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.

Mechanosensitive receptors in migraine: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a debilitating neurological disorder with pain profile, suggesting exaggerated mechanosensation. Mechanosensitive receptors of different families, which specifically respond to various mechanical stimuli, have gathered increasing attention due to their potential role in migraine related nociception. Understanding these mechanisms is of principal importance for improved therapeutic strategies. This systematic review comprehensively examines the involvement of mechanosensitive mechanisms in migraine pain pathways. METHODS: A systematic search across the Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Medline was conducted on 8th August 2023 for the period from 2000 to 2023, according to PRISMA guidelines. The review was constructed following a meticulous evaluation by two authors who independently applied rigorous inclusion criteria and quality assessments to the selected studies, upon which all authors collectively wrote the review. RESULTS: We identified 36 relevant studies with our analysis. Additionally, 3 more studies were selected by literature search. The 39 papers included in this systematic review cover the role of the putative mechanosensitive Piezo and K2P, as well as ASICs, NMDA, and TRP family of channels in the migraine pain cascade. The outcome of the available knowledge, including mainly preclinical animal models of migraine and few clinical studies, underscores the intricate relationship between mechanosensitive receptors and migraine pain symptoms. The review presents the mechanisms of activation of mechanosensitive receptors that may be involved in the generation of nociceptive signals and migraine associated clinical symptoms. The gender differences of targeting these receptors as potential therapeutic interventions are also acknowledged as well as the challenges related to respective drug development. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this analysis identified key molecular players and uncovered significant gaps in our understanding of mechanotransduction in migraine. This review offers a foundation for filling these gaps and suggests novel therapeutic options for migraine treatments based on achievements in the emerging field of mechano-neurobiology.

The impact of primary headaches on disability outcomes: a literature review and meta-analysis to inform future iterations of the Global Burden of Disease study.

BACKGROUND: The burden and disability associated with headaches are conceptualized and measured differently at patients' and populations' levels. At the patients' level, through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs); at population level, through disability weights (DW) and years lived with a disability (YLDs) developed by the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD). DW are 0-1 coefficients that address health loss and have been defined through lay descriptions. With this literature review, we aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of disability in headache disorders, and to present a coefficient referring to patients' disability which might inform future GBD definitions of DW for headache disorders. METHODS: We searched SCOPUS and PubMed for papers published between 2015 and 2023 addressing disability in headache disorders. The selected manuscript included a reference to headache frequency and at least one PROM. A meta-analytic approach was carried out to address relevant differences for the most commonly used PROMs (by headache type, tertiles of medication intake, tertiles of females' percentage in the sample, and age). We developed a 0-1 coefficient based on the MIDAS, on the HIT-6, and on MIDAS + HIT-6 which was intended to promote future DW iterations by the GBD consortium. RESULTS: A total of 366 studies, 596 sub-samples, and more than 133,000 single patients were available, mostly referred to cases with migraine. Almost all PROMs showed the ability to differentiate disability severity across conditions and tertiles of medication intake. The indexes we developed can be used to inform future iterations of DW, in particular considering their ability to differentiate across age and tertiles of medication intake. CONCLUSIONS: Our review provides reference values for the most commonly used PROMS and a data-driven coefficient whose main added value is its ability to differentiate across tertiles of age and medication intake which underlie on one side the increased burden due to aging (it is likely connected to the increased impact of common comorbidities), and by the other side the increased burden due to medication consumption, which can be considered as a proxy for headache severity. Both elements should be considered when describing disability of headache disorders at population levels.

The World Health Organization Intersectoral Global Action Plan on Epilepsy and Other Neurological Disorders and the headache revolution: from headache burden to a global action plan for headache disorders.

The World Health Organization (WHO) Intersectoral Global Action Plan on Epilepsy and Other Neurological Disorders was developed by WHO to address the worldwide challenges and gaps in provision of care and services for people with epilepsy and other neurological disorders and to ensure a comprehensive, coordinated response across sectors to the burden of neurologic diseases and to promote brain health across life-course. Headache disorders constitute the second most burdensome of all neurological diseases after stroke, but the first if young and midlife adults are taken into account. Despite the availability of a range of treatments, disability associated with headache disorders, and with migraine, remains very high. In addition, there are inequalities between high-income and low and middle income countries in access to medical care. In line with several brain health initiatives following the WHOiGAP resolution, herein we tailor the main pillars of the action plan to headache disorders: (1) raising policy prioritization and strengthen governance; (2) providing effective, timely and responsive diagnosis, treatment and care; (3) implementing strategies for promotion and prevention; (4) fostering research and innovation and strengthen information systems. Specific targets for future policy actions are proposed. The Global Action Plan triggered a revolution in neurology, not only by increasing public awareness of brain disorders and brain health but also by boosting the number of neurologists in training, raising research funding and making neurology a public health priority for policy makers. Reducing the burden of headache disorders will not only improve the quality of life and wellbeing of people with headache but also reduce the burden of neurological disorders increasing global brain health and, thus, global population health.

