A Monoclonal Antibody to PACAP for Migraine Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Targeting pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) is a new avenue for treating migraine. The efficacy and safety of intravenous Lu AG09222, a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against the PACAP ligand, for migraine prevention are unclear. METHODS: In a phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled adult participants (18 to 65 years of age) with migraine for whom two to four previous preventive treatments had failed to provide a benefit. The trial included a 4-week treatment period and an 8-week follow-up period. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1:2 ratio to receive a single-dose baseline infusion of 750 mg of Lu AG09222, 100 mg of Lu AG09222, or placebo. The primary end point was the mean change from baseline in the number of migraine days per month, during weeks 1 through 4, in the Lu AG09222 750-mg group as compared with the placebo group. RESULTS: Of 237 participants enrolled, 97 received 750 mg of Lu AG09222, 46 received 100 mg of Lu AG09222, and 94 received placebo. The mean number of baseline migraine days per month was 16.7 in the overall population, and the mean change from baseline over weeks 1 through 4 was -6.2 days in the Lu AG09222 750-mg group, as compared with -4.2 days in the placebo group (difference, -2.0 days; 95% confidence interval, -3.8 to -0.3; P = 0.02). Adverse events with a higher incidence in the Lu AG09222 750-mg group than in the placebo group during the 12-week observation period included coronavirus disease 2019 (7% vs. 3%), nasopharyngitis (7% vs. 4%), and fatigue (5% vs. 1%). CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 trial, a single intravenous infusion of 750 mg of Lu AG09222 showed superiority over placebo in reducing migraine frequency over the subsequent 4 weeks. (Funded by H. Lundbeck; HOPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05133323.).

Migraine headache and aura induced by hypoxia.

Migraine, a common neurological disorder, impacts over a billion individuals globally. Its complex aetiology involves various signalling cascades. Hypoxia causes headaches such as high-altitude headache and acute mountain sickness which share phenotypical similarities with migraine. Epidemiological data indicate an increased prevalence of migraine with and without aura in high-altitude populations. Experimental studies have further shown that hypoxia can induce migraine attacks. This review summarizes evidence linking hypoxia to migraine, delves into potential pathophysiological mechanisms and highlights research gaps.

Atogepant for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (PROGRESS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of atogepant for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. METHODS: We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 142 clinical research sites across the USA, the UK, Canada, China, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Poland, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and Taiwan. Adults aged 18-80 years with a 1-year or longer history of chronic migraine were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral atogepant 30 mg twice a day, oral atogepant 60 mg once a day, or placebo. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs) across the 12-week treatment period. The primary analysis was done in the modified intent-to-treat population and included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study intervention, had an evaluable baseline period of electronic diary (eDiary) data, and had at least one evaluable post-baseline 4-week period (weeks 1-4, 5-8, and 9-12) of eDiary data during the double-blind period. The safety population consisted of all participants who received at least one dose of study intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03855137). FINDINGS: Between March 11, 2019 and Jan 20, 2022, 1489 participants were assessed for eligibility. 711 were excluded, and 778 participants were randomly assigned to atogepant 30 mg twice a day (n=257), atogepant 60 mg once a day (n=262), or placebo (n=259). Participants in the safety population were aged 18-74 years (mean 42·1 years). 459 (59%) of 773 patients were White, 677 (88%) patients were female, and 96 (12%) were male. 84 participants discontinued treatment during the trial, and 755 comprised the modified intent-to-treat population (atogepant 30 mg twice a day n=253, atogepant 60 mg once a day n=256, and placebo n=246). Baseline mean number of MMDs were 18·6 (SE 5·1) with atogepant 30 mg twice a day, 19·2 (5·3) with atogepant 60 mg once a day, and 18·9 (4·8) with placebo. Change from baseline in mean MMDs across 12 weeks was -7·5 (SE 0·4) with atogepant 30 mg twice a day, -6·9 (0·4) with atogepant 60 mg once a day, and -5·1 (0·4) with placebo. Least squares mean difference from placebo was -2·4 with atogepant 30 mg twice a day (95% CI -3·5 to -1·3; adjusted p<0·0001) and -1·8 with atogepant 60 mg once a day (-2·9 to -0·8; adjusted p=0·0009). Most common adverse events for atogepant were constipation (30 mg twice a day 28 [10·9%]; 60 mg once a day 26 [10%]; and placebo 8 [3%]) and nausea (30 mg twice a day 20 [8%]; 60 mg once a day 25 [10%]; and placebo 9 [4%]). Potentially clinically significant weight decrease (≥7% reduction at any time post-baseline) was observed in each treatment group (atogepant 30 mg twice a day 14 [6%]; atogepant 60 mg once a day 15 [6%]; and placebo 5 [2%]). INTERPRETATION: Atogepant 30 mg twice a day and 60 mg once a day showed clinically relevant reductions in MMDs across 12 weeks in chronic migraine patients. Both atogepant doses were well tolerated, consistent with the known safety profile of atogepant. FUNDING: Allergan (now AbbVie).

