Neuromodulation for Chronic Daily Headache.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We reviewed the literature that explored the use of central and peripheral neuromodulation techniques for chronic daily headache (CDH) treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Although the more invasive deep brain stimulation (DBS) is effective in chronic cluster headache (CCH), it should be reserved for extremely difficult-to-treat patients. Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation has shown similar efficacy to DBS and is less risky in both CCH and chronic migraine (CM). Non-invasive transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation is a promising add-on treatment for CCH but not for CM. Transcutaneous external trigeminal nerve stimulation may be effective in treating CM; however, it has not yet been tested for cluster headache. Transcranial magnetic and electric stimulations have promising preventive effects against CM and CCH. Although the precise mode of action of non-invasive neuromodulation techniques remains largely unknown and there is a paucity of controlled trials, they should be preferred to more invasive techniques for treating CDH.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for clinical trials with neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine.

BACKGROUND: Although the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration have cleared several devices that use neuromodulation to provide clinical benefits in the acute or preventive treatment of migraine, the Clinical Trials Committee of the International Headache Society has not developed guidelines specifically for clinical trials of neuromodulation devices. In recognition of the distinct needs and challenges associated with their assessment in controlled trials, the Committee provides these recommendations for optimizing the design and conduct of controlled trials of neuromodulation devices for the acute and/or preventive treatment of migraine. METHODS: An international group of headache scientists and clinicians with expertise in neuromodulation evaluated clinical trials involving neuromodulation devices that have been published since 2000. The Clinical Trials Committee incorporated findings from this expert analysis into a new guideline for clinical trials of neuromodulation devices for the treatment of migraine. RESULTS: Key terms were defined and recommendations provided relative to the assessment of neuromodulation devices for acute treatment in adults, preventive treatment in adults, and acute and preventive treatment in children and adolescents. Ethical and administrative responsibilities were outlined, and a bibliography of previous research involving neuromodulation devices was created. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of these recommendations will improve the quality of evidence regarding this important area in migraine treatment.

Safety and tolerability of monthly galcanezumab injections in patients with migraine: integrated results from migraine clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated a significant reduction in monthly migraine headache days in phase 2 and 3 trials. In these analyses, we aimed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of galcanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic or chronic migraine. METHODS: Data were integrated from three double-blind clinical studies for the up to 6-month galcanezumab exposure group (N = 1435), and from five clinical studies for the up to 1-year all-galcanezumab exposure group (N = 2276). Patients received a monthly 120 mg subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab (with a 240 mg loading dose in month 1), 240 mg galcanezumab, or placebo. Outcomes measured were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and discontinuation due to AEs (DCAEs). Laboratory results, vital signs, electrocardiogram (ECG), suicidal ideation and behavior results were evaluated. RESULTS: TEAEs that occurred more frequently in galcanezumab-treated patients included injection site pain, injection site reactions excluding pain, constipation, vertigo, and pruritus. The proportion of DCAEs among galcanezumab-treated patients ranged between 1.8 and 3.0%, and differed from placebo group for galcanezumab 240 mg (P < 0.05). Fewer than 2.0% of patients in either galcanezumab dose-group compared with 1.0% of placebo-treated patients reported a SAE. There were no clinically meaningful differences between galcanezumab and placebo in laboratory measures, vital signs including blood pressure, ECGs, cardiovascular-related AEs, or suicidal ideation and behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile for up to 1 year of treatment for the prevention of migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials CGAB = NCT02163993, EVOLVE-1 = NCT02614183, EVOLVE-2 = NCT02614196, REGAIN = NCT02614261, and CGAJ = NCT02614287. All were first posted on 25 November 2015, except CGAB posted on 16 June 2014, and before enrolling the first patient.

Correction to: Safety and tolerability of monthly galcanezumab injections in patients with migraine: integrated results from migraine clinical studies.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed an error in the values for 'Hypersensitivity SMQ' and 'Rash' in Table 7.