Long COVID and especially headache syndromes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This is an expert overview on recent literature about the complex relationship between coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and headache. RECENT FINDINGS: Long COVID is a clinical syndrome characterized by the presence of persistent symptoms following the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Headache is one of the most common symptoms and is described most often as throbbing pain, associated with photo and phonofobia and worsening with physical exercise. In acute COVID-19, headache is usually described as moderate or severe, diffuse and oppressive although sometimes it has been described with a migraine-like phenotype, especially in patients with a previous history of migraine. Headache intensity during acute phase seems to be the most important predictor of duration of headache over time. Some COVID-19 cases can be associated with cerebrovascular complications, and red flags of secondary headaches (e.g. new worsening or unresponsive headache, or new onset of neurological focal signs) should be urgently investigated with imaging. Treatment goals are the reduction of number and intensity of headache crises, and the prevention of chronic forms. SUMMARY: This review can help clinicians to approach patients with headache and infection from SARS-CoV-2, with particular attention to persistent headache in long COVID.

New drugs targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide for the management of migraines.

INTRODUCTION: Significant advances in migraine research have contributed to the development of new drugs for the treatment of migraine. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) or its receptor and CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) have been associated with a good safety profile and resulted in an overall efficacy in reducing the number of monthly migraine days both in episodic and chronic forms of migraine. AREAS COVERED: The results from main investigation studies (phase 2 or 3) of CGRP-targeting drugs (both anti-CGRP mAbs and gepants) are reported in this expert-opinion review. EXPERT OPINION: The introduction of new drugs targeting CGRP is a significant breakthrough in the migraine field, and represents a new generation of therapeutic agents that are available to manage migraine. The evaluation of efficacy and safety in the long-term follow-up and the development of trials comparing the available drugs could improve the current knowledge. The economic sustainability of these drugs remains to be clarified, and a cost-cutting campaign should be promoted based on the high burden of migraine.

The Efficacy of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Approaches in Chronic Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological treatment is the primary approach in chronic migraine (CM), although non-drug interventions such as physical therapy are used as adjunct treatments. We aimed to review the efficacy of physical therapy and rehabilitation approaches for CM and their impact on quality of life (QoL) and disability. METHODS: This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with CM. The primary outcomes were changes in intensity, frequency, duration of headache, disability, and QoL. Methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale. Data synthesis and quantitative analysis were conducted on relevant studies. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included in the narrative review, and five of them were eligible for quantitative analysis. Aerobic exercise (AE), osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), occipital transcutaneous electrical stimulation (OTES), acupressure, hydrotherapy, instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM), facial proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (FPNF), and connective tissue massage (CTM) were used in CM. AE combined with pharmacological therapy reduced the frequency, duration, and intensity of headache. OMT combined with medication improved QoL and reduced disability, intensity of pain, and migraine days per month. Hydrotherapy combined with medication also resulted in improvements in the intensity of headache, frequency, and overall QoL. IASTM and OTES reduced the intensity of headache, alleviated neck pain, and improved QoL, although there were conflicting findings following OTES alone on disability and intensity of headache. Both FPNF and CTM reduced the intensity of headache. Acupressure as an adjunct to medication did not show additional benefits on the intensity of headache and QoL. Quantitative analysis of the data showed that manual physical therapy combined with medication reduced the intensity of headache (p = 0.0796), and manual or AE combined with medication reduced the headache days per month (p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: A limited number of RCTs investigating the efficacy of physical therapy and rehabilitation approaches show promise in improving headache symptoms, reducing disability, and enhancing QoL in CM. Meta-analysis of the data also supported favorable outcomes for both intensity and headache days per month. Further research is needed to better understand the efficacy, optimal duration, and safety of physical therapy and rehabilitation approaches for CM, and to explore alternative interventions.

Common Clinical and Molecular Pathways between Migraine and Sarcoidosis.

