Search

Abstract Background The burden of migraine goes beyond the pain and associated symptoms. We aimed to describe the impact of migraine in healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), work productivity, and mood disorders, as well as its economic cost. Methods Case–control study nested in a cross-sectional analysis of patient-reported data collected between 30/12/2019 and 20/04/2020 as part of the National Health and Wellness Survey, from respondents located in Spain. Adults (≥ 18 years old) who reported a physician diagnosis of migraine and ≥ 1 monthly headache days (MHD) in the previous 30 days were included. HCRU, health-related quality-of-life, depression scores, work and activity impairment, and the associated direct and indirect costs were assessed for four cohorts of migraine patients, according to the frequency of headache (MHD: 1–3, 4–7, 8–14, ≥ 15) and compared to a no-migraine control, matched to migraine cases by a propensity score based on demographic and clinical variables. Results The survey was completed by 595 people with active migraine, of whom 461 (77.4%) experienced

Abstract Headache is a common symptom of influenza infection; however, its causes and consequences remain uncertain. In this manuscript, we analyzed which demographic and clinical factors were associated with the presence of headache during the course of influenza infection and whether patients with headache had a different prognosis, evaluated by need of hospitalization, sick leave or school absenteeism. The influence study (NCT05704335) was an observational study that analyzed data routinely collected from the Health Sentinel Network between 2010 and 2020. During the study period, 7832 cases were considered, among which, 5275 (67.4%) reported headache. The presence of headache was independently associated with myalgia (2.753; 95%CI: 2.456–3.087, P

Abstract Current definitions of migraine that are based mainly on clinical characteristics do not account for other patient’s features such as those related to an impaired quality of life, due to loss of social life and productivity, and the differences related to the geographical distribution of the disease and cultural misconceptions which tend to underestimate migraine as a psychosocial rather than neurobiological disorder. Global differences definition, care access, and health equity for headache disorders, especially migraine are reported in this paper from a collaborative group of the editorial board members of the Journal of Headache and Pain. Other components that affect patients with migraine, in addition to the impact promoted by the migraine symptoms such as stigma and social determinants, are also reported.

Abstract Background Galcanezumab has shown efficacy and effectiveness in the treatment of episodic and chronic migraine (CM), however, the population represented in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) differs from the population observed in real-world setting. To describe the long-term effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab in clinical practice in patients excluded from RCTs. Methods Multicenter prospective cohort study of consecutive patients with chronic and high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) with prior failure to three or more migraine preventive drugs, treated with galcanezumab and followed up for 12 months. Results We enrolled 1055 patients, aged 50 (IQR: 42–58), 82.9% female, 76.4% chronic migraine, 69% with at least one exclusion criteria for RCTs, including age > 65 (n = 121), concomitant use of onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 185), daily headache at baseline (n = 347), chronic painful syndromes (n = 206), fibromyalgia (n = 101) or treatment resistance (n = 957). The median number of prior preventive treatments was 4 (IQR: 3–5). The retention rate was 90.8%, 76.8% and 71.4% at 3, 6 and 12 months. The main reasons for treatment discontinuation were lack of effectiveness (21.1%) and inadequate tolerability (6.6%). The 30%, 50% and 75% responder rates were 62.6%, 49.8% and 24.2% between weeks 8–12; 60.9%, 48.8% and 24.6% between weeks 20–24; and 59.7%, 48.3% and 24.6% between weeks 44–48. Daily headache at baseline (OR: 0.619; 95%CI: 0.469–0.817) and patient’s age (OR: 1.016; 95%CI: 1.005–1.026) were associated with 50% response at weeks 20–24. The variables that were associated with a higher reduction of headache days between weeks 20–24 were patient’s age (0.068; 95% CI: 0.018–0.119) and headache days per month at baseline (0.451; 95% CI: 0.319–0.583), while psychiatric comorbidity (-1.587; 95% CI: -2.626—0.538) and daily headache at baseline (-2.718; 95% CI: -4.58—0.869) were associated with fewer reduction in the number of headache days between weeks 20–24. Conclusion This study provides class III evidence of effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab in patients with HFEM and CM with comorbidities that would result in exclusion of the pivotal RCTs. Nonetheless, the clinical results over a 12-month period were similar to the efficacy observed in randomized controlled trials. Few patients discontinued the drug due to inadequate tolerability.

Abstract 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.

Abstract Introduction Neuroimaging has revealed that migraine is linked to alterations in both the structure and function of the brain. However, the relationship of these changes with aging has not been studied in detail. Here we employ the Brain Age framework to analyze migraine, by building a machine-learning model that predicts age from neuroimaging data. We hypothesize that migraine patients will exhibit an increased Brain Age Gap (the difference between the predicted age and the chronological age) compared to healthy participants. Methods We trained a machine learning model to predict Brain Age from 2,771 T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging scans of healthy subjects. The processing pipeline included the automatic segmentation of the images, the extraction of 1,479 imaging features (both morphological and intensity-based), harmonization, feature selection and training inside a 10-fold cross-validation scheme. Separate models based only on morphological and intensity features were also trained, and all the Brain Age models were later applied to a discovery cohort composed of 247 subjects, divided into healthy controls (HC, n=82), episodic migraine (EM, n=91), and chronic migraine patients (CM, n=74). Results CM patients showed an increased Brain Age Gap compared to HC (4.16 vs -0.56 years, P=0.01). A smaller Brain Age Gap was found for EM patients, not reaching statistical significance (1.21 vs -0.56 years, P=0.19). No associations were found between the Brain Age Gap and headache or migraine frequency, or duration of the disease. Brain imaging features that have previously been associated with migraine were among the main drivers of the differences in the predicted age. Also, the separate analysis using only morphological or intensity-based features revealed different patterns in the Brain Age biomarker in patients with migraine. Conclusion The brain-predicted age has shown to be a sensitive biomarker of CM patients and can help reveal distinct aging patterns in migraine.

