Assessing the Long-Term (48-Week) Effectiveness, Safety, and Tolerability of Fremanezumab in Migraine in Real Life: Insights from the Multicenter, Prospective, FRIEND3 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term (1-year) fremanezumab treatment proved to be effective, safe, and well tolerated in individuals with migraine and < 2 medication clusters in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We aimed to assess real-world evidence (RWE), long-term effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of fremanezumab in people with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM) with > 3 treatment failures and various comorbidities. METHODS: A 48-week, prospective, multicenter (n = 26), cohort study assessed fremanezumab's effectiveness, safety, and tolerability in consecutive adults with HFEM or CM with > 3 treatment failures. Primary endpoint was variation from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMD) in HFEM and monthly headache days (MHD) in CM at weeks 45-48. Secondary endpoints were changes in monthly analgesic medications, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), and the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) scores and ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% responder rates. RESULTS: Of 533 participants who had received ≥ 1 fremanezumab dose, 130 were treated for ≥ 48 weeks and considered for effectiveness analysis. No participant missed any treatment dosage every other consecutive month during the 12-month period. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: fremanezumab significantly (p < 0.001) reduced both MMD (- 6.4) in HFEM and MHD (- 14.5) in CM. Secondary endpoints: a significant reduction (p < 0.001) was observed in monthly analgesic medications (HFEM - 6.0; CM -16.5), NRS (HFEM - 3.4; CM - 3.4), HIT-6 (HFEM - 16.9; CM - 17.9) and MIDAS score (HFEM - 50.4; CM - 76.6). The ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% response rates to fremanezumab were 75.5%, 36.7%, and 2% in HFEM and 71.6%, 44.4%, and 3.7% in CM. Corresponding response rates were 60.5%, 37.2%, and 2.3% in individuals with psychiatric comorbidities, 74.2%, 50%, and 4.8% in CM with medication overuse, and 60.9%, 39.1%, and 4.3% in CM with medication overuse and psychiatric comorbidities. Mild and transient treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 7.8% of the participants. No subject discontinued the treatment for any reason. CONCLUSION: This RWE study documents that long-term fremanezumab treatment is highly effective and remarkably well tolerated in subjects with HFEM or CM with multiple (> 3) therapeutic failures, even in the presence of concomitant medication overuse, psychiatric comorbidities, or both. The effectiveness-to-tolerability ratio appears to be better in RWE than in RCTs.

The first interim analysis of Italian patients enrolled in the real-world, Pan-European, prospective, observational, phase 4 PEARL study of fremanezumab effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: In 2020, the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) approved the reimbursement of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), including fremanezumab, in patients with a Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) score ≥ 11, with prescription renewals for up to 12 months in patients with ≥ 50% reduction in MIDAS score at Months 3 and 6. In this sub-analysis of the Pan-European Real Life (PEARL) study, we provide real-world data on fremanezumab use in Italian routine clinical practice (EUPAS35111). METHODS: This first interim analysis for Italy was conducted when 300 enrolled adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine (EM, CM) completed 6 months of treatment with fremanezumab. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients achieving ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) across the 6 months post-fremanezumab initiation. Secondary endpoints include: proportion of patients achieving ≥ 50% reduction in MIDAS score at Months 3 and 6, and mean change from baseline across Months 1-6 in MMD and headache-related disability. Safety was assessed through adverse events (AEs) reported. RESULTS: Of 354 patients enrolled at Italian centers, 318 (EM, 35.5%, CM, 64.5%) were included in the effectiveness analysis. Of patients with available data, 109 (61.2%) achieved the primary endpoint. 61.0% and 65.1% achieved ≥ 50% reduction in MMDs at Months 3 and 6, respectively; 79.9% and 81.0% experienced ≥ 50% reduction in MIDAS at the same timepoints. CONCLUSION: Fremanezumab was effective and well-tolerated over the first 6 months of treatment, with approximately 80% of patients meeting Italian criteria for treatment continuation at Months 3 and 6.

Ultra-late response (> 24 weeks) to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine: a multicenter, prospective, observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Nearly 60% of migraine patients treated with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway experience a ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) at 12 weeks compared to baseline (responders). However, approximately half of the patients not responding to anti-CGRP mAbs ≤ 12 weeks do respond ≤ 24 weeks (late responders). We assessed frequency and characteristics of patients responding to anti-CGRP mAbs only > 24 weeks (ultra-late responders). METHODS: In this multicenter (n = 16), prospective, observational, real-life study, we enrolled all consecutive adults affected by high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM: ≥ 8 days/month) or chronic migraine (CM), with ≥ 3 prior therapeutic failures, treated with any anti-CGRP mAbs for ≥ 48 weeks. We defined responders patients with a ≥ 50% response rate ≤ 12 weeks, late responders those with a ≥ 50% response rate ≤ 24 weeks, and ultra-late responders those achieving a ≥ 50% response only > 24 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 572 migraine patients completed ≥ 48 weeks of anti-CGRP mAbs treatment. Responders accounted for 60.5% (346/572), late responders for 15% (86/572), and ultra-late responders for 15.7% (90/572). Among ultra-late responders, 7.3% (42/572) maintained the ≥ 50% response rate across all subsequent time intervals (weeks 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, and 48) and were considered persistent ultra-late responders, while 8.4% (48/572) missed the ≥ 50% response rate at ≥ 1 subsequent time interval and were classified as fluctuating ultra-late responders. Fifty patients (8.7%) did not respond at any time interval ≤ 48 weeks. Ultra-late responders differed from responders for higher BMI (p = 0.033), longer duration of medication overuse (p < 0.001), lower NRS (p = 0.017) and HIT-6 scores (p = 0.002), higher frequency of dopaminergic symptoms (p = 0.002), less common unilateral pain-either alone (p = 0.010) or in combination with UAS (p = 0.023), allodynia (p = 0.043), or UAS and allodynia (p = 0.012)-a higher number of comorbidities (p = 0.012), psychiatric comorbidities (p = 0.010) and a higher proportion of patients with ≥ 1 comorbidity (p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients not responding to anti-CGRP mAbs ≤ 24 weeks do respond later, while non-responders ≤ 48 weeks are quite rare (8.7%). These findings suggest to rethink the duration of migraine prophylaxis and the definition of resistant and refractory migraine, currently based on the response after 2-3 months of treatment.

Profiling migraine patients according to clinical and psychophysical characteristics: clinical validity of distinct migraine clusters.

AIMS: Investigate if different clinical and psychophysical bedside tools can differentiate between district migraine phenotypes in ictal/perictal (cohort 1) and interictal (cohort 2) phases. METHOD: This observational study included two independent samples in which patients were subgrouped into distinct clusters using standardized bedside assessment tools (headache frequency, disability, cervical active range of motion, pressure pain threshold in different areas): (A) cohort 1-ictal/perictal migraine patients were subgrouped, based on previous studies, into two clusters, i.e., Cluster-1.1 No Psychophysical Impairments (NPI) and Cluster-1.2 Increased Pain Sensitivity and Cervical Musculoskeletal Dysfunction (IPS-CMD); (B) cohort 2-interictal migraine patients were subgrouped into three clusters, i.e., Cluster-2.1 NPI, Cluster-2.2 IPS, and Cluster-2.3 IPS-CMD. Clinical characteristics (multiple questionnaires), somatosensory function (comprehensive quantitative sensory testing (QST)), and cervical musculoskeletal impairments (cervical musculoskeletal assessment) were assessed and compared across headache clusters and a group of 56 healthy controls matched for sex and age. RESULTS: Cohort 1: A total of 156 subjects were included. Cluster-1.2 (IPS-CMD) had higher headache intensity (p = 0.048), worse headache-related (p = 0.003) and neck-related disability (p = 0.005), worse quality of life (p = 0.003), and higher symptoms related to sensitization (p = 0.001) and psychological burden (p = 0.005) vs. Cluster-1.1(NPI). Furthermore, Cluster-1.2 (IPS-CMD) had (1) reduced cervical active and passive range of motion (p < 0.023), reduced functionality of deep cervical flexors (p < 0.001), and reduced values in all QST(p < 0.001) vs. controls, and (2) reduced active mobility in flexion, left/right lateral flexion (p < 0.045), and reduced values in QST (p < 0.001) vs. Cluster-1.1 (NPI). Cohort 2: A total of 154 subjects were included. Cluster-2.3 (IPS-CMD) had (1) longer disease duration (p = 0.006), higher headache frequency (p = 0.006), disability (p < 0.001), and psychological burden (p = 0.027) vs. Cluster-2.2 (IPS) and (2) higher headache-related disability (p = 0.010), neck-related disability (p = 0.009), and higher symptoms of sensitization (p = 0.018) vs. Cluster-2.1 (NPI). Cluster-2.3(IPS-CMD) had reduced cervical active and passive range of motion (p < 0.034), and reduced functionality of deep cervical flexors (p < 0.001), vs. controls, Custer-2.1 (NPI), and Cluster-2.2 (IPS). Cluster-2.2 (IPS) and 2.3 (IPS-CMD) had reduced QST values vs. controls (p < 0.001) and Cluster-2.1 (p < 0.039). CONCLUSION: A battery of patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) and quantitative bedside tools can separate migraine clusters with different clinical characteristics, somatosensory functions, and cervical musculoskeletal impairments. This confirms the existence of distinct migraine phenotypes and emphasizes the importance of migraine phases of which the characteristics are assessed. This may have implications for responders and non-responders to anti-migraine medications.

