ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in the cyclic pattern of cluster headache is unclear. To acquire biological insight and to comprehend why only episodic cluster headache responds to CGRP monoclonal antibodies, we examined whether plasma CGRP changes between disease states (i.e. bout, remission and chronic) and controls. METHODS: The present study is a prospective case-control study. Participants with episodic cluster headache were sampled twice (bout and remission). Participants with chronic cluster headache and controls were sampled once. CGRP concentrations were measured in plasma with a validated radioimmunoassay. RESULTS: Plasma was collected from 201 participants diagnosed with cluster headache according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, and from 100 age- and sex-matched controls. Overall, plasma CGRP levels were significantly lower in participants with cluster headache compared to controls (p < 0.05). In episodic cluster headache, CGRP levels were higher in bout than in remission (mean difference: 17.1 pmol/L, 95% confidence interval = 9.8-24.3, p < 0.0001). CGRP levels in bout were not different from chronic cluster headache (p = 0.266). CONCLUSIONS: Plasma CGRP is unsuitable as a diagnostic biomarker of cluster headache or its disease states. The identified reduced CGRP levels suggest that CGRPs role in cluster headache is highly complex and future investigations are needed into the modulation of CGRP and its receptors.
Subject(s)
Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide , Cluster Headache , Humans , Case-Control Studies , Cluster Headache/blood , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Headache , Research DesignABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The clinical profile of cluster headache may differ among different regions of the world, warranting interest in the data obtained from the initial Chinese Cluster Headache Register Individual Study (CHRIS) for better understanding. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, longitudinal cohort study on cluster headache across all 31 provinces of China, aiming to gather clinical characteristics, treatment approaches, imaging, electrophysiological and biological samples. RESULTS: In total 816 patients were enrolled with a male-to-female ratio of 4.33:1. The mean age at consultation was 34.98 ± 9.91 years, and 24.89 ± 9.77 years at onset. Only 2.33% were diagnosed with chronic cluster headache, and 6.99% had a family history of the condition. The most common bout was one to two times per year (45.96%), lasting two weeks to one month (44.00%), and occurring frequently in spring (76.23%) and winter (73.04%). Of these, 68.50% experienced one to two attacks per day, with the majority lasting one to two hours (45.59%). The most common time for attacks was between 9 am and 12 pm (75.86%), followed by 1 am and 3 am (43.48%). Lacrimation (78.80%) was the most predominant autonomic symptom reported. Furthermore, 39.22% of patients experienced a delay of 10 years or more in receiving a correct diagnosis. Only 35.67% and 24.26% of patients received common acute and preventive treatments, respectively. CONCLUSION: Due to differences in ethnicity, genetics and lifestyle conditions, CHRIS has provided valuable baseline data from China. By establishing a dynamic cohort with comprehensive multidimensional data, it aims to advance the management system for cluster headache in China.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Female , Humans , Male , China/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/therapy , Longitudinal Studies , Prospective Studies , AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Though an association between cluster headache (CH) and smoking has been postulated, data from the Middle East region is scarce. AIM OF WORK: To study the relationship between smoking and CH clinical characteristics and responsiveness to therapy in Egypt. METHODOLOGY: This was a prospective cohort hospital-based study conducted on patients with episodic and chronic CH in a tertiary headache clinic in Egypt during the period between 2019 and 2023. Patients were consecutively recruited at the time of their presentation and were followed up for two weeks after initiation of prophylactic treatment and steroids (as transitional therapy). RESULTS: Of 172 patients with CH recruited, 144 (83.7%) were smokers. Twenty-eight patients (16.3%) had chronic CH. The mean age was 42.08 ± 10.93 (20-66) years, and 131 (76.2%) were males. Smokers had a significantly higher median number of cluster bouts in the past five years (3.0 (IQR2.0-4.0) versus 2.0 (IQR 1.0-2.0)) and worse HIT-6 scores [51.0 (44.0-59.75) versus 41.0 (38.0-41.75)] than non-smokers (p < 0.001). The number of cluster bouts in the past five years was positively correlated with the smoking index (r = 0.249 (p = 0.006) and the smoking duration (in years) (r = 0.392 (p < 0.001)). HIT-6 scores were significantly correlated with the age at smoking onset (r=-0.190, = 0.023), smoking index (r = 0.519, p < 0.001), smoking duration (r = 0.611, p < 0.001), and number of cigarettes consumed per day (r = 0.392, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Smoking is significantly correlated with the daily frequency of CH attacks, the frequency of CH bouts in the past five years, and the HIT-6 scores among our cohort.