Cluster headache: a quasi-rare disorder needing a reappraisal

Editoria

New players in the preventive treatment of migraine.

Migraine is a common, chronic disorder of the brain causing much disability, as well as personal, familial and societal impact. Several oral preventive agents are available in different countries for the prevention of migraine, but none have performed better than 50% improvement in 50% of patients in a clinical trial. Additionally, each has various possible adverse events making their tolerability less than optimal. Recently, three monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) ligand (LY2951742, ALD403 and TEV-48125) and one targeting the CGRP receptor (AMG 334) have completed phase 2 trials, and the results have been reported. These early results show them all to be somewhat more effective than placebo, with no serious adverse events. Three have been studied for episodic migraine, and only TEV-48125 has been studied for both high frequency episodic and chronic migraine. Moreover, preliminary data suggests that neurostimulation is effective in migraine treatment, including stimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion, transcutaneous supraorbital and supratrochlear nerve, and transcutaneous vagus nerve. In this article, these innovative therapies will be reviewed

Refractory Headache: One Term does Not cover All – A Statement of the European Headache Federation

[No abstract available

Aging, cellular senescence, and progressive Multiple Sclerosis

Aging is one of the most important risk factors for the development of several neurodegenerative diseases including progressive multiple sclerosis (MS). Cellular senescence (CS) is a key biological process underlying aging. Several stressors associated with aging and MS pathology, such as oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, cytokines and replicative exhaustion are known triggers of cellular senescence. Senescent cells exhibit stereotypical metabolic and functional changes, which include cell-cycle arrest and acquiring a pro-inflammatory phenotype secreting cytokines, growth factors, metalloproteinases and reactive oxygen species. They accumulate with aging and can convert neighboring cells to senescence in a paracrine manner. In MS, accelerated cellular senescence may drive disease progression by promoting chronic non-remitting inflammation, loss or altered immune, glial and neuronal function, failure of remyelination, impaired blood-brain barrier integrity and ultimately neurodegeneration. Here we discuss the evidence linking cellular senescence to the pathogenesis of MS and the putative role of senolytic and senomorphic agents as neuroprotective therapies in tackling disease progression

Guideline on the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine. a consensus statement from the European Headache Federation

OnabotulinumtoxinA is being increasingly used in the management of chronic migraine (CM). Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA poses challenges compared with traditional therapy with orally administered preventatives. The European Headache Federation identified an expert group that was asked to develop the present guideline to provide recommendations for the use of onabotulinumtoxinA in CM. The expert group recommend onabotulinumtoxinA as an effective and well-tolerated treatment of CM. Patients should preferably have tried two to three other migraine prophylactics before start of onabotulinumtoxinA. Patients with medication overuse should be withdrawn from the overused medication before initiation of onabotulinumtoxinA if feasible, if not onabotulinumtoxinA can be initiated from the start or before withdrawal. OnabotulinumtoxinA should be administered according to the PREEMPT injection protocol, i.e. injecting 155 U-195 U to 31-39 sites every 12-weeks. We recommend that patients are defined as non-responders, if they have less than 30% reduction in headache days per month during treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA. However other factors such as headache intensity, disability and patient preferences should also be considered when evaluating response. Treatment should be stopped, if the patient does not respond to the first two to three treatment cycles. Response to continued treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA should be evaluated by comparing the 4 weeks before with the 4 weeks after each treatment cycle. It is recommended that treatment is stopped in patients with a reduction to less than 10 headache days per month for 3 months and that patients are re-evaluated 4-5 months after stopping onabotulinumtoxinA to make sure that the patient has not returned to CM. Questions regarding efficacy and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA could be answered on the basis of scientific evidence. The other recommendations were mainly based on expert opinion. Future research on the treatment of CM with onabotulinumtoxinA may further improve the management of this highly disabling disorder

Therapeutic Management: When and What

Migraine is a widespread brain disease that is classified as the second most disabling condition and has the third highest prevalence of all medical conditions. Despite its non-emergent or life-threatening nature, migraine can progress to chronic type, a subform associated with significant morbidity and drug overuse. In the management of migraine, it is important therefore to introduce early prophylactic treatment in order to limit migraine chronification. In this chapter, we will go through all the treatment options, both acute and preventive, pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical following this flowchart: 1. Introduction; 2. General principles; 2.1 Symptomatic therapy; 2.2 Prophylactic management; 3. Pharmaceutical therapies; 3.1 Symptomatic; 3.1.1 Disease-specific; 3.1.2 No disease-specific; 3.2 Prophylactic; 3.2.1 Disease-specific; 3.2.2 No disease-specific; 3.3 Non-Pharmaceutical therapies; 3.4 Neuromodulation; 3.4.1 Invasive; 3.4.5 Non-invasive; 3.5 Nutrient (nutraceuticals); 3.6 Dietary interventions; 3.7 Acupuncture; 3.8 Physical therapy; 4. Cognitive behavioral therapies; 5. Patient centricity and patient education

Reply to the letter: Headaches during/after SARS-CoV-2 infection/vaccination can be primary and secondary as well as acute and chronic, by Finsterer J and Mehri S

Headaches; Infection; SARS-CoV-2Mals de cap; Infecció; SARS-CoV-2Dolores de cabeza; Infección; SARS-CoV-

Headaches and facial pain attributed to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination: a systematic review

Chronic daily headache; Headache; Neurological disordersCefalea crònica diària; Mal de cap; Trastorns neurològicsCefalea crónica diaria; Dolor de cabeza; Trastornos neurológicosBackground and purpose The aim was to provide insights to the characteristics of headache in the context of COVID-19 on behalf of the Headache Scientific Panel and the Neuro-COVID-19 Task Force of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and the European Headache Federation (EHF). Methods Following the Delphi method the Task Force identified six relevant questions and then conducted a systematic literature review to provide evidence-based answers and suggest specific diagnostic criteria. Results No data for facial pain were identified in the literature search. (1) Headache incidence during acute COVID-19 varies considerably, with higher prevalence rates in prospective compared to retrospective studies (28.9%–74.6% vs. 6.5%–34.0%). (2) Acute COVID-19 headache is usually bilateral or holocranial and often moderate to severe with throbbing pain quality lasting 2–14 days after first signs of COVID-19; photo-phonophobia, nausea, anosmia and ageusia are common associated features; persistent headache shares similar clinical characteristics. (3) Acute COVID-19 headache is presumably caused by immune-mediated mechanisms that activate the trigeminovascular system. (4) Headache occurs in 13.3%–76.9% following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and occurs more often amongst women with a pre-existing primary headache; the risk of developing headache is higher with the adenoviral-vector-type vaccines than with other preparations. (5) Headache related to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is mostly bilateral, and throbbing, pressing, jolting or stabbing. (6) No studies have been conducted investigating the underlying mechanism of headache attributed to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Conclusion The results of this joint EAN/EHF initiative provide a framework for a better understanding of headache in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination