MAB-MIG: registry of the spanish neurological society of erenumab for migraine prevention

Erenumab; Migranya; Anticòs monoclonalErenumab; Migraña; Anticuerpo monoclonalErenumab; Migraine; Monoclonal antibodyBackground Erenumab was approved in Europe for migraine prevention in patients with ≥ 4 monthly migraine days (MMDs). In Spain, Novartis started a personalized managed access program, which allowed free access to erenumab before official reimbursement. The Spanish Neurological Society started a prospective registry to evaluate real-world effectiveness and tolerability, and all Spanish headache experts were invited to participate. We present their first results. Methods Patients fulfilled the ICHD-3 criteria for migraine and had ≥ 4 MMDs. Sociodemographic and clinical data were registered as well as MMDs, monthly headache days, MHDs, prior and concomitant preventive treatment, medication overuse headache (MOH), migraine evolution, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs): headache impact test (HIT-6), migraine disability assessment questionnaire (MIDAS), and patient global improvement change (PGIC). A > 50% reduction of MMDs after 12 weeks was considered as a response. Results We included 210 patients (female 86.7%, mean age 46.4 years old) from 22 Spanish hospitals from February 2019 to June 2020. Most patients (89.5%) suffered from chronic migraine with a mean evolution of 8.6 years. MOH was present in 70% of patients, and 17.1% had migraine with aura. Patients had failed a mean of 7.8 preventive treatments at baseline (botulinum toxin type A—BoNT/A—had been used by 95.2% of patients). Most patients (67.6%) started with erenumab 70 mg. Sixty-one percent of patients were also simultaneously taking oral preventive drugs and 27.6% were getting simultaneous BoNT/A. Responder rate was 37.1% and the mean reduction of MMDs and MHDs was -6.28 and -8.6, respectively. Changes in PROs were: MIDAS: -35 points, HIT-6: -11.6 points, PIGC: 4.7 points. Predictors of good response were prior HIT-6 score < 80 points (p = 0.01), ≤ 5 prior preventive treatment failures (p = 0.026), absence of MOH (p = 0.039), and simultaneous BoNT/A treatment (p < 0.001). Twenty percent of patients had an adverse event, but only two of them were severe (0.9%), which led to treatment discontinuation. Mild constipation was the most frequent adverse event (8.1%). Conclusions In real-life, in a personalized managed access program, erenumab shows a good effectiveness profile and an excellent tolerability in migraine prevention in our cohort of refractory patients.We declare that we have not received any scholarship, nor grant, nor help to do the MAB-MIG registry

Effectiveness and safety of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients over 65 years: a real-life multicentre analysis of 162 patients

Background Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies have shown notable effectiveness and tolerability in migraine patients; however, data on their use in elderly patients is still lacking, as clinical trials have implicit age restrictions and real-world evidence is scarce. In this study, we aimed to describe the safety and effectiveness of erenumab, galcanezumab and fremanezumab in migraine patients over 65 years old in real-life. Methods In this observational real-life study, a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 18 different headache units in Spain was performed. Migraine patients who started treatment with any anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody after the age of 65 years were included. Primary endpoints were reduction in monthly migraine days after 6 months of treatment and the presence of adverse effects. Secondary endpoints were reductions in headache and medication intake frequencies by months 3 and 6, response rates, changes in patient-reported outcomes and reasons for discontinuation. As a subanalysis, reduction in monthly migraine days and proportion of adverse effects were also compared among the three monoclonal antibodies. Results A total of 162 patients were included, median age 68 years (range 65-87), 74.1% women. 42% had dyslipidaemia, 40.3% hypertension, 8% diabetes, and 6.2% previous cardiovascular ischaemic disease. The reduction in monthly migraine days at month 6 was 10.17.3 days. A total of 25.3% of patients presented adverse effects, all of them mild, with only two cases of blood pressure increase. Headache and medication intake frequencies were significantly reduced, and patient-reported outcomes were improved. The proportions of responders were 68%, 57%, 33% and 9% for reductions in monthly migraine days >= 30%,>= 50%,>= 75% and 100%, respectively. A total of 72.8% of patients continued with the treatment after 6 months. The reduction in migraine days was similar for the different anti-CGRP treatments, but fewer adverse effects were detected with fremanezumab (7.7%). Conclusions Anti-CGRP mAbs are safe and effective treatments in migraine patients over 65 years old in real-life clinical practice

Stranger things. Neurocientíficos militares y de la CIA en proyectos secretos de experimentación humana en los Estados Unidos (1945-1975)