Evaluation of 2-Hour Post-Dose Efficacy of Lasmiditan for the Acute Treatment of Difficult-to-Treat Migraine Attacks.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors predicting response (2-hour headache pain freedom or most bothersome symptom freedom) to lasmiditan based on individual patient characteristics, migraine disease characteristics, and migraine attack characteristics. Further, efficacy specifically in difficult-to-treat patient/migraine disease characteristics or attack characteristics (ie, historically considered less responsive to certain acute therapies) subgroups was analyzed. BACKGROUND: Knowledge of factors associated with a positive or negative response to acute treatment would be useful to practitioners prescribing acute treatments for migraine. Additionally, practitioners and patients would benefit from understanding the efficacy of lasmiditan specifically in subgroups of patients with migraine disease characteristics and migraine attack characteristics historically associated with decreased pain threshold, reduced efficacy of acute treatment, or increased burden of migraine. METHODS: Pooled analyses were completed from 2 Phase 3 double-blind clinical trials, SPARTAN and SAMURAI. Data from baseline to 2 hours after taking lasmiditan (50, 100, or 200 mg) or placebo were analyzed to assess efficacy based on patient characteristics, migraine disease characteristics, and migraine attack characteristics. A total of 3981 patients comprising the intent-to-treat population were treated with placebo (N = 1130), lasmiditan 50 mg (N = 598), lasmiditan 100 mg (N = 1133), or lasmiditan 200 mg (N = 1120). Data were analyzed for the following efficacy measures at 2 hours: headache pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom. RESULTS: None of the analyzed subgroups based on individual patient characteristics, migraine disease characteristics, or migraine attack characteristics predicted headache pain freedom or most bothersome symptom freedom response at 2 hours following lasmiditan treatment (interaction P ≥ .1). For the difficult-to-treat patient/migraine disease characteristics subgroups (defined as those with ≥24 headache days in the past 3 months, duration of migraine history ≥20 years, severe disability [Migraine Disability Assessment score ≥21], obesity [≥30 kg/m2 ], and history of psychiatric disorder), single doses of lasmiditan (100 or 200 mg) were significantly more effective than placebo (P ≤ .002) in achieving both endpoints. Headache pain freedom response rates for higher doses of lasmiditan were numerically greater than for lower doses of lasmiditan. For the difficult-to-treat migraine attack subgroups, patients with severe headache, co-existent nausea at the time of treatment, or who delayed treatment for ≥2 hours from the time of headache onset, both endpoint response rates after lasmiditan 100 or 200 mg were significantly greater than after placebo. Among those who delayed treatment for ≥4 hours from the time of headache onset, headache pain freedom response rates for the 200 mg dose of lasmiditan met statistical significance vs placebo (32.4% vs 15.9%; odds ratio = 2.7 [1.17, 6.07]; P = .018). While the predictors of response interaction test showed similar efficacy of lasmiditan vs placebo across subgroups defined by baseline functional disability (mild, moderate, or needs complete bed rest) at the time of treatment, analyses of lasmiditan efficacy within the subgroup "needs complete bed rest" appeared to show less efficacy (eg, in the 200 mg vs placebo group, 25.9% vs 18.5%; odds ratio = 1.56 [0.96, 2.53]; P = .070). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy of lasmiditan 200 and 100 mg for headache pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom at 2 hours post-treatment was generally not influenced by the individual patient characteristics, migraine disease history, or migraine attack characteristics that were analyzed. In the analyses of difficult-to-treat subgroups, patients receiving lasmiditan achieved greater responses (2-hour headache pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom) vs placebo recipients.

Emerging treatments for cluster headache: hopes and disappointments.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cluster headache stands among the worst debilitating pain conditions. Available treatments for cluster headache have often disabling side effects, are not tolerated, or are ineffective. The management of drug-refractory chronic forms is challenging. New treatments are warranted and reported here. RECENT FINDINGS: In cluster headache acute treatment, delivery systems like Demand Valve Oxygen or nonrebreather-type masks could enhance the effectiveness of inhaled oxygen therapy. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation relieves cluster headache pain at short-term in episodic patients. Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation combines acute and preventive properties in subsets of patients and is of interest in selected refractory chronic forms. In cluster headache prevention, 'hypothalamic' deep brain stimulation is being refined using slightly different stereotactic coordinates or lower risk methods like endoventricular stimulation. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies provide interesting results in episodic cluster headache, have a good safety profile, but do not appear effective in chronic cluster headache. SUMMARY: These novel approaches provide additional alternatives to conventional cluster headache management, but results obtained in chronic forms are often disappointing. Research on cluster headache is often hampered by the lack of awareness in the medical world and by the relatively low prevalence of cluster headache compared with migraine. However, common features shared by these two primary headaches could help developing disease-specific therapies.