Migraine patients with and without neck pain: Differences in clinical characteristics, sensitization, musculoskeletal impairments, and psychological burden.

AIMS: This study aims to assess differences in clinical characteristics across healthy controls and migraine patients with (MNP) and without (MwoNP) neck pain. METHOD: This study assessed: headache frequency; headache disability index (HDI); central sensitization inventory (CSI); Hospital Anxiety (HADS-A) and Depression (HADS-D) scale; active range of motion (AROM); flexion rotation test (FRT); activation pressure score (APS); number of active/latent myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) in head/neck muscles; number of positive cervical vertebral segments (C1/C2) who reproduce migraine pain; wind-up ratio (WUR); mechanical pain threshold (MPT) and static pressure pain threshold (sPPT) over the trigeminal area; sPPT and dynamic PPT (dPPT) over the cervical area; sPPTs and MPT over the hand. RESULTS: Compared to controls, MNP had: worse CSI, HADS-A, and HADS-D (all, p < 0.002); reduced AROM (flexion, extension, left lateral-flexion, and right-rotation), FRT, APS, and a higher number of MTrPs and positive cervical vertebral segments (all, p < 0.020); reduced trigeminal MPT and sPPT, cervical sPPT and dPPT, hand MPT and sPPT (all, p < 0.006). Compared to controls, MwoNP had: worse CSI, and HADS-A (all, p < 0.002); reduced AROM (flexion, and left lateral-flexion), FRT, APS, and a higher number of MTrPs and positive cervical vertebral segments (all, p < 0.017); reduced trigeminal MPT and cervical dPPT (all, p < 0.007). Compared to MwoNP, MNP had higher headache frequency, worse HDI and CSI (all, p < 0.006); reduced AROM (flexion, and right rotation) (all, p < 0.037); reduced cervical dPPT (all, p < 0.002). CONCLUSION: MNP had worse headache characteristics, more pronounced cervical musculoskeletal impairments, enhanced signs and symptoms related to sensitization, and worse psychological burden compared to MwoNP.

Trigeminocervical pain sensitivity during the migraine cycle depends on headache frequency.