Cuando todavía estaban en el aire los horrores de la medicina nazi, los gobiernos de las potencias ganadoras de la II Guerra Mundial se lanzaron a la experimentación secreta en seres humanos para analizar los efectos de las nuevas armas químicas, biológicas y nucleares. Los más conocidos de estos proyectos fueron los realizados por la CIA y el ejército norteamericanos. Se realizaron exposiciones masivas a radiación en soldados, en pacientes ingresados y en enfermos mentales; se liberaron en ciudades microorganismos para estudiar su propagación; se intentó manipular la mente mediante técnicas de «lavado de cerebro » con privación sensorial, LSD y otras drogas, hipnosis, estimulación cerebral profunda con electrodos implantados, etc. Todo esto se llevó a cabo en personas no informadas que creían que recibían tratamientos bienintencionados o que participaban en un proyecto de investigación médica, desconociendo que los servicios secretos estaban detrás. En otras ocasiones, los sujetos fueron sometidos contra su voluntad. La mayoría de estos experimentos ilegales y antiéticos se hicieron en colectivos desvalidos (enfermos mentales, afroamericanos, amish, esquimales, etc.) o que deseaban una recompensa (presos, soldados, estudiantes, etc.). Se realizaron en universidades, hospitales y otras instituciones de prestigio. Algunos investigadores tampoco supieron quién estaba detrás de las donaciones y los fondos de investigación. El gobierno de EE.UU. ha reconocido estos programas ilegales de experimentación humana. En este trabajo se revisan los programas secretos de investigación en humanos realizados desde 1945 hasta 1975 en EE.UU., con especial atención al desarrollado por la CIA conocido como MK-Ultra

Neuromodulación en cefaleas y neuralgias craneofaciales: Guía de la Sociedad Española de Neurología y de la Sociedad Española de Neurocirugía

Neuromodulación; Estimulación; MigrañaNeuromodulació; Estimulació; MigranyaNeuromodulation; Stimulation; MigraineIntroducción En los últimos años han surgido numerosos dispositivos de neuromodulación, invasivos y no invasivos, que se han aplicado en pacientes con cefaleas y neuralgias sin que exista una revisión actualizada de su eficacia y seguridad, ni recomendaciones de ninguna institución sanitaria sobre su uso específico en cada entidad nosológica. Métodos Neurólogos del Grupo de Cefaleas de la Sociedad Española de Neurología (SEN) y neurocirujanos expertos en neurocirugía funcional seleccionados por la Sociedad Española de Neurocirugía (SENEC), hemos realizado una revisión exhaustiva en el sistema Medline sobre neuromodulación en cefaleas y neuralgias. Resultados Presentamos una revisión actualizada y establecemos por primera vez unas recomendaciones consensuadas entre la SEN y la SENEC sobre el uso de la neuromodulación en cefaleas y neuralgias, adjudicando niveles de evidencia sobre su eficacia actual, específicamente en cada entidad nosológica. Conclusiones Los resultados actuales de los estudios proporcionan evidencias para la indicación de técnicas de neuromodulación en casos refractarios de cefaleas y neuralgias (sobre todo en migraña, cefalea en racimos y neuralgia del trigémino), seleccionados por neurólogos expertos en cefaleas, tras comprobar el agotamiento de las opciones farmacológicas. Adicionalmente, en el caso de la neuromodulación invasiva, se recomienda que los casos sean debatidos en comités multidisciplinarios y la cirugía sea realizada por equipos de neurocirujanos expertos en neurocirugía funcional y con una morbimortalidad aceptable.Introduction Numerous invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation devices have been developed and applied to patients with headache and neuralgia in recent years. However, no updated review addresses their safety and efficacy, and no healthcare institution has issued specific recommendations on their use for these 2 conditions. Methods Neurologists from the Spanish Society of Neurology's (SEN) Headache Study Group and neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, selected by the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery (SENEC), performed a comprehensive review of articles on the MEDLINE database addressing the use of the technique in patients with headache and neuralgia. Results We present an updated review and establish the first set of consensus recommendations of the SEN and SENC on the use of neuromodulation to treat headache and neuralgia, analysing the current levels of evidence on its effectiveness for each specific condition. Conclusions Current evidence supports the indication of neuromodulation techniques for patients with refractory headache and neuralgia (especially migraine, cluster headache, and trigeminal neuralgia) selected by neurologists and headache specialists, after pharmacological treatment options are exhausted. Furthermore, we recommend that invasive neuromodulation be debated by multidisciplinary committees, and that the procedure be performed by teams of neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality.Esta guía no ha recibido ningún tipo de financiación pública ni privada

