CLOCK gene circannual expression in cluster headache.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache is a primary headache disorder characterized by bouts with circadian and circannual patterns. The CLOCK gene has a central role in regulating circadian rhythms. Here, we investigate the circannual CLOCK expression in a population of cluster headache patients in comparison to matched controls. METHODS: Patients with cluster headache were sampled two to four times over at least one year, both in or outside bouts, one week after each solstice and equinox. The expression of CLOCK was measured by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in the peripheral blood. RESULTS: This study included 50 patients and 58 matched controls. Among the patient population, composed of 42/50 males (84%) with an average age of 44.6 years, 45/50 (90%) suffered from episodic cluster headache. Two to four samples were collected from each patient adding up to 161 samples, 36 (22.3%) of which were collected within a bout. CLOCK expression for cluster headache patients was considerably different from that of the control population in winter (p-value mean = 0.006283), spring (p-value mean = 0.000006) and summer (p-value mean = 0.000064), but not in autumn (p-value mean = 0.262272). For each season transition, the variations in CLOCK expression were more pronounced in the control group than in the cluster headache population. No statistically significant differences were found between bout and non-bout samples. No individual factors (age, sex, circadian chronotype, smoking and coffee habits or history of migraine) were related to CLOCK expression. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that CLOCK expression in cluster headache patients fluctuates less throughout the year than in the control population. Bout activity and lifestyle factors do not seem to influence CLOCK expression.

Working memory during spontaneous migraine attacks: an fMRI study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the neural correlates of working memory during a spontaneous migraine attack compared to the interictal phase, using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). BACKGROUND: Cognitive disturbances are commonly observed during migraine attacks, particularly in the headache phase. However, the neural basis of these changes remains unknown. METHODS: In a fMRI within-subject test-retest design study, eleven women (32 years of age, average) with episodic migraine were evaluated twice, first during a spontaneous migraine attack, and again in a pain-free period. Each session consisted in a cognitive assessment and fMRI while performing a working memory task (N-back). RESULTS: Cognitive test scores were lower during the ictal session than in the pain-free session. Regions typically associated with working memory were activated during the N-back task in both sessions. A voxel wise between session comparison showed significantly greater activation in the left frontal pole and orbitofrontal cortex during the attack relative to the interictal phase. CONCLUSION: Migraine patients exhibited greater activation of the left frontal pole and orbitofrontal cortex while executing a verbal working memory task during a spontaneous migraine attack when compared to the interictal state. Given the association of these regions with pain processing and inhibitory control, these findings suggest that patients recruit inhibitory areas to accomplish the cognitive task during migraine attacks, a neural signature of their cognitive difficulties.

Impact of truncating diffusion MRI scans on diffusional kurtosis imaging.

OBJECTIVE: Diffusional kurtosis imaging (DKI) extends diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), characterizing non-Gaussian diffusion effects but requires longer acquisition times. To ensure the robustness of DKI parameters, data acquisition ordering should be optimized allowing for scan interruptions or shortening. Three methodologies were used to examine how reduced diffusion MRI scans impact DKI histogram-metrics: 1) the electrostatic repulsion model (OptEEM); 2) spherical codes (OptSC); 3) random (RandomTRUNC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pre-acquired diffusion multi-shell data from 14 female healthy volunteers (29±5 years) were used to generate reordered data. For each strategy, subsets containing different amounts of the full dataset were generated. The subsampling effects were assessed on histogram-based DKI metrics from tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) skeletonized maps. To evaluate each subsampling method on simulated data at different SNRs and the influence of subsampling on in vivo data, we used a 3-way and 2-way repeated measures ANOVA, respectively. RESULTS: Simulations showed that subsampling had different effects depending on DKI parameter, with fractional anisotropy the most stable (up to 5% error) and radial kurtosis the least stable (up to 26% error). RandomTRUNC performed the worst while the others showed comparable results. Furthermore, the impact of subsampling varied across distinct histogram characteristics, the peak value the least affected (OptEEM: up to 5% error; OptSC: up to 7% error) and peak height (OptEEM: up to 8% error; OptSC: up to 11% error) the most affected. CONCLUSION: The impact of truncation depends on specific histogram-based DKI metrics. The use of a strategy for optimizing the acquisition order is advisable to improve DKI robustness to exam interruptions.