OBJECTIVE: This experimental study aimed to assess pain sensitivity in low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM), high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM), and chronic migraine (CM) patients across the different phases of the migraine cycle. METHOD: In this observational, experimental study, clinical characteristics (diary and time from the last/next headache attack), and quantitative sensory testing (QST) (wind-up pain ratio (WUR) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) from the trigeminal area and PPT from the cervical spine) was performed. LFEM, HFEM, and CM were assessed in each of the 4 migraine phases (HFEM and LFEM: interictal, preictal, ictal, and postictal; CM: interictal and ictal) and compared vs. each other's (matched for the phase) and controls. RESULTS: A total of 56 controls, 105 LFEM, 74 HFEM, and 32 CM were included. No differences in QST parameters were observed between LFEM, HFEM, and CM in any of the phases. During the interictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: 1) LFEM had lower trigeminal PPT (p = 0.001) and 2) lower cervical PPT (p = 0.001). No differences were observed between HFEM or CM and healthy controls. During the ictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: HFEM and CM had 1) lower trigeminal PPTs (HFEM p = 0.001; CM = p < 0.001), 2) lower cervical PPT s (HFEM p = 0.007; CM p < 0.001), and 3) higher trigeminal WUR (HFEM p = 0.001, CM p = 0.006). No differences were observed between LFEM and healthy controls. During the preictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: 1) LFEM had lower cervical PPT (p = 0.007), 2) HFEM had lower trigeminal (p = 0.013) and 3) HFEM had lower cervical (p = .006) PPTs. During the postictal phase and when comparing with controls the following were found: 1) LFEM had lower cervical PPT (p = 0.003), 2) HFEM had lower trigeminal PPT (p = 0.005), and 3) and HFEM had lower cervical (p = 0.007) PPTs. CONCLUSION: This study suggested that HFEM patients have a sensory profile matching CM better than LFEM. When assessing pain sensitivity in migraine populations, the phase with respects to headache attacks is of utmost importance and can explain the inconsistency in pain sensitivity data reported in the literature.

Profiling migraine patients according to clinical and psychophysical characteristics: a cluster analysis approach.

AIM: This study aims to profile migraine patients according clinical and psychophysical characteristics. METHOD: In this observational study, two cohorts of migraine patients(episodic/chronic) were included. Cohort-1: ictal/perictal phase; Cohort-2: interictal phase.The following variables were assessed: headache frequency; disability; cervical active range of motion(AROM) in flexion, extension, right/left lateral flexion, right/left rotation; pressure-pain threshold(PPT) over: temporalis, two cervical areas(C1/C4 vertebral segments), and two distal pain-free areas(hand/leg). Cluster analysis was performed using the K-means algorithm. Differences across clusters were investigated. RESULTS: Cohort-1: 100 patients were included, and two clusters were identified. Cluster-1.1 (19%), Cluster-1.2 (81%). Cluster 1.1 had a higher percentage of men (P = .037) and higher disability (P = .003) compared to Clusters 1.2. Cluster 1.2 had reduced AROM in flexion, extension, and left/right lateral flexion (P < .037), and lower PPT value in all areas (P < .001) compared to Cluster 1.1. Cohort-2: 98 patients were included and three clusters were identified. Cluster-2.1(18%), Cluster-2.2(45%), and Cluster-2.3(37%). Cluster-2.1 had a higher percentage of men compared to clusters-2.2 and 2.3 (P = .009). Cluster-2.3 had higher headache frequency, and disability compared to Cluster-2.2 (P < .006), and higher disability compared to Cluster-2.1 (P = .010). Cluster-2.3 had reduced AROM in all directions compared to Clusters-2.1 and 2.2 (P < .029). Clusters-2.2 and 2.3 have lower PPT values in all areas compared to Cluster-1.1 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: In the Ictal/perictal phase, two clusters were identified according to clinical and psychophysical characteristics, with one group showing no psychophysical impairment and one with increased pain-sensitivity and cervical musculoskeletal-dysfunctions.In the interictal phase, three clusters could be identified, with one group showing no psychophysical impairment, one increased pain-sensitivity, and one increased pain sensitivity and cervical musculoskeletal-dysfunctions.

Early and sustained efficacy of fremanezumab over 24-weeks in migraine patients with multiple preventive treatment failures: the multicenter, prospective, real-life FRIEND2 study.