Induction of cGMP-mediated migraine attacks is independent of CGRP receptor activation.

BACKGROUND: The cAMP and cGMP pathways are implicated in the initiation of migraine attacks, but their interactions remain unclear. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) triggers migraine attacks via cAMP, whereas the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil induces migraine attacks via cGMP. Our objective was to investigate whether sildenafil could induce migraine attacks in individuals with migraine pre-treated with the CGRP-receptor antibody erenumab. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study, adults with migraine without aura received a single subcutaneous injection of 140 mg erenumab on day 1. They were then randomized to receive sildenafil 100 mg or placebo on two experimental days, each separated by at least one week, between days 8 and 21. The primary endpoint was the difference in the incidence of migraine attacks between sildenafil and placebo during the 12-h observation period after administration. RESULTS: In total, 16 participants completed the study. Ten participants (63%) experienced a migraine attack within 12 h after sildenafil administration compared to three (19%) after placebo (p = 0.016). The median headache intensity was higher after sildenafil than after placebo (area under the curve (AUC) for the 12-h observation period, p = 0.026). Furthermore, sildenafil induced a significant decrease in mean arterial blood pressure (AUC, p = 0.026) and a simultaneous increase in heart rate (AUC, p < 0.001) during the first hour after administration compared to placebo. CONCLUSION: These findings provide evidence that migraine induction via the cGMP pathway can occur even under CGRP receptor blockade. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier NCT05889455.

Non-vascular ATP-sensitive potassium channel activation does not trigger migraine attacks: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of NN414, a selective KATP channel opener for the Kir6.2/SUR1 channel subtype found in neurons and ß-pancreatic cells, in inducing migraine attacks in individuals with migraine without aura. METHODS: Thirteen participants were randomly allocated to receive NN414 and placebo on two days separated by at least one week. The primary endpoint was the difference in the incidence of migraine attacks after NN414 compared with placebo. The secondary endpoints were the difference in the area under the curve for headache intensity scores, middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity (VMCA), superficial temporal artery diameter, heart rate and mean arterial pressure. RESULTS: Twelve participants completed the study, with two (16.6%) reporting migraine attacks after NN414 compared to one (8.3%) after placebo (p = 0.53). The area under the curve for headache intensity, VMCA, superficial temporal artery diameter, heart rate and mean arterial pressure did not differ between NN414 and placebo (p > 0.05, all comparisons). CONCLUSION: The lack of migraine induction upon activation of the Kir6.2/SUR1 channel subtype suggests it may not contribute to migraine pathogenesis. Our findings point to KATP channel blockers that target the Kir6.1/SUR2B subtype, found in cerebral vasculature, as potential candidates for innovative antimigraine treatments.Registration number: NCT04744129.