CGRP-targeted medication in chronic migraine - systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic migraine is a highly debilitating condition that is often difficult to manage, particularly in the presence of medication overuse headache. Drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), or its receptor have shown promising results in treating this disorder. METHODS: We searched Pubmed and Embase to identify randomized clinical trials and real-world studies reporting on the use of medication targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in patients with chronic migraine. RESULTS: A total of 270 records were identified. Nineteen studies qualified for the qualitative analysis. Most studies reported on monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP (anti-CGRP mAbs), that overall prove to be effective in decreasing monthly migraine days by half in about 27.6-61.4% of the patients. Conversion from chronic to episodic migraine was seen in 40.88% of the cases, and 29-88% of the patients stopped medication overuse. Obesity seems to be the main negative predictor of response to anti-CGRP mAbs. There is no evidence to suggest the superiority of one anti-CGRP mAb. Despite the lack of strong evidence, the combination of anti-CGRP medication with onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine is likely to bring benefits for resistant cases. Atogepant is the first gepant to demonstrate a significant decrease in monthly migraine days compared to placebo in a recent trial. Further, anti-CGRP mAb and gepants have a good safety profile. CONCLUSION: There is strong evidence from randomized trials and real-world data to suggest that drugs targeting CGRP are a safe and effective treatment for chronic migraine.

The comparative effectiveness of migraine preventive drugs: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: While there are several trials that support the efficacy of various drugs for migraine prophylaxis against placebo, there is limited evidence addressing the comparative safety and efficacy of these drugs. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to facilitate comparison between drugs for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and clinicaltrials.gov from inception to August 13, 2022, for randomized trials of pharmacological treatments for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to screen references, extract data, and assess risk of bias. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and rated the certainty (quality) of evidence as either high, moderate, low, or very low using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: We identified 74 eligible trials, reporting on 32,990 patients. We found high certainty evidence that monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene related peptide or its receptor (CGRP(r)mAbs), gepants, and topiramate increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo. We found moderate certainty evidence that beta-blockers, valproate, and amitriptyline increase the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, and low certainty evidence that gabapentin may not be different from placebo. We found high certainty evidence that, compared to placebo, valproate and amitriptyline lead to substantial adverse events leading to discontinuation, moderate certainty evidence that topiramate, beta-blockers, and gabapentin increase adverse events leading to discontinuation, and moderate to high certainty evidence that (CGRP(r)mAbs) and gepants do not increase adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: (CGRP(r)mAbs) have the best safety and efficacy profile of all drugs for migraine prophylaxis, followed closely by gepants.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical re-appraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention-part 2: flunarizine.

OBJECTIVE: Novel disease-specific and mechanism-based treatments sharing good evidence of efficacy for migraine have been recently marketed. However, reimbursement by insurers depends on treatment failure with classic anti-migraine drugs. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to identify and rate the evidence for efficacy of flunarizine, a repurposed, first- or second-line treatment for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: A systematic search in MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for trials of pharmacological treatment in migraine prophylaxis, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Eligible trials for meta-analysis were randomized, placebo-controlled studies comparing flunarizine with placebo. Outcomes of interest according to the Outcome Set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) were the proportion of patients reaching a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs), and Adverse Events (AEs) leading to discontinuation. RESULTS: Five trials were eligible for narrative description and three for data synthesis and analysis. No studies reported the predefined outcomes, but one study assessed the 50% reduction in monthly migraine attacks with flunarizine as compared to placebo showing a benefit from flunarizine with a low or probably low risk of bias. We found that flunarizine may increase the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo (risk difference: 0.02; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Published flunarizine trials predate the recommended endpoints for evaluating migraine prophylaxis drugs, hence the lack of an adequate assessment for these endpoints. Further, modern-day, large-scale studies would be valuable in re-evaluating the efficacy of flunarizine for the treatment of migraines, offering additional insights into its potential benefits.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical re-appraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention-part 1: amitriptyline.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to critically re-appraise the published trials assessing amitriptyline for migraine prophylaxis. METHODS: We report our methods and results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA), by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized trials of pharmacologic treatments for migraine prophylaxis. We included randomized trials that compared amitriptyline with placebo for migraine prophylaxis in adults. Our outcomes of interest were informed by the Outcome Set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) and include the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in migraine days per month, migraine days per month, and adverse events leading to discontinuation. We assessed risk of bias by using a modified Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool and the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Our search yielded 10.826 unique records, of which three trials (n = 622) were eligible for data synthesis and analysis. We found moderate certainty evidence that amitriptyline increases the proportion of patients who experience a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo (relative risk: 1.60 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.19); absolute risk difference: 165 more per 1,000 (95% CI 47 more to 327 more). We found moderate certainty evidence that amitriptyline increases the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo (risk difference: 0.05 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.10); absolute risk difference: 50 more per 1,000 (95% CI 10 more to 100 more). CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis showed that amitriptyline may have a prophylactic role in migraine patients, however these results are far from robust. This warrants further large-scale research to evaluate the role of amitriptyline in migraine prevention.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical reappraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention - part 3: topiramate.