BACKGROUND: To verify the long-term (24-week) efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fremanezumab in real-life patients with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM: ≥ 8 days/month) or chronic migraine (CM: ≥ 15 days/month), and multiple preventive treatment failures. METHODS: This is a prospective, cohort, real-life study at 28 headache centers on consecutive patients affected by HFEM or CM with multiple preventive treatment failures who were prescribed subcutaneous fremanezumab (225 mg monthly/675 mg quarterly) for ≥ 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs) in HFEM and monthly headache days (MHDs) in CM at weeks 21-24 compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints encompassed changes in monthly analgesic medications, ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% responder rates, and variation in NRS, HIT-6 and MIDAS scores at the same time interval. Changes in MMDs/MHDs, monthly analgesic medications, ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% responder rates, and variation in NRS and HIT-6 scores at week 4 were also monitored. RESULTS: Four hundred ten patients who had received ≥ 1 dose of fremanezumab were considered for safety analysis while 148 patients treated for ≥ 24 weeks were included in the efficacy analysis. At weeks 21-24, fremanezumab significantly (p < 0.001) reduced MMDs, MHDs, monthly analgesic medications and NRS, HIT-6, and MIDAS scores in both HFEM and CM compared to baseline. The proportions of ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100% responders at weeks 21-24were 75.0%, 30.8%, 9.6% (HFEM), and 72.9, 44.8 and 1% (CM). A significant (p < 0.001) decrease in MMDs, MHDs, monthly analgesic medications and NRS, HIT-6, and MIDAS scores in both HFEM and CM was already present at week 4. The proportions of ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% responders at week 4 were 67.6%, 32.4%, 11.8% (HFEM) and 67.3%, 40%, 1.8% (CM). CM remitted to episodic migraine and medication overuse to no-medication overuse in 83.3 and 75% of patients at week 24, and in 80 and 72.4% at week 4. Adverse events were rare (2.4%), mild and transient. No patient discontinued treatment for any reason. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab is characterized by an early and sustained efficacy in HFEM and CM patients with multiple preventive treatment failures in real-life, revealing an optimal safety and tolerability profile.

Endovascular treatment of patients with acute ischemic stroke and tandem occlusion due to internal carotid artery dissection: A multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to tandem occlusion (TO) and underlying carotid dissection (CD) remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We present our multicenter-experience of endovascular treatment (EVT) approach used and outcomes for AIS patients with CD-related TO (CD-TO). METHODS: Consecutive AIS patients underwent EVT for CD-TO at five Italian Neuro-interventional Tertiary Stroke Centers were retrospectively identified. TO from atherosclerosis and other causes of, were excluded from the final analysis. Primary outcome was successful (mTICI 2b-3) and complete reperfusion (mTICI 3); secondary outcome was patients' 3-months functional independence (mRS≤2). RESULTS: Among 214 AIS patients with TO, 45 presented CD-TO. Median age was 54 years (range 29-86), 82.2% were male. Age <65 years (p < 0.0001), lower baseline NIHSS score (p = 0.0002), and complete circle of Willis (p = 0.0422) were associated with mRS ≤ 2 at the multivariate analysis. Comparisons between antegrade and retrograde approaches resulted in differences for baseline NIHSS scores (p = 0.001) and number of EVT attempts per-procedure (p = 0.001). No differences in terms of recanalization rates were observed between antegrade and retrograde EVT approaches (p = 0.811) but higher rates of mTICI3 revascularization was observed with the retrograde compared to the antegrade approach (78.6% vs 73.3%), anyway not statistically significant. CD management technique (angioplasty vs aspiration vs emergent stenting) did not correlate with 3-months mRS≤2. CONCLUSION: AIS patients with CD-TO were mostly treated with the retrograde approach with lower number of attempts per-procedure but it offered similar recanalization rates compared with the antegrade approach. Emergent carotid artery stenting (CAS) proved to be safe for CD management but it does not influence 3-months patients' clinical outcomes.

Maintenance of response and predictive factors of 1-year GalcanezumAb treatment in real-life migraine patients in Italy: The multicenter prospective cohort GARLIT study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To evaluate the 1-year effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab in real life and the prognostic indicators of persistent response. METHODS: High-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and chronic migraine (CM) patients treated with galcanezumab who completed a 1-year observation were enrolled. The primary outcomes assessed during the 12 months (V1-V12) were the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs) from baseline and the response rates ≥50% in MMDs (MMD ≥50% RR). The secondary outcomes were changes in pain intensity (numerical rating scale [NRS]) and in monthly acute medication intake (MAMI). RESULTS: We enrolled 191 patients (77.5% CM). Twenty-three patients (12%) dropped out, two for nonserious adverse events. At least 40% of patients took add-on standard preventives from baseline to V12. At V12, MMDs were reduced by 6.0 days in HFEM and by 11.9 days in CM patients (both p < 0.00001); NRS and MAMI were also decreased in both groups (p < 0.00001). One-hundred eight (56.5%) patients presented MMD ≥50% RR for 9 cumulative months (interquartile range=8): we defined this value as the cutoff for a persistent response. Persistent responders were less likely to have a higher body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.007) but more frequently had a good response to triptans (p = 0.005) and MMD ≥50% RR at V1 (p < 0.0000001). Patients without a persistent response were on add-on therapy for longer periods of time (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab was effective and well-tolerated in the 1-year term, with most patients presenting MMD ≥50% RR for at least 9 months. Triptan response, lower BMI, and MMD ≥50% RR in the first month emerged as predictive factors for a persistent response.

The PRESTO study: awareness of stroke symptoms and time from onset to intervention.

Timely access to medical assistance is the first crucial step to improving clinical outcomes of stroke patients. Many educational campaigns have been organized with the purpose of making people aware of what a stroke is and what is necessary to do after its clinical onset. The PRESTO campaign was organized in Genoa (Italy) to spread easy messages regarding the management of the acute phase of stroke. Educational material was disseminated to educate people to call the emergency medical services as soon as symptoms appear. Data collected were analyzed in three different phases of the campaign: before the beginning, during, and after the end. We enrolled 1,132 patients with ischemic stroke admitted to hospital within 24 hours of symptoms onset. Our data showed a mild reduction in onset-to-door time (24 minutes) during the months following the end of the campaign and a slight increase in number of patients who arrived at hospitals, in particular with milder symptoms and transient ischemic attack, as opposed to the same period before the campaign. Interestingly, in the months after the end of the campaign, we observed a slight reduction of the percentage of patients who accessed hospitals after 4.5 hours from symptoms onset. In conclusion, our results may suggest that an informative campaign can be successful in making people rapidly aware of stroke onset, with the consequent rapid access to hospitals. Considering the changing of way of access to information, we think that an extensive multimedia campaign should be evaluated in the next future.

Predictors of response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a 24-week, multicenter, prospective study on 864 migraine patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The identification of predictors of response to antiCGRP mAbs could favor tailored therapies and personalized treatment plans. This study is aimed at investigating predictors of ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100% response at 24 weeks in patients with high-frequency episodic (HFEM: 8-14 days/month) or chronic migraine (CM). METHODS: This is a large, multicenter, cohort, real-life study. We considered all consecutive adult patients affected by HFEM or CM who were prescribed antiCGRP mAbs for ≥ 24 weeks in 20 headache centers. Patients were interviewed face-to-face using a shared semi-structured questionnaire carefully exploring socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients received subcutaneous erenumab (70 mg or140 mg, monthly), galcanezumab (120 mg monthly, following a 240 mg loading dose), or fremanezumab (225 mg, monthly or 675 mg, quarterly) according to drug market availability, physician's choice, or patient's preference. The primary endpoint of the study was the assessment of ≥ 50% response predictors at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included ≥ 75% and 100% response predictors at 24 weeks. RESULTS: Eight hundred sixty-four migraine patients had been treated with antiCGRP mAbs for ≥ 24 weeks (erenumab: 639 pts; galcanezumab: 173 pts; fremanezumab: 55 pts). The ≥50% response (primary endpoint) in HFEM was positively associated with unilateral pain (UP) + unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (UAs) (OR:4.23, 95%CI:1.57-11.4; p = 0.004), while in CM was positively associated with UAs (OR:1.49, 95%CI:1.05-2.11; p = 0.026), UP + UAs (OR:1.90, 95%CI:1.15-3.16; p = 0.012), UP + allodynia (OR:1.71, 95%CI:1.04-2.83; p = 0.034), and negatively associated with obesity (OR:0.21, 95%CI:0.07-0.64; p = 0.006). The 75% response (secondary endpoint) was positively associated with UP + UAs in HFEM (OR:3.44, 95%CI:1.42-8.31; p = 0.006) and with UP + UAs (OR:1.78, 95%CI:1.14-2.80; p = 0.012) and UP + allodynia (OR:1.92, 95%CI:1.22-3.06; p = 0.005) in CM. No predictor of 100% response emerged in patients with HFEM or CM. CONCLUSIONS: A critical evaluation of headache characteristics indicating peripheral or central sensitization may help in predicting responsiveness to antiCGRP mAbs in HFEM and CM. A more precise pain profiling may represent a steppingstone for a mechanism-based approach and personalized treatment of migraine with compounds targeting specific molecular mechanisms.