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Smoking , Humans , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Adult , Smoking/epidemiology , Smoking/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Aged , Young Adult , Treatment Outcome , Egypt/epidemiology , Cohort StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To systematically investigate previously examined biomarkers in blood, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, tear fluid, and saliva of patients with cluster headache. BACKGROUND: Cluster headache is a condition with extensive clinical challenges in terms of diagnosis and treatment. Identification of a biomarker with diagnostic implications or as a potential treatment target is highly warranted. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review including peer reviewed full text of studies that measured biochemical compounds in either blood, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, tear fluid, or saliva of patients with cluster headache diagnosed after the implementation of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (1988) written in English, Danish, Swedish, or Norwegian. Inclusion required a minimum of five participants. The search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE, in September 2022, and extracted data were screened by two authors. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for reporting systematic reviews were followed. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias in case-controlled studies. RESULTS: We included 40 studies involving 832 patients with cluster headache and 872 controls, evaluating 80 potential biomarkers. The risk of bias for case-controlled studies was a median of 6 (range: 3-8) and 20 studies out of 40 (50%) were of fair or good quality. Most studies were identified within three groups: hypothalamic-regulated hormones, inflammatory markers, and neuropeptides. Among the hypothalamic hormones, cortisol was the most frequently investigated (N = 7) and was elevated in cluster headache in most of the studies. The most frequently examined inflammatory marker was interleukin 1 (N = 3), but findings were divergent. Calcitonin gene-related peptide was the most investigated neuropeptide (N = 9) and all studies found increased levels during attacks. CONCLUSION: Biomarker findings have been inconsistent and widely non-specific for cluster headache, which explains why none of the previous studies succeeded in identifying a unique biomarker for cluster headache, but instead contributed to substantiating the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms. Several of the examined biomarkers could hold promise as markers for disease activity but are unfit for a clear distinction from both controls and other headaches.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Headache Disorders , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Headache , Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide , Biomarkers/cerebrospinal fluidABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe different pitfalls in the diagnosis of primary cluster headaches (CHs) with the guidance of seven case vignettes. RECENT FINDINGS: The question of whether primary CHs and migraines are totally different entities has been long debated. Autonomic features can be detected in as many as 60% of migraine patients. Although some genetic similarities have been found, CACNA1A mutations have not been detected among CH patients with hemimotor aura in contrast to hemiplegic migraine. Recently, functional MRI studies have shown that the left thalamic network was the most discriminative MRI feature in distinguishing migraine from CH patients. Compared to migraine, CH patients showed decreased functional interaction between the left thalamus and cortical areas mediating interception and sensory integration. However, clinically the most significant feature had been the restlessness and agitation seen during headache attacks patients with CHs. This feature is also important in distinguishing cluster patients from other patients having other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias except for a subset of patients with hemicrania continua. CH is an important member of the group of headache disorders characterized by their association with one or more autonomic features in the trigeminal nerve distribution and termed Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias (TACs). Although CH is a relatively rare condition, judged by the distress it generally causes to the affected individual, early diagnosis and institution of appropriate therapy seem mandatory. Correct diagnosis of CHs needs avoidance of pitfalls. Such pitfalls generally include differentiation from migraine, differentiation from other side locked headache disorders, from other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs), and lastly, recognition of rare presentations of cluster-like manifestations with hemiplegic aura and simulating trigeminal and glossopharyngeal neuralgias. Differentiation between primary and symptomatic CHs related to sellar pathologies and systemic medical conditions is of equal importance. In the present review such issues are discussed with the assistance of seven case vignettes.