Effects of levcromakalim in patients with migraine aura without headache: An experimental study.

BACKGROUND/HYPOTHESIS: Levcromakalim has previously been shown to induce attacks of migraine with aura in certain individuals. In this study, we tested the migraine-inducing effect of levcromakalim in a cohort of participants with migraine aura without headache. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over study, eight adult participants with migraine with aura received intravenous infusions of levcromakalim and saline. Headache, aura and associated symptoms were evaluated for 24 h following administration of the study drug. The primary endpoint was occurrence of migraine-like attacks with or without aura in the 24-h observation period. RESULTS: Five participants (62.5%) developed migraine of any type following levcromakalim compared with three participants (37.5%) following placebo. No participants developed aura following levcromakalim. CONCLUSION/INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that the aura-inducing effect of levcromakalim is likely not based on direct induction of cortical spreading depression but may involve activation of the trigeminovascular system. This hypothesis should be further explored in future studies. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04905654.

Premonitory symptoms in migraine: A REFORM Study.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of proportions of people with migraine who report premonitory symptoms vary greatly among previous studies. Our aims were to establish the proportion of patients reporting premonitory symptoms and its dependency on the enquiry method. Additionally, we investigated the impact of premonitory symptoms on disease burden using Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and World Health Organization Disability Assessment 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), whilst investigating how various clinical factors influenced the likelihood of reporting premonitory symptoms. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, premonitory symptoms were assessed among 632 patients with migraine. Unprompted enquiry was used first, followed by a list of 17 items (prompted). Additionally, we obtained clinical characteristics through a semi-structured interview. RESULTS: Prompted enquiry resulted in a greater proportion reporting premonitory symptoms than unprompted (69.9% vs. 43.0%; p < 0.001) and with higher symptom counts (medians 2, interquartile range = 0-6 vs. 1, interquartile range = 0-1; p < 0.001). The number of symptoms correlated weakly with HIT-6 (ρ = 0.14; p < 0.001) and WHODAS scores (ρ = 0.09; p = 0.041). Reporting postdromal symptoms or triggers increased the probability of reporting premonitory symptoms, whereas monthly migraine days decreased it. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a standardized and optimized method for assessing premonitory symptoms is necessary to estimate their prevalence and to understand whether and how they contribute to disease burden.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of Neck Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in patients with migraine and tension-type headache.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to assess the burden of neck pain in adults with migraine and tension-type headache (TTH), utilizing the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed and Embase to identify observational studies assessing NDI and NPRS in populations with migraine or TTH. The screening of articles was independently performed by two investigators (HMA and ZA). Pooled mean estimates were calculated through random-effects meta-analysis. The I2 statistic assessed between-study heterogeneity, and meta-regression further explored heterogeneity factors. RESULTS: Thirty-three clinic-based studies met the inclusion criteria. For participants with migraine, the pooled mean NDI score was 16.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 13.2-19.2, I2 = 99%). Additionally, the mean NDI was 5.5 (95% CI = 4.11-6.8, p < 0.001) scores higher in participants with chronic compared to episodic migraine. The pooled mean NDI score for participants with TTH was 13.7 (95% CI = 4.9-22.4, I2 = 99%). In addition, the meta-analysis revealed a mean NPRS score of 5.7 (95% CI = 5.1-6.2, I2 = 95%) across all participants with migraine. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows a greater degree of neck pain-related disability in migraine compared to TTH. Nevertheless, the generalizability of these findings is constrained by methodological variations identified in the current literature.