Migraine and sarcoidosis are two distinct medical conditions that may have some common biological and clinical pathways. Sarcoidosis is a chronic granulomatous disease characterized by the formation of granulomas in various organs, including the lungs, skin, cardiovascular system, lymph nodes, and brain. Migraine is a common comorbidity in sarcoidosis patients and a common neurological disorder characterized by recurrent headaches that can be accompanied by other symptoms, such as nausea, vomiting, and sensitivity to light and sound. There have been several reports of individuals with neurosarcoidosis experiencing migraines, though the exact relationship between the two disorders is not well understood. Both conditions have been associated with inflammation and the activation of the immune system. In sarcoidosis, the formation of granulomas is thought to be an immune response to the presence of an unknown antigen. Similarly, the pain and other symptoms associated with migraines are thought to be caused by inflammation in the brain and the surrounding blood vessels. There is also evidence to suggest an interplay of environmental and genetic factors playing a role in both conditions, but evidence is inconsistent with the hypothesis of shared genetic susceptibility. This review aims to illustrate common clinical and biological pathways between migraine and sarcoidosis, including inflammation and dysregulation of the immune system, with a focus on the cumulative burden of concurrent disorders and therapeutic implications.

Efficiency of occlusal splint therapy on orofacial muscle pain reduction: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review aims to examine the existing original studies to determine the effectiveness of occlusal splints (OSs) in the management of orofacial myalgia and myofascial pain (MP) in comparison with no treatment or other interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this systematic review, randomized controlled trials were qualified, in which the effectiveness of occlusal splint therapy in the management of muscle pain was examined in comparison with no treatment or other interventions. This systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis 2020. The authors searched three databases (PubMed, CINAHL (The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and Scopus) for English publications published between January 1, 2010, and June 1, 2022. The last database search was carried out on June 4, 2022. Data were extracted from the included studies and assessed for risk of bias using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were identified for inclusion in this review. In total, 589 patients were diagnosed with orofacial muscle pain who underwent education and various forms of therapy including different types of OSs, light emitting diode therapy, acupuncture, low-level laser therapy, device-supported sensorimotor training, Kinesio Taping, myofunctional therapy, and physical therapy. All studies included demonstrated a high risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence regarding whether OS therapy in the treatment of orofacial myalgia and MP offers an advantage over other forms of interventions or no treatment. Further reliable clinical studies in this area are needed to improve the quality of research, which should be performed with larger groups of blinded respondents and controls. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Due to the large-scale nature of orofacial muscle pain, it is assumed that each dental clinician will meet patients with orofacial muscle pain repeatedly in daily practice; hence, the review of the effectiveness of OSs in the management of orofacial myalgia and MP is necessary.

What to do with non-responders to CGRP(r) monoclonal antibodies: switch to another or move to gepants?

In this editorial we aim to provide potential therapeutic options in patients who do not benefit from treatment with CGRP(r) monoclonal antibodies. Based on current real-life studies and analysis of practical and economic aspects, we will analyze the potential benefits of changing CGRP-targeted treatment.

Debate: differences and similarities between tension-type headache and migraine.

Tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine are two common primary headaches distinguished by clinical characteristics according to the 3rd edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. Migraine is identified by specific features such as being more prevalent in females, being aggravated by physical activity, certain genetic factors, having photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, vomiting, or aura, and responding to specific drugs. Nonetheless, TTH and migraine share some common characteristics, such as onset occurring in the 20 s, and being triggered by psychological factors like stress, moderate pain severity, and mild nausea in chronic TTH. Both conditions involve the trigeminovascular system in their pathophysiology. However, distinguishing between TTH and migraine in clinical practice, research, and epidemiological studies can be challenging, as there is a lack of specific diagnostic tests and biomarkers. Moreover, both conditions may coexist, further complicating the diagnostic process. This review aims to explore the similarities and differences in the pathophysiology, epidemiology, burden and disability, comorbidities, and responses to pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments of TTH and migraine. The review also discusses future research directions to address the diagnostic challenges and improve the understanding and management of these conditions.

COVID-19 vaccination-related headache showed two different clusters in the long-term course: a prospective multicenter follow-up study (COVA-Head Study).