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/physiopathology , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Diagnosis, Differential , Magnetic Resonance ImagingABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Cluster headache is associated with a decreased quality of life (QoL). The increased focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) has led to the creation of a tailored Cluster Headache Quality of Life scale (CHQ). Our objective was to create and authenticate a Dutch version of the CHQ (CHQ-D). METHODS: The TRAPD model (Translation, Review, Adjudication, Pretesting, Documentation) was used to translate the CHQ from English to Dutch and ensure cross-cultural adaption. Pre-testing was performed in n = 31 participants, and validity was in a new sample of n = 40 participants who completed the CHQ twice at a 2-day interval. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the validity and reproducibility of the CHQ-D. RESULTS: To produce the CHQ-D, we made five modifications based on pretesting. Participants finished the questionnaire in a median time of 10 min (IQR:10.0, 17.5) and 90% within 20 min. The majority of participants (74.2%) did not find it burdensome at all. The reliability of the CHQ-D was excellent (Cronbach's alpha: 0.94; ICC: 0.94). CONCLUSION: The CHQ-D is a valid and practical instrument for QoL in individuals with cluster headache. We aim to use CHQ-D as PROM in clinical research in the Netherlands to enforce international collaborations and comparisons of studies.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Quality of Life , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Reproducibility of Results , Psychometrics , Surveys and Questionnaires , TranslatingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cluster headache (CH) is associated with high disability. The Cluster Headache Impact Questionnaire (CHIQ) is a short, disease-specific disability questionnaire first developed and validated in German. Here, we validated the English version of this questionnaire. METHODS: The CHIQ was assessed together with nonspecific headache-related disability questionnaires in CH patients from a tertiary headache center and an American self-help group. RESULTS: 155 active episodic and chronic CH patients were included. The CHIQ showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.91) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.93, n = 44). Factor analysis identified a single factor. Convergent validity was shown by significant correlations with the Headache Impact Test™ (HIT-6™, ρ = 0.72, p < 0.001), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS depression: ρ = 0.53, HADS anxiety: ρ = 0.61, both p < 0.001), the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10, ρ = 0.61, p < 0.001) and with CH attack frequency (ρ = 0.29, p < 0.001). Chronic CH patients showed the highest CHIQ scores (25.4 ± 7.9, n = 76), followed by active episodic CH and episodic CH patients in remission (active eCH: 22.2 ± 8.7, n = 79; eCH in remission: 14.1 ± 13.1, n = 127; p < 0.001). Furthermore, the CHIQ was graded into 5 levels from "no to low impact" to "extreme impact" based on the patients' perception. Higher CHIQ grading was associated with higher attack and acute medication frequency, HIT-6™, HADS and PSS scores. CONCLUSION: The English version of the CHIQ is a reliable, valid, and disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure to assess the impact of headaches on CH patients.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/psychology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , Adult , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Disability Evaluation , Psychometrics/standards , Psychometrics/instrumentationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pre-cluster symptoms (PCSs) are symptoms preceding cluster bouts and might have implications for the treatment of cluster headache (CH). This study investigated the prevalence of PCSs, and their utility in predicting upcoming bouts as well as the associations with therapeutic efficacy. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from patients with CH. Each patient received a structured interview and completed questionnaire surveys during CH bouts. In sub-study 1, we cross-sectionally analyzed the prevalence, symptomatology, and predictability of upcoming bouts. Overall, 34 PCSs, divided into seven categories, were queried, including head and neck pain, cranial autonomic symptoms, restlessness, fatigue or mood changes, sleep alterations, constitutional symptoms, and generalized pain. In sub-study 2, we recorded the weekly frequency of CH attacks after the initiation of verapamil concurrently with a 14-day transitional therapy based on the patients' headache diary. A responder to verapamil was defined as a patient who have a reduction from baseline of at least 50% in the weekly frequency of CH attacks 4 weeks after the initiation of verapamil. RESULTS: A total of 168 CH patients (women/men: 39/129) completed the study. In sub-study 1, we found 149 (88.7%) experienced PCSs, with a median of 24 (IQR 18 to 72) hours before the bouts. Up to 57.7% of patients with PCS reported that they could predict upcoming bouts. Among the seven categories of PCSs, head and neck pain was the most common (81.0%) and was associated with a higher predictability of upcoming bouts (odds ratio [OR] = 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-9.6). In sub-study 2, we found two categories of PCSs were associated with the response to verapamil: sleep alteration (OR = 2.5 [95% CI = 1.3-4.8], p = 0.004) and ≥ 1 cranial autonomic symptoms (OR = 2.7 [95% CI = 1.4-5.1], p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: PCSs were very common in CH and could be used to predict upcoming bouts. Different symptom categories of PCSs may have different clinical implications.