Age related metabolic modifications in the migraine brain.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the possibility that migraine patients exhibit specific age-related metabolic changes in the brain, which occur regardless of disease duration or the frequency of attacks. METHODS: We analysed the relation between brain glucose (18F-fluorodeoxyglucose) uptake and age in healthy volunteers (n = 20) and episodic migraine patients (n = 19). In the latter, we additionally compared the correlation between 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake and disease duration and monthly migraine days. RESULTS: In contrast to controls, in migraine patients advancing age was positively correlated to increased metabolism in the brainstem (especially the posterior pons), hippocampus, fusiform gyrus and parahippocampus. Conversely, no significant correlations between cerebral metabolism and disease duration or migraine days were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this cross-sectional study show that episodic migraine patients exhibit specific metabolic brain modifications while ageing. As such, age is correlated with metabolic changes in key regions of the brain previously associated with migraine's pathophysiology to a better extent than disease duration or the number of monthly migraine days. More than the repeated headache attacks, the continuous interaction with the environment seemingly models the brain of migraine sufferers in an adaptive manner. A positive control (e.g. chronic pain) is missing in this study and therefore findings cannot be proven to be migraine-specific.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine: The multicentre, double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled PREMIUM trial.

INTRODUCTION: Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS; gammaCore®) has the potential to prevent migraine days in patients with migraine on the basis of mechanistic rationale and pilot clinical data. METHODS: This multicentre study included a 4-week run-in period, a 12-week double-blind period of randomised treatment with nVNS or sham, and a 24-week open-label period of nVNS. Patients were to administer two 120-second stimulations bilaterally to the neck three times daily (6-8 hours apart). RESULTS: Of 477 enrolled patients, 332 comprised the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Mean reductions in migraine days per month (primary outcome) were 2.26 for nVNS (n = 165; baseline, 7.9 days) and 1.80 for sham (n = 167; baseline, 8.1 days) (p = 0.15). Results were similar across other outcomes. Upon observation of suboptimal adherence rates, post hoc analysis of patients with ≥ 67% adherence per month demonstrated significant differences between nVNS (n = 138) and sham (n = 140) for outcomes including reduction in migraine days (2.27 vs. 1.53; p = 0.043); therapeutic gains were greater in patients with aura than in those without aura. Most nVNS device-related adverse events were mild and transient, with application site discomfort being the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive nVNS treatment in episodic migraine was not superior to sham stimulation in the ITT population. The "sham" device inadvertently provided a level of active vagus nerve stimulation. Post hoc analysis showed significant effects of nVNS in treatment-adherent patients. Study identification and registration: PREMIUM; NCT02378844; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02378844.

Sunlight irradiance and habituation of visual evoked potentials in migraine: The environment makes its mark.

Background Migraine is a complex multifactorial disease that arises from the interaction between a genetic predisposition and an enabling environment. Habituation is considered as a fundamental adaptive behaviour of the nervous system that is often impaired in migraine populations. Given that migraineurs are hypersensitive to light, and that light deprivation is able to induce functional changes in the visual cortex recognizable through visual evoked potentials habituation testing, we hypothesized that regional sunlight irradiance levels could influence the results of visual evoked potentials habituation studies performed in different locations worldwide. Methods We searched the literature for visual evoked potentials habituation studies comparing healthy volunteers and episodic migraine patients and correlated their results with levels of local solar radiation. Results After reviewing the literature, 26 studies involving 1291 participants matched our inclusion criteria. Deficient visual evoked potentials habituation in episodic migraine patients was reported in 19 studies. Mean yearly sunlight irradiance was significantly higher in locations of studies reporting deficient habituation. Correlation analyses suggested that visual evoked potentials habituation decreases with increasing sunlight irradiance in migraine without aura patients. Conclusion Results from this hypothesis generating analysis suggest that variations in sunlight irradiance may induce adaptive modifications in visual processing systems that could be reflected in visual evoked potentials habituation, and thus partially account for the difference in results between studies performed in geographically distant centers. Other causal factors such as genetic differences could also play a role, and therefore well-designed prospective trials are warranted.

Migraine triggers and habituation of visual evoked potentials.

