Redefining migraine prevention: early treatment with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies enhances response in the real world.

BACKGROUND: Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP MAbs) are approved and available treatments for migraine prevention. Patients do not respond alike and many countries have reimbursement policies, which hinder treatments to those who might respond. This study aimed to investigate clinical factors associated with good and excellent response to anti-CGRP MAbs at 6 months. METHODS: European multicentre, prospective, real-world study, including high-frequency episodic or chronic migraine (CM) patients treated since March 2018 with anti-CGRP MAbs. We defined good and excellent responses as ≥50% and ≥75% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD) at 6 months, respectively. Generalised mixed-effect regression models (GLMMs) were used to identify variables independently associated with treatment response. RESULTS: Of the 5818 included patients, 82.3% were females and the median age was 48.0 (40.0-55.0) years. At baseline, the median of MHD was 20.0 (14.0-28.0) days/months and 72.2% had a diagnosis of CM. At 6 months (n=4963), 56.5% (2804/4963) were good responders and 26.7% (1324/4963) were excellent responders. In the GLMM model, older age (1.08 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.15), p=0.016), the presence of unilateral pain (1.39 (95% CI 1.21 to 1.60), p<0.001), the absence of depression (0.840 (95% CI 0.731 to 0.966), p=0.014), less monthly migraine days (0.923 (95% CI 0.862 to 0.989), p=0.023) and lower Migraine Disability Assessment at baseline (0.874 (95% CI 0.819 to 0.932), p<0.001) were predictors of good response (AUC of 0.648 (95% CI 0.616 to 0.680)). These variables were also significant predictors of excellent response (AUC of 0.691 (95% CI 0.651 to 0.731)). Sex was not significant in the GLMM models. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest real-world study of migraine patients treated with anti-CGRP MAbs. It provides evidence that higher migraine frequency and greater disability at baseline reduce the likelihood of responding to anti-CGRP MAbs, informing physicians and policy-makers on the need for an earlier treatment in order to offer the best chance of treatment success.

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

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

Impact of multiple treatment cycles with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies on migraine course: focus on discontinuation periods. Insights from the multicenter, prospective, I-GRAINE study.

OBJECTIVES: While a single 12-month treatment cycle (TrC) with anti-CGRP mAbs is not disease-modifying for most patients, there is limited understanding of the effects of multiple TrCs on migraine course. We evaluated whether a second TrC might modify the migraine course by comparing the occurrence of migraine relapse after discontinuation of the second TrC to that following the cessation of the first TrC. METHODS: In a real-life, multicenter, prospective study we considered all consecutive patients diagnosed with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM) with > 3 treatment failures and treated with any anti-CGRP mAbs for ≥ 2 consecutive 12-month TrCs who were responders at week 12. The primary endpoint was the change in monthly migraine days (MMD) for HFEM or monthly headache days (MHD) for CM at the first month of treatment discontinuation after the second TrC (D2) compared to the first TrC (D1). Secondary endpoints included variations in monthly analgesic medications (MAM), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores, ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% response rates, and relapse from episodic migraine to CM and from no-medication overuse (MO) to MO at D2 vs. D1. RESULTS: One-hundred-seventy-eight patients completed two 12-month TrCs with anti-CGRP mAbs. At D2, patients experienced a significant reduction in MMD (- 0.6, p = 0.028), MHD (- 2.6, p < 0.001), monthly analgesic medications (- 2.0, p < 0.001), and HIT-6 score (- 2.2, p < 0.001) compared to D1, indicating improved effectiveness. The ≥ 50% response rate at weeks 45-48 during the first TrC was 95.5%, while at weeks 45-48 of the second TrC was 99.4%. Corresponding rates at D1 was 20.2% whereas at D2 was 51.6% (p < 0.0001). No statistical difference emerged in ≥ 75% and 100% responders. The relapse rate from episodic migraine to CM at D2 was lower than at D1 (12.3% vs 30.4%; p = 0.0002) Fewer patients experienced relapse from no-MO to MO at D2 compared to D1 (29.5% vs 68.7%; p = 0.00001). DISCUSSION: A second TrC with anti-CGRP mAbs demonstrated clinical improvements compared to the first one, as indicated by a milder migraine relapse at D2 compared to D1. Multiple TrCs with anti-CGRP mAbs could progressively modify migraine evolution by reducing CGRP-dependent neuroinflammatory nociceptive inputs to the brain.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Late Response to Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the frequency and characteristics of late responders (>12 weeks) to monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). METHODS: This is a multicenter (n = 16) prospective real-life study considering all consecutive adults with high-frequency or chronic migraine treated with anti-CGRP mAbs for ≥24 weeks. We defined responder patients with a ≥50% reduction from baseline in monthly migraine/headache days at weeks 9-12 and late responders as those achieving a ≥50% reduction only afterward. RESULTS: A total of 771 people with migraine completed ≥24 weeks of anti-CGRP mAb treatment. Responders at 12 weeks were 65.6% (506/771) of the patients, while nonresponders were 34.4% (265/771). A total of 146 of the 265 nonresponders (55.1%) at 12 weeks responded afterward (late responders): they differed from responders for a higher BMI (+0.78, 95% CI [0.10; 1.45]; p = 0.024), more frequent treatment failures (+0.52, 95% CI [0.09; 0.95]; p = 0.017) and psychiatric comorbidities (+10.1%, 95% CI [0.1; 0.20]; p = 0.041), and less common unilateral pain, alone (-10,9%, 95% CI [-20.5; -1.2]; p = 0.025) or in combination with unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (-12.3%, 95% CI [-20.2;-3.9]; p = 0.006) or allodynia (-10.7, 95% CI [-18.2; -3.2]; p = 0.01). DISCUSSION: Half of nonresponders to anti-CGRP mAbs at 12 weeks are indeed late responders. Efficacy of anti-CGRP mAbs should be assessed at 24 weeks while treatment duration should be extended beyond 12 months.