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Verapamil , Humans , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/drug therapy , Female , Male , Adult , Middle Aged , Verapamil/therapeutic use , Taiwan/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Prospective Studies , Prodromal Symptoms , PrevalenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is lack of population-based studies evaluating the prevalence of paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the gender-specific 1-year prevalence of cluster headache, paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua, and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks. METHODS: A nationwide study was conducted from January 1 2022 and December 31 2022 by linking diagnostic codes from Norwegian Patient Registry and prescription of relevant drugs from Norwegian Prescription Database on an individual basis. The 1-year prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of cluster headache, paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks are estimated based on the combination of diagnostic codes, prescription of drugs and corresponding reimbursement codes. RESULTS: Among 4,316,747 individuals aged ≥ 18 years, the 1-year prevalence per 100,000 was 14.6 (95% CI 13.5-15.8) for cluster headache, 2.2 (95% CI 1.8-2.7) for hemicrania continua, 1.4 (95% CI 1.0-1.8) for paroxysmal hemicrania, and 1.2 (95% CI 0.8-1.4) for short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks. For all the trigeminal autonomic cephalalgies, cluster headache included, the prevalence was higher for women than men. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide register-based study, we found a 1-year prevalence per 100,100 of 14.6 for cluster headache, 2.2 for hemicranias continua, 1.4 for paroxysmal hemicranias, and 1.2 for short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks. This is the first study reporting higher prevalence of cluster headache for women than men.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Neuralgia , Paroxysmal Hemicrania , SUNCT Syndrome , Male , Female , Humans , Paroxysmal Hemicrania/diagnosis , Paroxysmal Hemicrania/drug therapy , Paroxysmal Hemicrania/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/drug therapy , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Prevalence , Headache , Norway/epidemiology , RegistriesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Inhalation of oxygen is highly effective in cluster headache, a subtype of trigeminal autonomic cephalgias. Since oxygen has no effect on nociceptive pain, the mechanism of action is still unknown. The present study investigated whether oxygen inhalation modifies the trigeminal autonomic reflex arc in healthy volunteers. METHODS: 21 healthy volunteers participated in a randomized, placebo controlled, double-blind, cross-over, and within-subject study design. In a randomized order demand valve inhalation of 100% oxygen or medical air were administered. Capillary blood samples were collected to control for blood gas changes. Cranial parasympathetic output (lacrimation) was provoked using kinetic oscillation stimulation of the nasal mucosa. Standardized measurement of lacrimation between baseline and kinetic oscillation stimulation served as a measure of induced cranial autonomic output. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in parasympathetic output after oxygen inhalation when compared to inhalation of medical air. CONCLUSION: The inhalation of 100% oxygen does not affect the parasympathetic reflex arc of the trigeminal autonomic reflex.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Oxygen , Humans , Healthy Volunteers , Autonomic Nervous System , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Reflex/physiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This narrative review aims to broaden our understanding of the epidemiology, burden and clinical spectrum of cluster headache based on updated findings with a global perspective. METHODS: We conducted a literature search on the following topics: (a) epidemiology; (b) burden: quality of life, disability, economic burden, job-related burden and suicidality; and (c) clinical spectrum: male predominance and its changes, age, pre-cluster and pre-attack symptoms, aura, post-drome, attack characteristics (location, severity, duration and associated symptoms), bout characteristics (attack frequency, bout duration and bout frequency), circadian and seasonal rhythmicity and disease course. RESULTS: New large-scale population-based reports have suggested a lower prevalence than previous estimations. The impact of cluster headache creates a significant burden in terms of the quality of life, disability, economic and job-related burdens and suicidality. Several studies have reported decreasing male-to-female ratios and a wide age range at disease onset. The non-headache phases of cluster headache, including pre-cluster, pre-attack and postictal symptoms, have recently been revisited. The latest data regarding attack characteristics, bout characteristics, and circadian and seasonal rhythmicity from different countries have shown variability among bouts, attacks, individuals and ethnicities. Studies on the disease course of cluster headache have shown typical characteristics of attacks or bouts that decrease with time. CONCLUSIONS: Cluster headache may be more than a "trigeminal autonomic headache" because it involves complex central nervous system phenomena. The spectrum of attacks and bouts is wider than previously recognised. Cluster headache is a dynamic disorder that evolves or regresses over time.