OBJECTIVE: Topiramate is a repurposed first-line treatment for migraine prophylaxis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to critically re-appraise the existing evidence supporting the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate. METHODS: A systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for trials of pharmacological treatment in migraine prophylaxis as of August 13, 2022, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Randomized controlled trials in adult patients that used topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of migraine, with placebo as active comparator, were included. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved studies and extracted all data. Outcomes of interest were the 50% responder rates, the reduction in monthly migraine days, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. Results were pooled and meta-analyzed, with sensitivity analysis based on the risk of bias of the studies, the monthly migraine days at baseline, and the previous use of other prophylactic treatments. Certainty evidence was judged according to the GRADE framework. RESULTS: Eight out of 10,826 studies fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria, accounting for 2,610 randomized patients. Six studies included patients with episodic migraine and two with chronic migraine. Topiramate dose ranged from 50 to 200 mg/day, and all studies included a placebo arm. There was a high certainty that topiramate: 1) increased the proportion of patients who achieved a 50% responder rate in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo [relative risk: 1.61 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-2.01); absolute risk difference: 168 more per 1,000 (95% CI: 80 to 278 more)]; 2) was associated with 0.99 (95% CI: 1.41-0.58) fewer migraine days than placebo; 3) and had a higher proportion of patients with adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation [absolute risk difference 80 patients more per 1,000 (95% CI: 20 to 140 more patients)]. CONCLUSIONS: There is high-quality evidence of the efficacy of topiramate in the prophylaxis of migraine, albeit its use poses a risk of adverse events that may lead to treatment discontinuation, with a negative effect on patient satisfaction and adherence to 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.

Indirect costs attributed to headache: A nation-wide survey of an active working population.

BACKGROUND: The economic burden of headache in European countries is substantial, mostly related to indirect work-productivity loss costs, yet data for Portugal is scarce. METHODS: An anonymous web-based survey of headache was distributed to a convenience sample of Portuguese companies' workforces, to assess last-year headache and "yesterday"-point prevalence. Preexisting headaches were classified into migraine and non-migraine headache and work impact (absenteeism and presenteeism) was evaluated in relation to point prevalence. If no significant selection biases were detected, projected work-loss costs for the whole country were to be calculated. RESULTS: Eleven (17%) of 65 invited companies participated, around 15,000 active workers were exposed to the survey and 3624 (24.3%) responded, 73% females, 84.3% with previous ("last-year") headaches, 53% with migraine. Due to participation and gender bias, national cost-projections were not calculated. Workday point-prevalence was 21% (migraine) and 9% (non-migraine headache), resulting in 14 employees with migraine losing, on average, 4 h and 32 min of work time. Presenteeism occurred in 29% of migraine and 15% of NMH employees. Yearly cost of each employee with a headache disorder was €664.88. DISCUSSION: Headache has a significant economic burden, as measured by work loss costs, in Portugal. Company-based interventions should aim to support employees' access to headache diagnosis and treatment, including non-pharmacological coping strategies, in order to reduce headache related economic costs.

Are PROMs passing the message? A reflection with real-life migraine patients.

BACKGROUND: Several patient-reported outcome measures are available to monitor headache impact, but are those reliable in real-life clinical practice? METHODS: Two identical patient-reported outcome measures (HALT-90 and MIDAS) were applied simultaneously in each clinical visit to a series of patients treated with monoclonal antibodies for migraine and intra-individual agreement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: Our sample included 92 patients, 92.4% females, 45 years old on average. Moderate (0.50 to 0.75) and even poor (<0.50) ICC were observed in all but the first item of these patient-reported outcome measures in at least one evaluation. Over time, missing data were more frequent and no learning effect was detected. DISCUSSION: We observed intra-personal variation in reliability when answering patient-reported outcome measures, persisting in repeated applications, and a decrease in the motivation to respond, which should alert clinicians for these additional challenges in real-life clinical practice.

Update on "Treatment of orthostatic headache without intracranial hypotension: A case report" - nine years later.