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

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

Prevalence, natural history and dynamic nature of chronic headache and medication overuse headache in Italy: The SPARTACUS study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic headaches and medication overuse headache are common and burdening conditions. No studies have evaluated the prevalence of chronic headache and medication overuse headache in an unselected Italian population. METHODS: We performed a three-year cross-sectional and longitudinal population-based study to investigate prevalence, natural history, and prognostic factors of chronic headache. We delivered a self-administered questionnaire to 25,163 subjects. Chronic headache patients were interviewed by General Practitioners. After three years, medication overuse headache patients were invited to undergo a neurological evaluation at our Center. RESULTS: 16,577 individuals completed the questionnaire; 6878 (41,5%) were episodic headache sufferers and 636 (3.8%) were chronic headache subjects. 239 (1.4%) patients were acute medication over-users. All medication overuse headache patients had migraine or headache with migrainous features. At the three-year follow-up of 98 patients, we observed conversion to episodic headaches in 53 (54.1%) patients. 27 (50.9%) patients remitted spontaneously. CONCLUSIONS: We present the first prevalence data on chronic headache and medication overuse headache in an unselected Italian population and a high rate of spontaneous remission. These data support the interpretation of medication overuse headache as a specific migraine-related disorder that may reflect chronic migraine's dynamic nature, the need for more specific medication overuse headache diagnostic criteria, and highlight the priority of targeted public health policies.

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

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

Excellent Response to OnabotulinumtoxinA: Different Definitions, Different Predictors.

The identification of patients who can benefit the most from the available preventive treatments is important in chronic migraine. We explored the rate of excellent responders to onabotulinumtoxinA in a multicenter European study and explored the predictors of such response, according to different definitions. A pooled analysis on chronic migraineurs treated with onabotulinumtoxinA and followed-up for, at least, 9 months was performed. Excellent responders were defined either as patients with a ≥75% decrease in monthly headache days (percent-based excellent responders) or as patients with <4 monthly headache days (frequency-based excellent responders). The characteristics of excellent responders at the baseline were compared with the ones of patients with a <30% decrease in monthly headache days. Percent-based excellent responders represented about 10% of the sample, whilst frequency-based excellent responders were about 5% of the sample. Compared with non-responders, percent-based excellent responders had a higher prevalence of medication overuse and a higher excellent response rate even after the 1st and the 2nd injection. Females were less like to be frequency-based excellent responders. Chronic migraine sufferers without medication overuse and of female sex may find fewer benefits with onabotulinumtoxinA. Additionally, the excellent response status is identifiable after the first cycle.

Comparison study between erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in the preventive treatment of high frequency episodic migraine and chronic migraine.

The treatment of migraine now includes the possibility of using the anti CGRP monoclonal antibodies erenumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab. Registration studies and real life studies have shown excellent efficacy and extraordinary tolerability of these treatments. Little is known about the possible differences between the three treatments and this observational study was conducted with a view to comparing the efficacy, safety and impact that anti-CGRP monclonal antibodies have on additional parameters such as disability in social, family and work activities.

Nutraceuticals and migraine: further strategy for the treatment of specific conditions.

Nutraceuticals might be defined as food or dietary supplements that provide medicinal or health benefits. Current preventive treatment of migraine includes nutraceuticals as well as conventional drugs. These non-pharmacological therapies, such as magnesium, coenzyme Q10, feverfew, riboflavin, and phycocyanins, are particularly useful in certain categories of patients (adolescents, pregnant or breastfeeding women, the elderly with complex drug therapy, the patient with contraindication to the usual pharmacological therapies) when a conventional drug therapy cannot be prescribed or may be not well tolerated. The evidence currently available confirms a modest efficacy but a very good safety and tolerability profile.

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

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

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

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