BACKGROUND: Although acute headache following COVID-19 vaccination is widely acknowledged, the long-term progression of these headaches remains poorly understood. Our objective was to identify various phenotypes of prolonged or worsened headaches associated with COVID-19 vaccination and document any changes in these phenotypes over an extended period. Additionally, we aimed to document the diverse headache presentations among patients with pre-existing primary headaches. METHODS: A multinational, prospective observational study was conducted to investigate prolonged or worsened headaches associated with COVID-19 vaccination. Questionnaires assessing COVID-19 vaccination-related headaches at three time points (initial visit, 3rd month follow-up, and 6th month follow-up) were developed for the study. Headache specialists/clinicians evaluated patients using these questionnaires in a prospective manner. Repeated K-means cluster analysis was performed to identify patient profiles with prolonged or worsened headaches related to COVID-19 vaccination. RESULTS: Among the 174 patients included in the study, there was a female-to-male ratio of 128 (73.6%) to 46 (26.4%). The mean age of the patient group was 45.2 ± 13.3 years, and 107 patients (61.5%) had a pre-existing history of primary headaches. Through the analysis, two major clusters were identified based on headache characteristics at each visit. During the first visit (n = 174), Cluster 1 primarily comprised patients with a history of primary headaches, frontal localization of pain, throbbing pain type, more severe headaches accompanied by symptoms such as nausea, phonophobia, photophobia, and osmophobia, and worsened by physical activity. In contrast, Cluster 2 consisted of patients with longer headache durations (over one month) and a stabbing/pressing quality of pain. Patients in Cluster 1 had a higher prevalence of migraine as the pre-existing primary headache disorder compared to Cluster 2 (90.48% vs. 68.18%, respectively; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The identification of two distinct phenotypes of prolonged or worsened headaches related to COVID-19 vaccination can provide valuable clinical insights. Having an awareness of the potential worsening of headaches following COVID-19 vaccination, particularly in patients with a primary headache disorder such as migraine, can help clinicians and headache experts anticipate and adjust their treatment strategies accordingly. This knowledge can aid in preplanning treatment modifications and optimize patient care.

Rethinking headache as a global public health case model for reaching the SDG 3 HEALTH by 2030.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development sets out, through 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a path for the prosperity of people and the planet. SDG 3 in particular aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages and includes several targets to enhance health. This review presents a "headache-tailored" perspective on how to achieve SDG 3 by focusing on six specific actions: targeting chronic headaches; reducing the overuse of acute pain-relieving medications; promoting the education of healthcare professionals; granting access to medication in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC); implementing training and educational opportunities for healthcare professionals in low and middle income countries; building a global alliance against headache disorders. Addressing the burden of headache disorders directly impacts on populations' health, as well as on the possibility to improve the productivity of people aged below 50, women in particular. Our analysis pointed out several elements, and included: moving forward from frequency-based parameters to define headache severity; recognizing and managing comorbid diseases and risk factors; implementing a disease management multi-modal management model that incorporates pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments; early recognizing and managing the overuse of acute pain-relieving medications; promoting undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing medical education of healthcare professionals with specific training on headache; and promoting a culture that favors the recognition of headaches as diseases with a neurobiological basis, where this is not yet recognized. Making headache care more sustainable is an achievable objective, which will require multi-stakeholder collaborations across all sectors of society, both health-related and not health-related. Robust investments will be needed; however, considering the high prevalence of headache disorders and the associated disability, these investments will surely improve multiple health outcomes and lift development and well-being globally.

Narrative-based medicine in headache disorders.

In this editorial we aim to provide an overview of Narrative-based Medicine (NBM) and highlight what it may offer to the care of individuals with headache disorders.

The Global Campaign turns 18: a brief review of its activities and achievements.

The Global Campaign against Headache, as a collaborative activity with the World Health Organization (WHO), was formally launched in Copenhagen in March 2004. In the month it turns 18, we review its activities and achievements, from initial determination of its strategic objectives, through partnerships and project management, knowledge acquisition and awareness generation, to evidence-based proposals for change justified by cost-effectiveness analysis.

Long COVID headache.

Headache is among the most frequent symptoms persisting or newly developing after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as part of the so-called long COVID syndrome. The knowledge on long COVID headache is still limited, however growing evidence is defining the features of this novel condition, in particular regarding clinical characteristics, some pathophysiological mechanisms and first treatment recommendations. Long COVID headache can present in the form of worsening of a preexisting primary headache, or, more specifically, in the form of a new (intermittent or daily) headache starting during the acute infection or after a delay. It often presents together with other long COVID symptoms, most frequently with hyposmia. It can manifest with a migrainous or, more frequently, with a tension-type-like phenotype. Persistent activation of the immune system and trigeminovascular activation are thought to play a role. As there are virtually no treatment studies, treatment currently is largely guided by the existing guidelines for primary headaches with the corresponding phenotype. The present report, a collaborative work of the international group of the Junior Editorial Board of The Journal of Headache and Pain aims to summarize the most recent evidence about long COVID headache and suggests approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of this disorder.