BACKGROUND: In 2013, one of the authors described a 36-year-old female with orthostatic headache without documented intracranial hypotension or evidence of cerebrospinal fluid leak, despite extensive workup. Headache was unresponsive to conservative treatment since 2010, showed only transient benefit after repeated epidural blood patches while vitamin A supplementation resulted in progressive improvement. CASE: Since 2013, the patient followed a relapsing and remitting course yet relapse control became difficult after a drug induced liver injury required vitamin A discontinuation in 2017, when her headache became chronic. Greater occipital nerve blocks provided pain relief as alternative but were stopped due to the pandemic and her latest severe relapse, in late 2020, required not only restarting anaesthetic blocks and aggressive medication management, but also reassessing and treating comorbidities (obstructive sleep apnoea and major depressive disorder) with modest benefit. CONCLUSION: Orthostatic headache without intracranial hypotension is rare, with only 28 cases reported so far, all treated empirically and all treatment options revealing to be mostly ineffective. Vitamin A anecdotally appeared to be useful in our case but had to be stopped for severe side effects, so unfavourable long-term prognosis, in ours and 2/3 of the reported cases, seems to be the rule in this intriguing entity.

Headaches and the use of personal protective equipment in the general population during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Headaches associated with personal protective equipment were reported in health-care workers in previous epidemiological studies. METHODS: National web-based survey advertised by the Portuguese Headache Society and National Headache and Migraine patient´s organization between September-December 2020 screening for personal protective equipment usage pattern, pre-existing and de novo headaches after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its relation to personal protective equipment use. RESULTS: Of 5064 participants, 90.6% (4562/5034) were women, mean age was 37.2 ± 11 years. Most questions had a completion rate above 87% (non-completion rate ranging from 0-12.7%). Twenty percent were health-care professionals (993/5046). Surgical and cloth masks were the most common personal protective equipment type, whereas protective eyewear and FFP2/FFP3 masks were mostly used by health-care professionals. About 97% (1814/1870) of migraine and headache participants reported aggravation of pre-existing headaches with personal protective equipment use, and 56% (2476/4420) had de novo headaches. Participants with de novo headaches had a higher frequency of pre-existing migraine (1118/1226, 91.2% vs 1408/1600, 88%, P = .042), and wore personal protective equipment for longer periods of time (7 ± 2 h 42 vs 6 ± 2 h 54 min per day, P < .001). In multivariate analysis longer mean duration of personal protective equipment use (OR of 1.1, 95% CI 1-1.2) and previous migraine (OR of 1.2, 95% CI 1-1.4) were predictors of developing de novo headaches. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all participants with pre-existing headache reported worsening of their headaches, and more than half of the study population developed de novo headaches following personal protective equipment use. Duration of personal protective equipment usage and pre-existing migraine were the strongest predictors of de novo headaches.

Gestational exposure to erenumab-The outcome of three pregnancies.

Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody (mAb) approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. While preclinical studies on calcitonin gene-related peptide mAbs did not identify any reproductive toxicity, pregnant and breastfeeding women were excluded from the pivotal human studies, and therefore the safety of calcitonin gene-related peptide medications in this population must be studied. So far, postmarketing data of accidental exposures have not brought to light any specific toxicities. Three women treated with erenumab in our series conceived while exposed to the drug. All had previous successful pregnancies, were on erenumab for more than 6 months, and had ≥80% reduction in headache frequency. The one who stopped erenumab only 1 month before conceiving had a spontaneous abortion during the first trimester due to a gestational trophoblastic neoplasia and has since conceived with an uneventful gestation. The other two women stopped treatment during the first trimester, and both pregnancies went to term with no complications. All babies have shown normal development. No plausible explanation relates the mechanism of action of erenumab and the serious complication that occurred in one patient. Continuous follow-up and reporting of all exposures are encouraged to gather safety data on pregnant and nursing women and on the development of the newborns. So far, immediately stopping the drug is advised and may contribute to decreasing the potential risks.

TIME, to move forward? comment on "a universal outcome measure for headache treatments, care-delivery systems and economic analysis".

The paper from Steiner et al. suggests that an outcome measure expressed in time units may be an adequate method to assess the impact of headache disorders, regardless of diagnosis or health care setting, proving useful for cost-benefit analysis and health policy definition. Using time lost to each attack - weighted by disability - may prove to be a reliable measure to establish the effectiveness of acute treatment, but if considering also the attack frequency it could evaluate the effects of preventive strategies. A measure such as the Headache Gauge, which translates the proportion of time lost to headache -related disability, has proven to be applicable also in routine clinical practice as well, and can be tested in clinical trials and populational analysis. There are practical limitations, such as disability assessment and the need for prospective data collection to avoid recall bias but it seems consensual that impairment related to primary headache disorders is primarily driven by the TIME stolen from the perfect health status.