Conversion from chronic to episodic migraine in patients treated with galcanezumab in real life in Italy: the 12-month observational, longitudinal, cohort multicenter GARLIT experience.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate in real-life the conversion from chronic migraine (CM) to episodic migraine (EM), specifically to EM with High-Frequency (HFEM: 8-14 monthly migraine days, MMDs), Medium-Frequency (MFEM, 4-7 MMDs), and Low-Frequency EM (LFEM, 0-3 MMDs), and its persistence during 1 year of treatment with galcanezumab. METHODS: Consecutive CM patients treated with galcanezumab completing 1 year of observation were enrolled. We collected data on MMDs, pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS score), and monthly acute medication intake (MAMI) from baseline (V1) to the 12-month visit (V12). RESULTS: Of the 155 enrolled patients, 116 (around 75%) reverted to EM at every visit and 81 (52.3%) for the entire 1-year treatment. Patients with older onset age (p = 0.010) and fewer baseline MMDs (p = 0.005) reverted more frequently to EM. At V12, 83 participants (53.5%) presented MFEM or LFEM. Patients reverted to MFEM or LFEM for 7 months (25th 1, 75th 11). The medication overuse discontinuation rate at V12 was 82.8% and occurred for 11 months (25th 8, 75th 12). From baseline to V12, the MAMI decreased by 17 symptomatic drugs (p < 0.000001) while the NRS score reduced by almost 2 points (p < 0.000001). A consistent transition to EM for the entire treatment year was observed in 81 (52.3%) patients. DISCUSSION: The 1-year GARLIT experience suggests that more than half of CM patients treated with galcanezumab persistently reverted to EM in real life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04803513.

Cervical musculoskeletal impairments in the 4 phases of the migraine cycle in episodic migraine patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess cervical musculoskeletal impairments during the 4 phases of a migraine cycle in episodic migraine patients, controlling for the presence of concomitant neck pain. METHODS: Differences in cervical musculoskeletal impairments were assessed during the 4 migraine phases in episodic migraine patients and compared with healthy controls controlling for concomitant neck pain. Cervical musculoskeletal impairments were assessed as follow: cervical active range of motion; flexion rotation test; craniocervical flexion test and calculation of activation pressure score; the total number of myofascial trigger points in head/neck muscles; the number of positivevertebral segments (headache's reproduction) during passive accessory intervertebral movement; pressure pain thresholds over C1, C2, C4, C6 vertebral segments bilaterally, trigeminal area, hand, and leg. Signs of pain sensitization were assessed by evaluating mechanical pain threshold over trigeminal area and hand, pressure pain thresholds, and the wind-up ratio. The Bonferroni-corrected p-value (05/4 = 0.013) was adopted to assess the difference between groups, while a p-value of 0.05 was considered significant for the correlation analysis. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients and 52 controls were included. Flexion rotation test and craniocervical flexion test were reduced in all 4 phases of the migraine cycle versus healthy controls (p < 0.001). The number of myofascial trigger points and positive vertebral segments was increased in all 4 phases of the migraine cycle versus healthy controls (p < 0.001). Flexion, extension, and total cervical active range of motion and cervical pressure pain thresholds were reduced in episodic migraine in the ictal phase versus controls (p < 0.007) with no other significant differences. Outside the ictal phase, the total cervical active range of motion was positively correlated with trigeminal and leg pressure pain threshold (p < 0.026), the number of active myofascial trigger points and positive positive vertebral segments were positively correlated with higher headache frequency (p=0.045), longer headache duration (p < 0.008), and with headache-related disability (p = 0.031). Cervical pressure pain thresholds were positively correlated with trigeminal, hand, and leg pressure pain threshold (p < 0.001), and trigeminal and leg mechanical pain thresholds (p < 0.005), and negatively correlated with the wind-up ratio (p < 0.004). CONCLUSION: In all phases of the migraine cycle, independent of the presence of concomitant neck pain, episodic migraine patients showed reduced flexion rotation test and craniocervical flexion test and an increased number of myofascial trigger points and passive accessory vertebral segments. These impairments are correlated with enhanced headache duration, headache-related disability, and signs of widespread pain sensitization. Reduction in active cervical movement and increased mechanical hyperalgesia of the cervical was consistent in ictal episodic migraine patients and the subgroups of episodic migraine patients with more pronounced widespread sensitization.