European Headache Federation guideline on the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide pathway for migraine prevention - 2022 update.

BACKGROUND: A previous European Headache Federation (EHF) guideline addressed the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway to prevent migraine. Since then, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence have expanded the evidence and knowledge for those treatments. Therefore, the EHF panel decided to provide an updated guideline on the use of those treatments. METHODS: The guideline was developed following the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The working group identified relevant questions, performed a systematic review and an analysis of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote recommendations. Where the GRADE approach was not applicable, expert opinion was provided. RESULTS: We found moderate to high quality of evidence to recommend eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in individuals with episodic and chronic migraine. For several important clinical questions, we found not enough evidence to provide evidence-based recommendations and guidance relied on experts' opinion. Nevertheless, we provided updated suggestions regarding the long-term management of those treatments and their place with respect to the other migraine preventatives. CONCLUSION: Monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway are recommended for migraine prevention as they are effective and safe also in the long-term.

European Headache Federation (EHF) consensus on the definition of effective treatment of a migraine attack and of triptan failure.

BACKGROUND: Triptans are migraine-specific acute treatments. A well-accepted definition of triptan failure is needed in clinical practice and for research. The primary aim of the present Consensus was to provide a definition of triptan failure. To develop this definition, we deemed necessary to develop as first a consensus definition of effective treatment of an acute migraine attack and of triptan-responder. MAIN BODY: The Consensus process included a preliminary literature review, a Delphi round and a subsequent open discussion. According to the Consensus Panel, effective treatment of a migraine attack is to be defined on patient well-being featured by a) improvement of headache, b) relief of non-pain symptoms and c) absence of adverse events. An attack is considered effectively treated if patient's well-being, as defined above, is restored within 2 hours and for at least 24 hours. An individual with migraine is considered as triptan-responder when the given triptan leads to effective acute attack treatment in at least three out of four migraine attacks. On the other hand, an individual with migraine is considered triptan non-responder in the presence of failure of a single triptan (not matching the definition of triptan-responder). The Consensus Panel defined an individual with migraine as triptan-resistant in the presence of failure of at least 2 triptans; triptan refractory, in the presence of failure to at least 3 triptans, including subcutaneous formulation; triptan ineligibile in the presence of an acknowledged contraindication to triptan use, as specified in the summary of product characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The novel definitions can be useful in clinical practice for the assessment of acute attack treatments patients with migraine. They may be helpful in identifying people not responding to triptans and in need for novel acute migraine treatments. The definitions will also be of help in standardizing research on migraine acute care.

Headache onset after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features. METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1st 2020 and August 6th, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset. RESULTS: Out of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18-27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23-35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10-12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. "traditional" ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40-60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.

Comorbidities of primary headache disorders: a literature review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Primary headache disorders are common and burdensome conditions. They are associated to several comorbidities, such as cardiovascular or psychiatric ones, which, in turn, contribute to the global burden of headache. The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive description of the pooled prevalence of comorbidities of primary headache disorders using a meta-analytical approach based on studies published between 2000 and 2020. METHODS: Scopus was searched for primary research (clinical and population studies) in which medical comorbidities were described in adults with primary headache disorders. Comorbidities were extracted using a taxonomy derived from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. We compared prevalence of comorbidities among headache sufferers against general population using GBD-2019 estimates, and compared comorbidities' proportions in clinical vs. population studies, and by age and gender. RESULTS: A total of 139 studies reporting information on 4.19 million subjects with primary headaches were included: in total 2.75 million comorbidities were reported (median per subject 0.64, interquartile range 0.32-1.07). The most frequently addressed comorbidities were: depressive disorders, addressed in 51 studies (pooled proportion 23 %, 95 % CI 20-26 %); hypertension, addressed in 48 studies (pooled proportion 24 %, 95 % CI 22-26 %); anxiety disorders addressed in 40 studies (pooled proportion 25 %, 95 % CI 22-28 %). For conditions such as anxiety, depression and back pain, prevalence among headache sufferers was higher than in GBD-2109 estimates. Associations with average age and female prevalence within studies showed that hypertension was more frequent in studies with higher age and less females, whereas fibromyalgia, restless leg syndrome, and depressive disorders were more frequent in studies with younger age and more female. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the most relevant comorbidities of primary headache disorders - back pain, anxiety and depression, diabetes, ischemic heart disease and stroke - are among the most burdensome conditions, together with headache themselves, according to the GBD study. A joint treatment of headaches and of these comorbidities may positively impact on headache sufferers' health status and contribute to reduce the impact of a group of highly burdensome diseases.