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias , Humans , Female , Male , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Quality of Life , Central Nervous System , Disease ProgressionABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The lack of knowledge about the intra- and interindividual attack frequency variability in chronic cluster headache complicates power and sample size calculations for baseline periods of trials, and consensus on their most optimal duration. METHODS: We analyzed the 12-week baseline of the ICON trial (occipital nerve stimulation in medically intractable chronic cluster headache) for: (i) weekly vs. instantaneous recording of attack frequency; (ii) intra-individual and seasonal variability of attack frequency; and (iii) the smallest number of weeks to obtain a reliable estimate of baseline attack frequency. RESULTS: Weekly median (14.4 [8.2-24.0]) and instantaneous (14.2 [8.0-24.5]) attack frequency recordings were similar (p = 0.20; Bland-Altman plot). Median weekly attack frequency was 15.3 (range 4.2-140) and highest during spring (p = 0.001) compared to the other seasons. Relative attack frequency variability decreased with increasing attack frequency (p = 0.010). We tabulated the weekly attack frequency estimation accuracies compared to, and the associated deviations from, the 12-week gold standard for different lengths of the observation period. CONCLUSION: Weekly retrospective attack frequency recording is as good as instantaneous recording and more convenient. Attack frequency is highest in spring. Participants with ≥3 daily attacks show less attack frequency variability than those with <3 daily attacks. An optimal balance between 90% accuracy and feasibility is achieved at a baseline period of seven weeks.The ICON trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT01151631.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: While migraine and cluster headache share some clinical features and therapies, they differ considerably in the frequency and duration of the headache, as well as the inter-attack, or inter-bout, pathophysiology. Neither is fully understood, with their shared pathways being of interest. FINDINGS: Five patients for whom it was difficult to distinguish migraine from cluster headache are presented. They had aspects of their phenotypes, which could be attributed to both disorders. Each patient was thoroughly examined, excluding secondary causes of headache, and had been treated with a number of medicines. CONCLUSION: A correct diagnosis is key to the appropriate treatment approach. Especially, if treatment is not successful for the suspected headache type, and enlargement of the diagnostic and therapeutic range, respectively, should be evaluated. Whether in such settings there is shared or different pathophysiology can only be speculated upon.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Migraine Disorders , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/therapy , Migraine Disorders/diagnosis , Migraine Disorders/epidemiology , Migraine Disorders/therapy , Headache/complications , ComorbidityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Cluster Headache Impact Questionnaire (CHIQ) is a specific and easy-to-use questionnaire to assess the current impact of cluster headache (CH). The aim of this study was to validate the Italian version of the CHIQ. METHODS: We included patients diagnosed with episodic CH (eCH) or chronic CH (cCH) according to the ICHD-3 criteria and included in the "Italian Headache Registry" (RICe). The questionnaire was administered to patients through an electronic form in two sessions: at first visit for validation, and after 7 days for test-retest reliability. For internal consistency, Cronbach's alpha was calculated. Convergent validity of the CHIQ with CH features and the results of questionnaires assessing anxiety, depression, stress, and quality of life was evaluated using Spearman's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: We included 181 patients subdivided in 96 patients with active eCH, 14 with cCH, and 71 with eCH in remission. The 110 patients with either active eCH or cCH were included in the validation cohort; only 24 patients with CH were characterized by a stable attack frequency after 7 days, and were included in the test-retest cohort. Internal consistency of the CHIQ was good with a Cronbach alpha value of 0.891. The CHIQ score showed a significant positive correlation with anxiety, depression, and stress scores, while showing a significant negative correlation with quality-of-life scale scores. CONCLUSION: Our data show the validity of the Italian version of the CHIQ, which represents a suitable tool for evaluating the social and psychological impact of CH in clinical practice and research.