2 (p < 0.001). Cessation of treatment with CGRP(-R) mAbs did not have an impact on the free-circulating CGRP concentrations. Total CGRP decreased significantly after three months of treatment discontinuation.

Migraine and Hormonal Contraception in Gynecological Outpatient Care-Cross-Sectional Study among Practicing Gynecologists in Germany.

Hormonal contraception (HC) can influence the migraine burden and should be considered in the comprehensive management of women with migraine. In this study, we aim to investigate the influence of migraine and migraine aura on the prescribing behavior of combined oral contraception (COC) and progestogen monotherapy (PM) in gynecological outpatient care. From October 2021 to March 2022, we performed an observational, cross-sectional study using a self-administered online-based survey. The questionnaire was distributed by mail and e-mail among 11,834 practicing gynecologists in Germany using the publicly available contact information. A total of 851 gynecologists responded to the questionnaire, of whom 12% never prescribe COC in the presence of migraine. Further 75% prescribe COC depending on the presence of limiting factors such as cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. When deciding to start PM, migraine appears to be less relevant, as 82% prescribe PM without restrictions. In the presence of aura, 90% of gynecologists do not prescribe COC at all, while PM is prescribed in 53% without restrictions. Almost all gynecologists reported to be actively involved in migraine therapy by having already initiated (80%), discontinued (96%), or changed (99%) HC due to migraine. Our results reveal that participating gynecologists actively consider migraine and migraine aura before and while prescribing HC. Gynecologists appear cautious in prescribing HC in patients with migraine aura.

Sex Hormones and Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide in Women With Migraine: A Cross-sectional, Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Sex hormones may modulate calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) release in the trigeminovascular system. We studied CGRP concentrations in plasma and tear fluid in female participants with episodic migraine (EM) and a regular menstrual cycle (RMC), female participants with EM and combined oral contraception (COC), and female participants with EM in the postmenopause. For control, we analyzed 3 corresponding groups of age-matched female participants without EM. METHODS: Participants with an RMC had 2 visits: during menstruation on menstrual cycle day 2 ± 2 and in the periovulatory period on day 13 ± 2. Participants with COC were examined at day 4 ± 2 of the hormone-free interval (HFI) and between days 7 and 14 of hormone intake (HI). Postmenopausal participants were assessed once at a random time point. Plasma and tear fluid samples were collected at each visit for determination of CGRP levels with an ELISA. RESULTS: A total of 180 female participants (n = 30 per group) completed the study. Participants with migraine and an RMC showed statistically significantly higher CGRP concentrations in plasma and tear fluid during menstruation compared with female participants without migraine (plasma: 5.95 pg/mL [IQR 4.37-10.44] vs 4.61 pg/mL [IQR 2.83-6.92], p = 0.020 [Mann-Whitney U test]; tear fluid: 1.20 ng/mL [IQR 0.36-2.52] vs 0.4 ng/mL [IQR 0.14-1.22], p = 0.005 [Mann-Whitney U test]). In contrast, female participants with COC and in the postmenopause had similar CGRP levels in the migraine and the control groups. In migraine participants with an RMC, tear fluid but not plasma CGRP concentrations during menstruation were statistically significantly higher compared with migraine participants under COC (p = 0.015 vs HFI and p = 0.029 vs HI, Mann-Whitney U test). DISCUSSION: Different sex hormone profiles may influence CGRP concentrations in people, with current or past capacity to menstruate, with migraine. Measurement of CGRP in tear fluid was feasible and warrants further investigation.