Central effects of erenumab in migraine patients: An event-related functional imaging study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether erenumab, a new monoclonal antibody to the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor, exerts functional central effects in migraineurs by performing functional imaging scans on patients treated with erenumab. METHODS: We conducted an fMRI study on 27 patients with migraine using a well-established trigeminal nociceptive paradigm, examining patients before and 2 weeks after administration of the CGRP receptor antibody erenumab 70 mg. RESULTS: Comparing both visit days in all patients (n = 27) revealed that erenumab leads to a decrease in activation in the right thalamus (i.e., contralateral to the stimulated side), right middle temporal gyrus, right lingual gyrus, left operculum, and several clusters on both sides of the cerebellum. Furthermore, when responders (n = 9) and nonresponders (n = 8) of the respective same headache state were compared, we found a significant reduction of hypothalamic activation after the administration of erenumab in responders only (t = 4.78; contrast estimate 29.79 [90% confidence interval 19.53-40.05]). This finding of reduced hypothalamic activation was confirmed when absolute headache days was used as a regressor. INTERPRETATION: These findings suggest that erenumab may not be an exclusively peripheral migraine treatment but has additional central effects. Whether this is due to secondary changes after peripheral modulation of sensory input or indeed represents a direct central mode of action is discussed.

[Modern migraine therapy-interdisciplinary long-term care]. / Moderne Migränetherapie ­ fachübergreifende Versorgung im Langzeitverlauf.

Migraine has a very high lifetime prevalence with a severe illness-related burden. As a result, extensive long-term and regular treatment is required, which cannot be covered solely by neurologists. This is particularly the case for the long-term monitoring of migraine, which often takes place over several decades. The diagnosis is made using the diagnostic criteria of the International Headache Society (ICHD-3) based on the clinical phenotype. Owing to often complex neurological symptoms, a detailed weighing up of the differential diagnoses is required, which calls for specialist neurological expertise. The same is true for follow-up appointments of more complex therapy issues. Acute therapy with antiemetics, analgesics, and triptans can, so long as it is effective and is administered not longer than 10 days per month, be carried out by the general practitioner or specialist in internal medicine. This is also true for medical prophylactic treatment with dietary supplements, antihypertensive drugs, and tricyclic antidepressants. If this therapy is unsuccessful, prophylactic substances must be used that require more specialized knowledge, which is also reflected in the formal prescription requirements. Neurologists and pain therapists should then be involved in the treatment. This is particularly true for the use of Onabotulinumtoxin A and monoclonal CGRP-(receptor)-antibodies.

The Headache Pipeline: Excitement and Uncertainty.

There are many new treatment options available for migraine and more are coming. Three calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist monoclonal antibodies have been approved and a 4th is due in early 2020. Small molecule CGRP receptor-blocking oral compounds, both for acute care and prevention, are also coming. Four neurostimulators are available, with others on the way. New acute treatments coming soon include the 5HT1F agonist lasmiditan, a zolmitriptan intradermal micro-needle patch, and a nasal mist sumatriptan with a permeability enhancer. Farther out, three novel dihydroergotamine delivery systems, and a liquid-filled capsule of celecoxib show early promise. A new, safer form of methysergide is in the works, as is a longer-duration onabotulinumtoxinA. As always with new products, questions regarding safety, tolerability, cost, and insurance coverage will need to be addressed. Despite these concerns and uncertainties, a robust headache treatment pipeline is good for patients who are not satisfied with the results of their treatment and/or cannot tolerate existing treatments.

Why is the therapeutic effect of acute antimigraine drugs delayed? A review of controlled trials and hypotheses about the delay of effect.

In randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of oral drug treatment of migraine attacks, efficacy is evaluated after 2 hours. The effect of oral naratriptan 2.5 mg with a maximum blood concentration (Tmax ) at 2 hours increases from 2 to 4 hours in RCTs. To check whether such a delayed effect is also present for other oral antimigraine drugs, we hand-searched the literature for publications on RCTs reporting efficacy. Two triptans, 3 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), a triptan combined with an NSAID and a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist were evaluated for their therapeutic gain with determination of time to maximum effect (Emax ). Emax was compared with known Tmax from pharmacokinetic studies to estimate the delay to pain-free. The delay in therapeutic gain varied from 1-2 hours for zolmitriptan 5 mg to 7 hours for naproxen 500 mg. An increase in effect from 2 to 4 hours was observed after eletriptan 40 mg, frovatriptan 2.5 mg and lasmiditan 200 mg, and after rizatriptan 10 mg (Tmax  = 1 h) from 1 to 2 hours. This strongly indicates a general delay of effect in oral antimigraine drugs. A review of 5 possible effects of triptans on the trigemino-vascular system did not yield a simple explanation for the delay. In addition, Emax for triptans probably depends partly on the rise in plasma levels and not only on its maximum. The most likely explanation for the delay in effect is that a complex antimigraine system with more than 1 site of action is involved.