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Humans , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/psychology , Quality of Life/psychology , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires , Italy , PsychometricsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to identify susceptibility loci for cluster headache and obtain insights into relevant disease pathways. METHODS: We carried out a genome-wide association study, where 852 UK and 591 Swedish cluster headache cases were compared with 5,614 and 1,134 controls, respectively. Following quality control and imputation, single variant association testing was conducted using a logistic mixed model for each cohort. The 2 cohorts were subsequently combined in a merged analysis. Downstream analyses, such as gene-set enrichment, functional variant annotation, prediction and pathway analyses, were performed. RESULTS: Initial independent analysis identified 2 replicable cluster headache susceptibility loci on chromosome 2. A merged analysis identified an additional locus on chromosome 1 and confirmed a locus significant in the UK analysis on chromosome 6, which overlaps with a previously known migraine locus. The lead single nucleotide polymorphisms were rs113658130 (p = 1.92 × 10-17 , odds ratio [OR] = 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.37-1.66) and rs4519530 (p = 6.98 × 10-17 , OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.34-1.61) on chromosome 2, rs12121134 on chromosome 1 (p = 1.66 × 10-8 , OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.22-1.52), and rs11153082 (p = 1.85 × 10-8 , OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.19-1.42) on chromosome 6. Downstream analyses implicated immunological processes in the pathogenesis of cluster headache. INTERPRETATION: We identified and replicated several genome-wide significant associations supporting a genetic predisposition in cluster headache in a genome-wide association study involving 1,443 cases. Replication in larger independent cohorts combined with comprehensive phenotyping, in relation to, for example, treatment response and cluster headache subtypes, could provide unprecedented insights into genotype-phenotype correlations and the pathophysiological pathways underlying cluster headache. ANN NEUROL 2021;90:193-202.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/genetics , Genetic Loci/genetics , Genetic Predisposition to Disease/epidemiology , Genetic Predisposition to Disease/genetics , Genome-Wide Association Study/methods , Case-Control Studies , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Sweden/epidemiology , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical profiles between male and female cluster headache patients from a large cohort. METHODS: This hospital-based study enrolled patients diagnosed with cluster headache between 1997 to 2021. Participants completed structured questionnaires collecting information on demographics, clinical profiles, and quality of life. Treatment regimens and effectiveness were determined through medical chart review. All variables were compared between the sexes. RESULTS: In total, 798 patients (M/F:659/139) were enrolled. The male-to-female ratio was 4.7:1 for the full study period, but it declined from 5.2:1 to 4.3:1 for patients enrolled before and after 2010, respectively. The frequencies of chronic cluster headache (M:1.2%, F:1.4%) and aura (M:0.3%, F:0.7%) were low but similar between the sexes. Most headache features showed no difference between men and women. Female patients had significantly longer attack duration, shorter inter-bout duration, higher frequencies for eyelid edema, nausea and vomiting and lower frequencies for conjunctival injection and pacing. Sex difference did not influence headache-associated disability, anxiety, or depression, but poor sleep quality was significantly more common in women. Among menstruating women, 22/122 (18.0%) reported worsening headaches during menses. The effectiveness of treatment was similar between the sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a decline of male-to-female ratio in the past two decades, most clinical profiles were similar between the sexes.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Female , Humans , Male , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Sex Characteristics , Quality of Life , Taiwan/epidemiology , Headache , HospitalsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Contrary to pre-attack symptoms before an individual cluster headache attack, little is known about the pre-cluster symptoms before the onset of cluster bouts. We previously described pre-attack symptoms before cluster headache attacks. The aim of this study was to investigate characteristics of pre-cluster symptoms in patients with episodic cluster headache. METHODS: In this multicentre study, 184 patients with episodic cluster headache were recruited between October 2018 and December 2020. They were interviewed by investigators and completed a structured questionnaire. To investigate pre-cluster and pre-attack symptoms, we assessed 20 symptoms and signs using the questionnaire. RESULTS: The upcoming cluster bout was predictable in 35.3% (n = 65/184) of the patients. When present, pre-cluster symptoms occurred at a median duration of 7 days (interquartile range, 2.3-14 days) before the onset of the cluster bout. Patients with pre-cluster symptoms showed a higher proportion of women, prevalence of pre-attack symptoms and seasonal rhythmicity, frequency of cluster headache attacks per day, and total number of cluster bouts compared to patients without pre-cluster symptoms. In univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses, female sex was associated with the predictability of pre-cluster symptoms (odds ratio = 2.297, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: The upcoming cluster bout was predicted in approximately 35% of patients with episodic cluster headache, which may allow for an earlier preventive treatment and help understand the pathophysiology.