Activation of ATP-sensitive potassium channels triggers migraine attacks independent of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptors: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to investigate whether levcromakalim, a KATP channel opener, induces migraine attacks in people with migraine pre-treated with erenumab, a monoclonal CGRP receptor antibody. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way cross-over study, adults with migraine without aura received a subcutaneous injection of 140 mg of erenumab on day 1. Subsequently, they were randomized to receive a 20-minute infusion of 0.05 mg/ml levcromakalim or placebo on two experimental days separated by at least one week (between days 8 and 21). The primary endpoint was the difference in the incidence of migraine attacks between levcromakalim and placebo during the 12-hour post-infusion period. RESULTS: In total, 16 participants completed the study. During the 12-hour observation period, 14 (88%) of 16 participants experienced migraine attacks after levcromakalim, compared to two (12%) after placebo (p < 0.001). The area under the curve for median headache intensity was greater after levcromakalim than placebo (p < 0.001). Levcromakalim elicited dilation of the superficial temporal artery during the first hour after infusion, a response absent following placebo (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The induction of migraine attacks via opening of KATP channels appears independent of CGRP receptor activation.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier NCT05889442.

Investigations of the migraine-provoking effect of levcromakalim in patients with migraine with aura.

BACKGROUND/HYPOTHESIS: Experimental provocation studies have yielded important insights in migraine pathophysiology. Levcromakalim has been previously shown to induce migraine-like attacks with and without aura. In this study, we aim to further explore the migraine aura-inducing potential of levcromakalim. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over study, 27 adult participants with migraine with aura received intravenous infusions of levcromakalim and saline. Headache, aura and associated symptoms were evaluated for 24 hours following administration of the study drug. The primary endpoint was occurrence of migraine-like attacks with or without aura in the 24-hour observation period. RESULTS: Thirteen participants developed migraine-like attacks on the active day only (P = 0.0098), and four participants developed aura on the active day only (P = 0.68). The median time to onset of migraine-like headache was three hours, and the median time to onset of aura was 27.5 minutes. CONCLUSION/INTERPRETATION: Our findings affirm the potent migraine-inducing effect of levcromakalim. We observed a lower induction-rate of migraine aura than previously reported. Further studies are warranted to identify predictors of migraine aura following levcromakalim. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04905654.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of pharmacological preventive treatment for persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Persistent headache attributed to traumatic injury to the head is divided into two subtypes, one attributed to moderate or severe traumatic injury and another attributed to mild traumatic injury (i.e., concussion). The latter is much more prevalent, in part because more than 90% of cases with traumatic brain injury are classified as mild. The pathophysiology of persistent post-traumatic headache is poorly understood and the underlying mechanisms are likely multifactorial. There is currently no approved treatment specifically for persistent post-traumatic headache, and management strategies rely on medications used for migraine or tension-type headache. Therefore, high-quality trials are urgently needed to support clinical decision-making and optimize management strategies. International guidelines can facilitate appropriate trial design and ensure the acquisition of high-quality data evaluating the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of available and novel pharmacological therapies for the preventive treatment of persistent post-traumatic headache. METHODS: The development of this guideline was based on a literature review of available studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, along with a review of previously published guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment for episodic and chronic migraine. The identified literature was critically appraised, and due to the scarcity of scientific evidence, recommendations were primarily based on the consensus of experts in the field. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidelines for designing state-of-the-art controlled clinical trials aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of preventive treatments for persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury.

Hypersensitivity to CGRP as a predictive biomarker of migraine prevention with erenumab.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to investigate the predictive value of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-induced migraine attacks for effectiveness to erenumab treatment in people with migraine. METHODS: In total, 139 participants with migraine underwent a single experimental day involving a 20-min infusion with CGRP. Following this, the participants entered a 24-week treatment period with erenumab. The primary endpoints were the predictive value of CGRP-induced migraine attacks on the effectiveness of erenumab, defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days, or ≥ 50% reduction in either monthly migraine or monthly headache days of moderate to severe intensity. RESULTS: Among participants with CGRP-induced migraine attacks, 60 of 99 (61%) achieved ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days during weeks 13-24 with erenumab. Conversely, 13 of 25 (52%) where CGRP infusion did not induce a migraine achieved the same endpoint (p = 0.498). There were no significant differences between the ≥50% reduction in either monthly migraine or monthly headache days of moderate to severe intensity between CGRP-sensitive and non-sensitive participants (p = 0.625). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the CGRP-provocation model cannot be used to predict erenumab's effectiveness. It remains uncertain whether this finding extends to other monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP ligand or to gepants.Trial Registration: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04592952).