Background Identifying specific subsets of patients within the clinical spectrum of migraine could help in personalizing migraine treatment. Profiling patients by combining clinical characteristics and neurophysiological biomarkers is largely unexplored. We studied the association between migraine attack triggers and habituation of visual evoked potentials. Methods We personally interviewed 25 patients about their migraine triggers following a structured list, and measured the N1-P1 habituation slope over six blocks of 100 averaged pattern-reversal VEP afterwards. Results The mean number of triggers per patient was 4.52 ± 1.42. Habituation slopes differed significantly between subjects who reported stress as a migraine trigger (deficient VEP habituation) and subjects who did not (preserved VEP habituation). For the remaining categories, the mean amplitude slope was always positive, indicating deficient habituation, and was not significantly different between subgroups. Conclusions Migraine patients not reporting perceived stress as a trigger for their attacks might constitute a distinct clinic-physiological subset within the migraine spectrum.

Anodal frontal tDCS for chronic cluster headache treatment: a proof-of-concept trial targeting the anterior cingulate cortex and searching for nociceptive correlates.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is effective in refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) patients. Responders to ONS differ from non-responders by greater glucose metabolism in subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (sgACC). We reasoned that transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive approach, might be able to activate this area and thus improve rCCH patients. Our objective was to explore in a pilot trial the therapeutic potential of tDCS (anode at Fz, cathode over C7) and its possible effects on pain perception, frontal executive functions and mood in rCCH patients. METHODS: Thirty-one patients were asked to apply daily 20-min sessions of 2 mA tDCS for 4 or 8 weeks after a 1-month baseline. CH attacks were monitored with paper diaries. The primary outcome measure was change in weekly attacks between baseline and the last week of tDCS. Twenty-three patients were available for a modified ITT analysis, 21 for per-protocol analysis. We also explored treatment-related changes in thermal pain thresholds and nociceptive blink reflexes (nBR), frontal lobe function and mood scales. RESULTS: In the per-protocol analysis there was a mean 35% decrease of attack frequency (p = 0.0001) with 41% of patients having a ≥ 50% decrease. Attack duration and intensity were also significantly reduced. After 8 weeks (n = 10), the 50% responder rate was 45%, but at follow-up 2 weeks after tDCS (n = 16) mean attack frequency had returned to baseline levels. The treatment effect was significant in patients with high baseline thermal pain thresholds in the forehead (n = 12), but not in those with low thresholds (n = 9). The Frontal Assessment Battery score increased after tDCS (p = 0.01), while there was no change in depression scores or nBR. CONCLUSION: tDCS with a Fz-C7 montage may have a preventive effect in rCCH patients, especially those with low pain sensitivity, suggesting that a sham-controlled trial in cluster headache is worthwhile. Whether the therapeutic effect is due to activation of the sgACC that can in theory be reached by the electrical field, or of other prefrontal cortical areas remains to be determined.

Evidence of an increased neuronal activation-to-resting glucose uptake ratio in the visual cortex of migraine patients: a study comparing 18FDG-PET and visual evoked potentials.

BACKGROUND: Migraine attacks might be triggered by a disruption of cerebral homeostasis. During the interictal period migraine patients are characterized by abnormal sensory information processing, but this functional abnormality may not be sufficient to disrupt the physiological equilibrium of the cortex unless it is accompanied by additional pathological mechanisms, like a reduction in energetic reserves. The aim of this study was to compare resting cerebral glucose uptake (using positron emission tomography (18fluorodeoxyglucose-PET)), and visual cortex activation (using visual evoked potentials (VEP)), between episodic migraine without aura patients in the interictal period and healthy volunteers. METHODS: Twenty episodic migraine without aura patients and twenty healthy volunteers were studied. 18FDG-PET and VEP recordings were performed on separate days. The overall glucose uptake in the visual cortex-to-VEP response ratio was calculated and compared between the groups. Additionally, PET scan comparisons adding area under the VEP curve as a covariate were performed. For case-wise analysis, eigenvalues from a specific region exhibiting significantly different FDG-PET signal in the visual cortex were extracted. Standardized glucose uptake values from this region and VEP values from each subject were then coupled and compared between the groups. RESULTS: The mean area under the curve of VEP was greater in migraine patients compared to healthy controls. In the same line, patients had an increased neuronal activation-to-resting glucose uptake ratio in the visual cortex. Statistical parametric mapping analysis revealed that cortical FDG-PET signal in relation to VEP area under the curve was significantly reduced in migraineurs in a cluster extending throughout the left visual cortex, from Brodmann's areas 19 and 18 to area 7. Within this region, case-wise analyses showed that a visual neuronal activation exceeding glucose uptake was present in 90% of migraine patients, but in only 15% of healthy volunteers. CONCLUSION: This study identifies an area of increased neuronal activation-to-resting glucose uptake ratio in the visual cortex of migraine patients between attacks. Such observation supports the concept that an activity-induced rupture of cerebral metabolic homeostasis may be a cornerstone of migraine pathophysiology. This article has been selected as the winner of the 2018 Enrico Greppi Award. The Enrico Greppi Award is made to an unpublished paper dealing with clinical, epidemiological, genetic, pathophysiological or therapeutic aspects of headache. Italian Society for the Study of Headaches (SISC) sponsors this award, and the award is supported through an educational grant from Teva Neuroscience. This article did not undergo the standard peer review process for The Journal of Headache and Pain. The members of the 2018 Enrico Greppi Award Selection Committee were: Francesco Pierelli, Paolo Martelletti, Lyn Griffiths, Simona Sacco, Andreas Straube and Cenk Ayata.