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Cluster Headache/complications , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cluster Headache/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Periodicity , Prevalence , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The presence of aura is rare in cluster headache, and even rarer in other trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias. We hypothesized that the presence of aura in patients with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias is frequently an epiphenomenon and mediated by comorbid migraine with aura. METHODS: The study retrospectively reviewed 480 patients with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia in a tertiary medical center for 10 years. Phenotypes and temporal correlation of aura with headache were analyzed. Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia patients with aura were further followed up in a structured telephone interview. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with aura (3.5%) were identified from 480 patients with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia, including nine with cluster headache, one with paroxysmal hemicrania, three with hemicrania continua, and four with probable trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia. Compared to trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia patients without aura, trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia patients with aura were more likely to have a concomitant diagnosis of migraine with aura (odds ratio [OR] = 109.0, 95% CI 30.9-383.0, p < 0.001); whereas the risk of migraine without aura remains similar between both groups (OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.14-8.59, p = 0.931). Aura was more frequently accompanied with migraine-like attacks, but not trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia attacks. INTERPRETATION: In most patients with trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia, the presence of aura is mediated by the comorbidity of migraine with aura. Aura directly related to trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia attack may exist but remains rare. Our results suggest that aura may not be involved in the pathophysiology of trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Epilepsy , Migraine Disorders , Migraine with Aura , Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Comorbidity , Humans , Migraine with Aura/diagnosis , Migraine with Aura/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias/diagnosisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Increased sensitivity to light and patterns is typically associated with migraine, but has also been anecdotally reported in cluster headache, leading to diagnostic confusion. We wanted to assess whether visual sensitivity is increased ictally and interictally in cluster headache. METHODS: We used the validated Leiden Visual Sensitivity Scale (L-VISS) questionnaire (range 0-36 points) to measure visual sensitivity in people with episodic or chronic cluster headache: (i) during attacks; (ii) in-between attacks; and in episodic cluster headache (iii) in-between bouts. The L-VISS scores were compared with the L-VISS scores obtained in a previous study in healthy controls and participants with migraine. RESULTS: Mean L-VISS scores were higher for: (i) ictal vs interictal cluster headache (episodic cluster headache: 11.9 ± 8.0 vs. 5.2 ± 5.5, chronic cluster headache: 13.7 ± 8.4 vs 5.6 ± 4.8; p < 0.001); (ii) interictal cluster headache vs controls (5.3 ± 5.2 vs 3.6 ± 2.8, p < 0.001); (iii) interictal chronic cluster headache vs interictal ECH in bout (5.9 ± 0.5 vs 3.8 ± 0.5, p = 0.009), and (iv) interictal episodic cluster headache in bout vs episodic cluster headache out-of-bout (5.2 ± 5.5 vs. 3.7 ± 4.3, p < 0.001). Subjective visual hypersensitivity was reported by 110/121 (91%; 9 missing) participants with cluster headache and was mostly unilateral in 70/110 (64%) and ipsilateral to the ictal pain in 69/70 (99%) participants. CONCLUSION: Cluster headache is associated with increased ictal and interictal visual sensitivity. In contrast to migraine, this is mostly unilateral and ipsilateral on the side of the ictal pain.
Subject(s)
Cluster Headache , Migraine Disorders , Cluster Headache/complications , Cluster Headache/diagnosis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Migraine Disorders/complications , Pain , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Acute treatments for migraine and cluster headache are necessary to abort attacks, relieve pain and associated symptoms, and restore an individual's ability to function. Acute headache treatments consist of a variety of medication and nonmedication options. In this article, we discuss the approach to acute treatment of migraine and cluster headache. We summarize the level of evidence to support each acute medication class according to recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well as guideline recommendations from the American Headache Society, American Academy of Neurology, and European Federation of Neurological Society.