International Headache Society global practice recommendations for the acute pharmacological treatment of migraine.

BACKGROUND: In an effort to improve migraine management around the world, the International Headache Society (IHS) has here developed a list of practical recommendations for the acute pharmacological treatment of migraine. The recommendations are categorized into optimal and essential, in order to provide treatment options for all possible settings, including those with limited access to migraine medications. METHODS: An IHS steering committee developed a list of clinical questions based on practical issues in the management of migraine. A selected group of international senior and junior headache experts developed the recommendations, following expert consensus and the review of available national and international headache guidelines and guidance documents. Following the initial search, a bibliography of twenty-one national and international guidelines was created and reviewed by the working group. RESULTS: A total of seventeen questions addressing different aspects of acute migraine treatment have been outlined. For each of them we provide an optimal recommendation, to be used whenever possible, and an essential recommendation to be used when the optimal level cannot be attained. CONCLUSION: Adoption of these international recommendations will improve the quality of acute migraine treatment around the world, even where pharmacological options remain limited.

Targeting the PACAP-38 pathway is an emerging therapeutic strategy for migraine prevention.

INTRODUCTION: The pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide-38 (PACAP-38) has emerged as a key mediator of migraine pathogenesis. PACAP-38 and its receptors are predominantly distributed in arteries, sensory and parasympathetic neurons of the trigeminovascular system. Phase 2 trials have tested human monoclonal antibodies designed to bind and inhibit PACAP-38 and the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide type I (PAC1) receptor for migraine prevention. AREAS COVERED: This review focuses on the significance of the PACAP-38 pathway as a target in migraine prevention. English peer-reviewed articles were searched in PubMed, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases. EXPERT OPINION: A PAC1 receptor monoclonal antibody was not effective for preventing migraine in a proof-of-concept trial, paving the way for alternative strategies to be considered. Lu AG09222 is a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting PACAP-38 that was effective in preventing physiological responses of PACAP38 and reducing monthly migraine days in individuals with migraine. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the clinical utility, long-term safety and cost-effectiveness of therapies targeting the PACAP pathway.

Responder rates with eptinezumab over 24 weeks in patients with prior preventive migraine treatment failures: post hoc analysis of the DELIVER randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Eptinezumab reduced monthly migraine days more than placebo in the DELIVER study, a clinical trial with patients with difficult-to-treat migraine and prior preventive treatment failures. This post hoc analysis assesses the sustained response to eptinezumab at the population and patient level and evaluates the potential for response in initial non-responders. METHODS: Adults with chronic or episodic migraine and two to four prior preventive treatment failures were randomized to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg or placebo every 12 weeks. Primary outcomes in this post hoc analysis are the proportion of patients with ≥30%, ≥50% or ≥75% reduction in monthly migraine days (i.e., migraine responder rates [MRRs]) during weeks 1-12 and weeks 13-24 and across 4-week intervals. Secondary outcomes are maintenance and shifts in MRRs from weeks 1-12 to weeks 13-24. RESULTS: Between weeks 1-12 and 13-24, ≥30% MRRs increased from 65.9% to 70.4% (100 mg) and from 71.0% to 74.5% (300 mg), versus 36.9% to 43.1% (placebo). The ≥50% and ≥75% MRRs were sustained or increased over the 24-week period. The largest increase in ≥30% MRRs occurred after the second infusion with eptinezumab. The percentage of initial non-responders (<30% MRRs during weeks 1-12) who experienced response (≥30% MRRs during weeks 13-24) to the second dose was 34.7% (100 mg) and 30.4% (300 mg) with eptinezumab versus 21.1% with placebo. CONCLUSION: Across MRR thresholds, most patients who responded to eptinezumab during weeks 1-12 maintained or improved response during weeks 13-24. More than one-third of initial non-responders became responders after their second infusion.