Evidence of activation of vagal afferents by non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation: An electrophysiological study in healthy volunteers.

Background Benefits of cervical non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) devices have been shown in episodic cluster headache and preliminarily suggested in migraine, but direct evidence of vagus nerve activation using such devices is lacking. Vagal somatosensory evoked potentials (vSEPs) associated with vagal afferent activation have been reported for invasive vagus nerve stimulation (iVNS) and non-invasive auricular vagal stimulation. Here, we aimed to show and characterise vSEPs for cervical nVNS. Methods vSEPs were recorded for 12 healthy volunteers who received nVNS over the cervical vagus nerve, bipolar electrode/DS7A stimulation over the inner tragus, and nVNS over the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscle. We measured peak-to-peak amplitudes (P1-N1), wave latencies, and N1 area under the curve. Results P1-N1 vSEPs were observed for cervical nVNS (11/12) and auricular stimulation (9/12), with latencies similar to those described previously, whereas SCM stimulation revealed only a muscle artefact with a much longer latency. A dose-response analysis showed that cervical nVNS elicited a clear vSEP response in more than 80% of the participants using an intensity of 15 V. Conclusion Cervical nVNS can activate vagal afferent fibres, as evidenced by the recording of far-field vSEPs similar to those seen with iVNS and non-invasive auricular stimulation.

Visual and auditory cortical evoked potentials in interictal episodic migraine: An audit on 624 patients from three centres.

Background Many studies report a habituation deficit of visual evoked potentials (VEP) and/or increased intensity dependence of auditory evoked cortical potentials (IDAP) in episodic migraine patients between attacks. These findings have a pathophysiological interest, but their diagnostic utility is not known. Aims To perform an audit on a large database of interictal VEP and IDAP recordings in episodic migraine patients and evaluate their diagnostic accuracy. Methods We pooled data for VEP habituation and IDAP measured in 624 episodic migraineurs (EM) and 360 healthy volunteers (HV) from three centers. Thresholds were calculated by Receiver Operating Curve analysis and used to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-) and the accuracy of each test, using ICHD diagnostic criteria as the gold standard. Results In EM, VEP habituation was significantly lower than in HV, and IDAP slopes were significantly steeper. VEP (five blocks of 50 responses), VEP (six blocks of 100 responses) and IDAP had respectively 61.0%, 61.4% and 45.7% sensitivity, and 77.9%, 77.9% and 87.2% specificity. Their positive (LR+) and negative (LR-) likelihood ratios were respectively 2.760, 2.778, 3.570 and 0.500, 0.495, 0.623, with diagnostic accuracies of 65.3%, 69.0% and 54.3%. In combined VEP + IDAP recordings, an abnormality of at least one test had 83.4% sensitivity, 66.7% specificity, 2.504 LR+, 0.249 LR- and 81.1% accuracy. Conclusions In this large database, VEP habituation is significantly reduced and IDAP increased in episodic migraine patients between attacks. Taken alone, neither VEP nor IDAP has sufficient diagnostic accuracy. However, when both tests are performed in the same patient, an abnormality of at least one of them is highly predictive of interictal episodic migraine.