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 Gauge: a real-life calendar-based tool for headache monitoring.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to validate a semi-quantitative composite score tool, "Headache Gauge" (HG), to monitor the treatment effect in primary headaches in everyday clinic practice, adjustable to any chosen timeframe. METHOD: A cohort validation study of HG was performed in primary headache patients, recovering their clinical data and patient-related outcome measures (PROMs) for headache (HIT-6, MIDAS, HURT), work impact (WPAIQ), quality-of-life (SF-12), and mood (STAI, ZUNG). HG score distribution, its relation to clinical variables, its internal consistency, and its convergent validity were determined. RESULTS: HG was plotted in 233 patients: 90.1% females, age average 37 years, 86% with migraine, 27% with chronic headaches, and 28% with medication overuse. HG ranged from 0.21 to 58.3 in this sample, higher in chronic headaches (HG 16) and medication overuse (HG 15). HG presented good concurrent validity, significantly correlating with HIT-6 (p < 0.0001), SF-12 (p = 0.001), WPAIQ (p < 0.0001), MIDAS (p < 0.0001), and HURT (p < 0.0001). Good sensitivity to change (p < 0.001) and moderate test-retest reliability (p = 0.001) were calculated after reassessment of 147 patients (63.1% of the initial sample). CONCLUSIONS: Headache Gauge is a clinical data-based outcome measure that conceptually translates the percentage of lost time to headache in any given timeframe. It relates to headache impact, therefore bearing the potential to be relevant in real-life clinical monitoring.

Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache: 1. Rationale and description

In countries where headache services exist at all, their focus is usually on specialist (tertiary) care. This is clinically and economically inappropriate: most headache disorders can effectively and more efficiently (and at lower cost) be treated in educationally supported primary care. At the same time, compartmentalizing divisions between primary, secondary and tertiary care in many health-care systems create multiple inefficiencies, confronting patients attempting to navigate these levels (the "patient journey") with perplexing obstacles.High demand for headache care, estimated here in a needs-assessment exercise, is the biggest of the challenges to reform. It is also the principal reason why reform is necessary.The structured headache services model presented here by experts from all world regions on behalf of the Global Campaign against Headache is the suggested health-care solution to headache. It develops and refines previous proposals, responding to the challenge of high demand by basing headache services in primary care, with two supporting arguments. First, only primary care can deliver headache services equitably to the large numbers of people needing it. Second, with educational supports, they can do so effectively to most of these people. The model calls for vertical integration between care levels (primary, secondary and tertiary), and protection of the more advanced levels for the minority of patients who need them. At the same time, it is amenable to horizontal integration with other care services. It is adaptable according to the broader national or regional health services in which headache services should be embedded.It is, according to evidence and argument presented, an efficient and cost-effective model, but these are claims to be tested in formal economic analyses.

Early Recanalization in Patients With Cerebral Venous Thrombosis Treated With Anticoagulation.

Background and Purpose- The hypothesis that venous recanalization prevents progression of venous infarction is not established in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Evidence is also scarce on the association between residual symptoms, particularly headache, and the recanalization grade. We aimed to assess, in patients with CVT treated with standard anticoagulation, (1) the rate of early venous recanalization, (2) whether lack of early recanalization was predictor of parenchymal brain lesion progression, and (3) the prevalence and features of persistent headache according to the recanalization grade achieved. Methods- PRIORITy-CVT (Pathophysiology of Venous Infarction - Prediction of Infarction and Recanalization in CVT) was a multicenter, prospective, cohort study including patients with newly diagnosed CVT. Standardized magnetic resonance imaging was performed at inclusion (≤24 hours of therapeutic anticoagulation), days 8 and 90. Potential imaging predictors of recanalization were predefined and analyzed at each anatomical segment. Primary outcomes were rate of early recanalization and brain lesion progression at day 8. Secondary outcomes were headache (days 8 and 90) and functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale at days 8 and 90). Results- Sixty eight patients with CVT were included, of whom 30 (44%) had parenchymal lesions. At the early follow-up (n=63; 8±2 days), 68% (n=43) of patients had partial recanalization and 6% (n=4) full recanalization. Early recanalization was associated both with early regression (P=0.03) and lower risk of enlargement of nonhemorrhagic lesions (P=0.02). Lesions showing diffusion restriction (n=12) were fully reversible in 66% of cases, particularly in patients showing early venous recanalization. Evidence of new or enlarged hemorrhagic lesions, headache at days 8 and 90, and unfavorable functional outcome at days 8 and 90 were not significantly different in patients achieving recanalization. Conclusions- Venous recanalization started within the first 8 days of therapeutic anticoagulation in most patients with CVT and was associated with early regression of nonhemorrhagic lesions, including venous infarction. There was an association between persistent venous occlusion at day 8 and enlargement of nonhemorrhagic lesions.