The headache research priorities: Research goals from the American Headache Society and an international multistakeholder expert group.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and disseminate research priorities for the headache field that should be areas of research focus during the next 10 years. BACKGROUND: Establishing research priorities helps focus and synergize the work of headache investigators, allowing them to reach the most important research goals more efficiently and completely. METHODS: The Headache Research Priorities organizing and executive committees and working group chairs led a multistakeholder and international group of experts to develop headache research priorities. The research priorities were developed and reviewed by clinicians, scientists, people with headache, representatives from headache organizations, health-care industry representatives, and the public. Priorities were revised and finalized after receiving feedback from members of the research priorities working groups and after a public comment period. RESULTS: Twenty-five research priorities across eight categories were identified: human models, animal models, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management, treatment, inequities and disparities, research workforce development, and quality of life. The priorities address research models and methods, development and optimization of outcome measures and endpoints, pain and non-pain symptoms of primary and secondary headaches, investigations into mechanisms underlying headache attacks and chronification of headache disorders, treatment optimization, research workforce recruitment, development, expansion, and support, and inequities and disparities in the headache field. The priorities are focused enough that they help to guide headache research and broad enough that they are widely applicable to multiple headache types and various research methods. CONCLUSIONS: These research priorities serve as guidance for headache investigators when planning their research studies and as benchmarks by which the headache field can measure its progress over time. These priorities will need updating as research goals are met and new priorities arise.

Second messenger signalling bypasses CGRP receptor blockade to provoke migraine attacks in humans.

There are several endogenous molecules that can trigger migraine attacks when administered to humans. Notably, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been identified as a key player in a signalling cascade involved in migraine attacks, acting through the second messenger cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) in various cells, including intracranial vascular smooth muscle cells. However, it remains unclear whether intracellular cAMP signalling requires CGRP receptor activation during a migraine attack in humans. To address this question, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel trial using a human provocation model involving the administration of CGRP and cilostazol in individuals with migraine pretreated with erenumab or placebo. Our study revealed that migraine attacks can be provoked in patients by cAMP-mediated mechanisms using cilostazol, even when the CGRP receptor is blocked by erenumab. Furthermore, the dilation of cranial arteries induced by cilostazol was not influenced by the CGRP receptor blockade. These findings provide clinical evidence that cAMP-evoked migraine attacks do not require CGRP receptor activation. This discovery opens up new possibilities for the development of mechanism-based drugs for the treatment of migraine.

Elevated plasma levels of calcitonin gene-related peptide in individuals with rosacea: A cross-sectional case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in the pathogenesis of rosacea might provide new therapeutic avenues for individuals with this disease. OBJECTIVE: To compare plasma levels of CGRP between individuals with rosacea and healthy controls. METHODS: In this cross-sectional case-control study conducted in Copenhagen, Denmark, we collected blood samples from the antecubital vein from adults with rosacea and from healthy controls. RESULTS: We enrolled 123 individuals with rosacea and 68 healthy controls. After adjusting for age and sex, plasma levels of CGRP were significantly higher in individuals with rosacea (mean, 95% confidence interval: 140.21 pmol/L, 128.50-151.92 pmol/L), compared with controls (110.77 pmol/L, 99.91-120.14 pmol/L, p = 0.002). Plasma levels of CGRP were not affected by age, sex, BMI, concomitant migraine, rosacea sub- or phenotype, concomitant disease or current treatment. LIMITATIONS: Participants were not age-, sex- and BMI-matched. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Elevated plasma levels of CGRP in individuals with rosacea suggest a role of CGRP in the pathogenesis of rosacea. Targeting CGRP signalling might hold therapeutic promise in people affected by this disease. GOV LISTING: NCT03872050.