Document of revision and updating of medication overuse headache (MOH)

Tratamiento preventivo; Cefalea con uso excesivo de medicación; OpioidesTractament preventiu; Cefalea per ús excessiu de medicaments; OpioidesPreventive treatment; Medication overuse headache; OpioidsIntroducción La cefalea con uso excesivo de medicación es una cefalea secundaria en la que el uso regular o frecuente de medicación analgésica produce un aumento de la frecuencia de una cefalea de base, pasando de episódica a crónica. La prevalencia de esta entidad está en torno al 1-2%, siendo más frecuente en mujeres entre 30 y 50 años con comorbilidades psiquiátricas como depresión o ansiedad y otros procesos de dolor crónico. Es importante conocer el manejo de esta entidad. Por este motivo, el Grupo de Estudios de Cefaleas de la Sociedad Española de Neurología ha pretendido realizar este documento de consenso sobre esta patología. Desarrollo Esta guía ha sido redactada por un grupo de expertos a partir de la revisión de la evidencia científica publicada y estableciendo recomendaciones prácticas para su adecuado manejo y tratamiento. El tratamiento de la cefalea con uso excesivo de medicación tiene varios pilares fundamentales y suele ser complejo: información y educación sobre el desarrollo de la cefalea con uso excesivo de medicación, tratamiento preventivo, suspensión del fármaco de uso frecuente y tratamiento de deshabituación. Es importante el seguimiento de pacientes con riesgo de recurrencias. Conclusiones Esperamos que este documento resulte de utilidad y permita su aplicación práctica en la consulta diaria y que sirva para actualizar y mejorar el conocimiento del manejo de esta patología.Introduction Medication overuse headache is a secondary headache in which the regular or frequent use of analgesics can increase the frequency of the episodes, causing the transition from episodic to chronic headache. The prevalence of medication overuse headache is approximately 1-2%, with higher rates among women aged 30-50 years and with comorbid psychiatric disorders such as depression or anxiety, or other chronic pain disorders. It is important to be familiar with the management of this disease. To this end, the Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group has prepared a consensus document addressing this disorder. Development These guidelines were prepared by a group of neurologists specialising in headache after a systematic literature review and provides consensus recommendations on the proper management and treatment of medication overuse headache. The treatment of medication overuse headache is often complex, and is based on 4 fundamental pillars: education and information about the condition, preventive treatment, discontinuation of the drug being overused, and treatment for withdrawal symptoms. Follow-up of patients at risk of recurrence is important. Conclusions We hope that this document will be useful in daily clinical practice and that it will update and improve understanding of medication overuse headache management

Effectiveness and safety of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients over 65 years: a real-life multicentre analysis of 162 patients

Abstract Background Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies have shown notable effectiveness and tolerability in migraine patients; however, data on their use in elderly patients is still lacking, as clinical trials have implicit age restrictions and real-world evidence is scarce. In this study, we aimed to describe the safety and effectiveness of erenumab, galcanezumab and fremanezumab in migraine patients over 65 years old in real-life. Methods In this observational real-life study, a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 18 different headache units in Spain was performed. Migraine patients who started treatment with any anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody after the age of 65 years were included. Primary endpoints were reduction in monthly migraine days after 6 months of treatment and the presence of adverse effects. Secondary endpoints were reductions in headache and medication intake frequencies by months 3 and 6, response rates, changes in patient-reported outcomes and reasons for discontinuation. As a subanalysis, reduction in monthly migraine days and proportion of adverse effects were also compared among the three monoclonal antibodies. Results A total of 162 patients were included, median age 68 years (range 65–87), 74.1% women. 42% had dyslipidaemia, 40.3% hypertension, 8% diabetes, and 6.2% previous cardiovascular ischaemic disease. The reduction in monthly migraine days at month 6 was 10.1 ± 7.3 days. A total of 25.3% of patients presented adverse effects, all of them mild, with only two cases of blood pressure increase. Headache and medication intake frequencies were significantly reduced, and patient-reported outcomes were improved. The proportions of responders were 68%, 57%, 33% and 9% for reductions in monthly migraine days ≥ 30%, ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100%, respectively. A total of 72.8% of patients continued with the treatment after 6 months. The reduction in migraine days was similar for the different anti-CGRP treatments, but fewer adverse effects were detected with fremanezumab (7.7%). Conclusions Anti-CGRP mAbs are safe and effective treatments in migraine patients over 65 years old in real-life clinical practice. Graphical Abstrac