Trigeminal and cervical sensitization during the four phases of the migraine cycle in patients with episodic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: Assessing mechanical pain thresholds from trigeminal, cervical, and distal pain-free areas during the four phases of a migraine cycle in patients with episodic migraine (EM). METHODS: This multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study conducted in Parma and Genoa's Headache Centers assessed quantitative sensory tests during the four migraine phases in patients with EM compared to controls. Temporal summation of pain (TSP), static pressure pain threshold (sPPT), and mechanical pinprick pain threshold (MPT) were assessed from the trigeminal area, sPPT and dynamic PPT (dPPT) from the cervical area, sPPT and MPT over the hand, and sPPT from the tibialis anterior. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients and 46 controls were included. TSP was facilitated in ictal EM (EM vs. controls: mean [standard deviation] 2.7 [2.0] vs. 1.4 [1.8]; p = 0.004); trigeminal sPPT and MPT were reduced in interictal (sPPT: 198.5 [79.3] kPa; p = 0.021; MPT: 12.6 [15.7] g; p = 0.001), preictal (sPPT: 200.6 [71.6] kPa; p = 0.033; MPT: 10.7 [12.4] g; p < 0.001), ictal (sPPT: 171.4 [95.9] kPa; p < 0.001; MPT: 7.3 [12.0] g; p < 0.001), and postictal EM (sPPT: 182.2 [76.3] kPa; p = 0.006; MPT: 10.1 [14.9] g; p = 0.001), compared to controls (sPPT: 238.3 [73.8] kPa; MPT: 21.9 [17.3] g). Cervical sPPTs and dPPT were reduced in interictal (sPPT upper cervical spine: 420.5 [176.7] kPa; p = 0.031; sPPT lower cervical spine: 458.6 [207.3] kPa; p = 0.002; dPPT: 4826.5 [2698.0] g; p < 0.001), preictal (sPPT upper cervical spine: 389.3 [133.4] kPa; p = 0.006; sPPT lower cervical spine: 450.8 [174.3] kPa; p = 0.005; dPPT: 4184.2 [2628.3] g; p < 0.001), ictal (sPPT upper cervical spine: 379.9 [205.6] kPa p = 0.003; sPPT lower cervical spine: 436.3 [271.1] kPa; p = 0.001; dPPT: 3838.3 [2638.7] g; p < 0.001), and postictal EM (sPPT upper cervical spine: 385.5 [131.6] kPa; p = 0.020; sPPT lower cervical spine: 413.0 [150.3] kPa; p = 0.002; dPPT: 4679.6 [2894.9] g; p = 0.001), compared to controls (sPPT upper cervical spine: 494.9 [171.5] kPa; sPPT lower cervical spine: 586.9 [210.8] kPa; dPPT: 7693.9 [2896.8] g). Preictal EM had reduced hand sPPT and MPT (sPPT: 248.8 [96.6] kPa vs. 319.8 [112.3] kPa; p = 0.006; MPT: 23.6 [12.2] g vs. 32.5 [14.4] g; p = 0.035), while EM in the other phases showed reduction in hand MPT (interictal: 22.3 [15.6] g vs. 32.5 [14.4] g; p = 0.002; ictal: 22.4 [17.0] g vs. 32.5 [14.4] g; p = 0.004; postictal: 24.2 [18.8] g vs. 32.5 [14.4] g; p = 0.003) without significant reduction in hand sPPT. No difference in sPPT over the tibialis anterior was found. Hand MPT was negatively correlated with longer disease duration (r = -0.25; p = 0.011) and hand sPPT was negatively correlated with higher drug usage (r = -0.31; p = 0.002). TSP during the ictal phase was positively correlated with the physical (r = 0.38; p = 0.040) and emotional headache-related disability (r = 0.53; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: In all phases of the migraine cycle, patients with EM show signs of sensitization in the trigeminocervical area, with patients with the most prominent sensitization in the ictal phase. Signs of widespread sensitization were consistent in the preictal phase in patients with EM and in the subgroups of patients with EM with the longest disease duration and more usage of symptomatic drugs.