Cerebral metabolism before and after external trigeminal nerve stimulation in episodic migraine.

Background and aim A recent sham-controlled trial showed that external trigeminal nerve stimulation (eTNS) is effective in episodic migraine (MO) prevention. However, its mechanism of action remains unknown. We performed 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) to evaluate brain metabolic changes before and after eTNS in episodic migraineurs. Methods Twenty-eight individuals were recruited: 14 with MO and 20 healthy volunteers (HVs). HVs underwent a single FDG-PET, whereas patients were scanned at baseline, directly after a first prolonged session of eTNS (Cefaly®) and after three months of treatment (uncontrolled study). Results The frequency of migraine attacks significantly decreased in compliant patients ( N = 10). Baseline FDG-PET revealed a significant hypometabolism in fronto-temporal areas, especially in the orbitofrontal (OFC) and rostral anterior cingulate cortices (rACC) in MO patients. This hypometabolism was reduced after three months of eTNS treatment. Conclusion Our study shows that metabolic activity of OFC and rACC, which are pivotal areas in central pain and behaviour control, is decreased in migraine. This hypometabolism is reduced after three months of eTNS. eTNS might thus exert its beneficial effects via slow neuromodulation of central pain-controlling areas, a mechanism also previously reported in chronic migraine and cluster headache after percutaneous occipital nerve stimulation. However, this finding needs to be confirmed by further studies using a sham condition.

Familial history of migraine influences habituation of visual evoked potentials.

Background Lack of habituation of visual evoked potentials (VEP) is a common finding in migraine patients between attacks. Previous studies have suggested an electrophysiological familial aggregation pattern associated with migraine. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of a positive familial history of migraine on VEP amplitude and habituation. Methods We recorded six blocks of 100 VEP during continuous pattern-reversal stimulation in 30 patients with migraine between attacks (MO) and in 30 healthy volunteers, of whom 15 had a first-degree relative suffering from migraine (HVm) and 15 had not (HV). Results Both MO and HVm had a significant deficit of VEP habituation and similarly reduced N1-P1 first block amplitudes, compared to HV (habituation slope: MO = 0.033, HVm = 0.021, HV = -0.025, HV vs. MO p = 0.002, HV vs. HVm p = 0.036; mean N1-P1 amplitude in the first block: MO = 9.08 µV, HVm = 9.29 µV, HV = 12.19 µV. HV vs. MO p = 0.041, HV vs. HVm p = 0.076). The first block N1-P1 amplitude was negatively correlated with the habituation slope for both MO (ρ = -.44, p = 0.015) and HVm (ρ = -.56, p = 0.031) while no significant correlation was found in HV (ρ = .17, p = 0.53). There were no differences in VEP latencies between the groups. Conclusions Our study suggests that lack of habituation of visual evoked potentials is probably a genetically determined endophenotypic trait that is associated with both migraine and migraine susceptibility. We hypothesize that genetic diversity of populations could account for some of the discrepancies between electrophysiological studies performed in migraine and for interindividual variations among the subgroups.

Effects of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation on attack frequency over time and expanded response rates in patients with chronic cluster headache: a post hoc analysis of the randomised, controlled PREVA study.

BACKGROUND: In the PREVention and Acute treatment of chronic cluster headache (PREVA) study, attack frequency reductions from baseline were significantly more pronounced with non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation plus standard of care (nVNS + SoC) than with SoC alone. Given the intensely painful and frequent nature of chronic cluster headache attacks, additional patient-centric outcomes, including the time to and level of therapeutic response, were evaluated in a post hoc analysis of the PREVA study. FINDINGS: After a 2-week baseline phase, 97 patients with chronic cluster headache entered a 4-week randomised phase to receive nVNS + SoC (n = 48) or SoC alone (n = 49). All 92 patients who continued into a 4-week extension phase received nVNS + SoC. Compared with SoC alone, nVNS + SoC led to a significantly lower mean weekly attack frequency by week 2 of the randomised phase; the attack frequency remained significantly lower in the nVNS + SoC group through week 3 of the extension phase (P < 0.02). Attack frequencies in the nVNS + SoC group were significantly lower at all study time points than they were at baseline (P < 0.05). Response rates were significantly greater with nVNS + SoC than with SoC alone when response was defined as attack frequency reductions of ≥25%, ≥50%, and ≥75% from baseline (≥25% and ≥50%, P < 0.001; ≥75%, P = 0.009). The 100% response rate was 8% with nVNS + SoC and 0% with SoC alone. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic nVNS led to rapid, significant, and sustained reductions in chronic cluster headache attack frequency within 2 weeks after its addition to SoC and was associated with significantly higher ≥25%, ≥50%, and ≥75% response rates than SoC alone. The rapid decrease in weekly attack frequency justifies a 4-week trial period to identify responders to nVNS, with a high degree of confidence, among patients with chronic cluster headache.