Postdromal symptoms in migraine: a REFORM study.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a multiphasic neurovascular disorder, where headache can be succeeded by postdromal symptoms. However, there are limited research on postdromal symptoms. This study aimed to investigate the proportion of individuals with migraine from a tertiary care unit reporting postdromal symptoms in adherence with the ICHD-3 definition. We also aimed to examine how the means of enquiry might influence the estimated proportions. Additionally, we explored whether any clinical features might affect the likelihood of reporting postdromal symptoms. Finally, we assessed to what extend the postdromal symptoms might impact the disease burden. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we enrolled adult participants diagnosed with migraine who were asked to report their postdromal symptoms (i.e., unprompted reporting). Subsequently, a 16-item list was used to further ascertain the occurrence of postdromal symptoms (i.e., prompted reporting). Clinical characteristics were obtained through a semi-structured interview. Moreover, electronic questionnaires were used to assess the disease burden, i.e., the Six-Item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). RESULTS: Among 631 participants with migraine, a higher proportion experienced at least one postdromal symptom when prompted (n = 509 [80.7%]) compared with unprompted reporting (n = 421 [66.7%], P < 0.001). Furthermore, the total number of postdromal symptoms experienced was greater with prompted than unprompted reporting (medians 3 [IQR 1 - 6] versus 1 [IQR 0 - 2]; P < 0.001). Furthermore, the likelihood of reporting postdromal symptoms increased with the presence of premonitory symptoms and decreased with higher number of monthly migraine days. Weak correlations were identified between the number of postdromal symptoms reported and both HIT-6 (ρ = 0.14; P < 0.001) and WHODAS scores (ρ = 0.15; P < 0.001), whilst no correlation was observed with MIDAS score (ρ = 0.08; P = 0.054). CONCLUSIONS: Postdromal symptoms are prevalent in individuals with migraine from a tertiary care unit. However, reported estimates warrant cautious interpretation as they depend on the means of enquiry, presence of premonitory symptoms, and frequency of monthly migraine days. Moreover, a weak correlation was identified between the number of postdromal symptoms and both HIT-6 and WHODAS scores, indicating only a marginal influence on the disease burden.

Clinical features of migraine with aura: a REFORM study.

BACKGROUND: About one-third of persons with migraine experience transient neurologic symptoms, referred to as aura. Despite its widespread prevalence, comprehensive clinical descriptions of migraine with aura remain sparse. Therefore, we aimed to provide an in-depth phenotypic analysis of aura symptoms and characteristics in a cross-sectional study of a large sample of adults diagnosed with migraine with aura. METHODS: Data were extracted from the baseline characteristics of participants in the Registry for Migraine (REFORM) study - a single-center, prospective, longitudinal cohort study. Participants were adults diagnosed with migraine aura, reporting ≥ 4 monthly migraine days in the preceding 3 months. Trained personnel conducted in-person semi-structured interviews, capturing details on the nature, duration, localization, and progression of individual aura symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 227 enrolled participants with migraine with aura, the mean age was 41.1 years, with a predominant female representation (n = 205 [90.3%]). Visual aura was present in 215 (94.7%) participants, somatosensory aura in 81 (35.7%), and speech and/or language aura in 31 (13.7%). A single type of aura was observed in 148 (65.2%) participants, whilst 79 (34.8%) reported multiple aura types. Most participants (n = 220 [96.9%]) described their aura symptoms as positive or gradually spreading. Headache in relation to aura was noted by 218 (96.0%) participants, with 177 (80.8%) stating that the onset of aura symptoms preceded the onset of headache. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers a detailed clinical depiction of persons with migraine with aura, who were predominantly enrolled from a tertiary care unit. The findings highlight potential gaps in the available literature on migraine with aura and should bolster clinicians' acumen in diagnosing migraine with aura in clinical settings.