Highlights in migraine electrophysiology: are controversies just reflecting disease heterogeneity?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In migraine, the brain is 'hyperresponsive', which refers to a deficit of habituation to repeated sensory stimuli between attacks. This deficit normalizes in peri-ictal and ictal phases. A decreased cortical preactivation of thalamo-cortical origin and an impaired intracortical inhibition are probably involved in its pathophysiology. RECENT FINDINGS: The reality of a habituation deficit of visual evoked potentials, a neurophysiological 'hallmark' of interictal migraine, has been questioned. Blinding may be an issue, but some genetic, environmental, or behavioural differences could also exist between populations. A habituation deficit is found interictally in other sensory modalities, and strongly depends on the time of the recordings within the migraine cycle. An impaired thalamocortical drive is demonstrated in interictal phase, and normalizes in ictal phase as well as in chronic migraine, where a strength enhancement of primary cortical activation is observed. An interictal dysexcitability, of subcortical or primary cortical origin, is suggested by magnetic stimulation. These phenomena could occur in varying degrees depending on patients and on the migraine cycle, and account for the heterogeneity of electrophysiological results. SUMMARY: Finding a reliable electrophysiological biomarker for such a multifaceted and cycling disease as migraine is still a challenge. A better standardization of protocols would be worthwhile.

Noninvasive neurostimulation methods for migraine therapy: The available evidence.

Background Migraine is one of the most disabling neurological disorders. The current pharmacological armamentarium is not satisfying for a large proportion of patients because the responder rate does not exceed 50% on average and the most effective drugs often induce intolerable side effects. During recent years, noninvasive central and peripheral neuromodulation methods have been explored for migraine treatment. Overview A review of the available evidence suggests that noninvasive neuromodulation techniques could be beneficial for migraine patients. The transcranial stimulation methods allow modulating selectively cortical activity and can thus be curtailed to the patient's pathophysiological profile, while transcutaneous stimulation of pericranial nerves likely modulates central pain control centers. Occipital single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcutaneous supraorbital stimulation have the strongest evidence respectively for acute and preventive treatment. Transcranial direct current stimulation and repetitive magnetic stimulation are promising in pilot studies, but large sham-controlled trials are not yet available. Conclusions The noninvasive neurostimulation methods are promising for migraine treatment and devoid of serious adverse effects allowing their combination with drug therapies. Their application in clinical practice will depend on the industry's capacity to develop portable and user-friendly devices, and on the scientists' capacity to prove their efficacy in randomized sham-controlled trials.

Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for PREVention and Acute treatment of chronic cluster headache (PREVA): A randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating disorder for which few well-controlled studies demon.strate effectiveness of available therapies. Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) was examined as adjunctive prophylactic treatment of chronic CH. METHODS: PREVA was a prospective, open-label, randomised study that compared adjunctive prophylactic nVNS (n = 48) with standard of care (SoC) alone (control (n = 49)). A two-week baseline phase was followed by a four-week randomised phase (SoC plus nVNS vs control) and a four-week extension phase (SoC plus nVNS). The primary end point was the reduction in the mean number of CH attacks per week. Response rate, abortive medication use and safety/tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: During the randomised phase, individuals in the intent-to-treat population treated with SoC plus nVNS (n = 45) had a significantly greater reduction in the number of attacks per week vs controls (n = 48) (-5.9 vs -2.1, respectively) for a mean therapeutic gain of 3.9 fewer attacks per week (95% CI: 0.5, 7.2; p = 0.02). Higher ≥50% response rates were also observed with SoC plus nVNS (40% (18/45)) vs controls (8.3% (4/48); p < 0.001). No serious treatment-related adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive prophylactic nVNS is a well-tolerated novel treatment for chronic CH, offering clinical benefits beyond those with SoC.