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

Abstract Background The diagnosis of migraine is mainly clinical and self-reported, which makes additional examinations unnecessary in most cases. Migraine can be subtyped into chronic (CM) and episodic (EM). Despite the very high prevalence of migraine, there are no evidence-based guidelines for differentiating between these subtypes other than the number of days of migraine headache per month. Thus, we consider it timely to perform a systematic review to search for physiological evidence from functional activity (as opposed to anatomical structure) for the differentiation between CM and EM, as well as potential functional biomarkers. For this purpose, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and PubMed databases were screened. Findings Among the 24 studies included in this review, most of them (22) reported statistically significant differences between the groups of CM and EM. This finding is consistent regardless of brain activity acquisition modality, ictal stage, and recording condition for a wide variety of analyses. That speaks for a supramodal and domain-general differences between CM and EM that goes beyond a differentiation based on the days of migraine per month. Together, the reviewed studies demonstrates that electro- and magneto-physiological brain activity (M/EEG), as well as neurovascular and metabolic recordings from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET), show characteristic patterns that allow to differentiate between CM and EM groups. Conclusions Although a clear brain activity-based biomarker has not yet been identified to distinguish these subtypes of migraine, research is approaching headache specialists to a migraine diagnosis based not only on symptoms and signs reported by patients. Future studies based on M/EEG should pay special attention to the brain activity in medium and fast frequency bands, mainly the beta band. On the other hand, fMRI and PET studies should focus on neural circuits and regions related to pain and emotional processing.

Abstract Background Migraine represents a serious burden for national health systems. However, preventive treatment is not optimally applied to reduce the severity and frequency of headache attacks and the related expenses. Our aim was to assess the persistence to traditional migraine prophylaxis available in Spain and its relationship with the healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs. Methods Retrospective observational study with retrospective cohort design of individuals with migraine treated with oral preventive medication for the first time from 01/01/2016 to 30/06/2018. One-year follow-up information was retrieved from the Big-Pac™ database. According to their one-year persistence to oral prophylaxis, two study groups were created and describe regarding HRU and healthcare direct and indirect costs using 95% confidence intervals (CI). The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed as a sensitivity analysis. Patients were considered persistent if they continued on preventive treatment until the end of the study or switched medications within 60 days or less since the last prescription. Non-persistent were those who permanently discontinued or re-initiated a treatment after 60 days. Results Seven thousand eight hundred sixty-six patients started preventive treatment (mean age (SD) 48.2 (14.8) and 80.4% women), of whom 2,545 (32.4%) were persistent for 6 months and 2,390 (30.4%) for 12 months. Most used first-line preventive treatments were antidepressants (3,642; 46.3%) followed by antiepileptics (1,738; 22.1%) and beta-blockers (1,399; 17.8%). The acute treatments prescribed concomitantly with preventives were NSAIDs (4,530; 57.6%), followed by triptans (2,217; 28.2%). First-time preventive treatment prescribers were mostly primary care physicians (6,044; 76.8%) followed by neurologists (1,221; 15.5%). Non-persistent patients required a higher number of primary care visits (mean difference (95%CI): 3.0 (2.6;3.4)) and days of sick leave (2.7 (0.8;4.5)) than the persistent ones. The mean annual expenditure was €622 (415; 829) higher in patients who not persisted on migraine prophylactic treatment. Conclusions In this study, we observed a high discontinuation rate for migraine prophylaxis which is related to an increase in HRU and costs for non-persistent patients. These results suggest that the treatment adherence implies not only a clinical benefit but also a reduction in HRU and costs.

Abstract Background Headache is a frequent symptom following COVID-19 immunization with a typical onset within days post-vaccination. Cases of cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) have been reported in adenovirus vector-based COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Findings We reviewed all vaccine related CVT published cases by April 30, 2021. We assessed demographic, clinical variables and the interval between the vaccination and onset of headache. We assessed whether the presence of headache was associated with higher probability of death or intracranial hemorrhage. We identified 77 cases of CVT after COVID-19 vaccination. Patients’ age was below 60 years in 74/77 (95.8%) cases and 61/68 (89.7%) were women. Headache was described in 38/77 (49.4%) cases, and in 35/38 (92.1%) was associated with other symptoms. Multiple organ thrombosis was reported in 19/77 (24.7%) cases, intracranial hemorrhage in 33/77 (42.9%) cases and 19/77 (24.7%) patients died. The median time between vaccination and CVT-related headache onset was 8 (interquartile range 7.0–9.7) days. The presence of headache was associated with a higher odd of intracranial hemorrhage (OR 7.4; 95% CI: 2.7–20.8, p

Abstract Background The presence of headache during the acute phase of COVID-19 could be associated with the innate response and the cytokine release. We aim to compare the cytokine and interleukin profile in hospitalized COVID-19 patients at the moment of admission with and without headache during the course of the disease. Methods An observational analytic study with a case control design was performed. Hospitalized patients from a tertiary hospital with confirmed COVID-19 disease were included. Patients were classified into the headache or the control group depending on whether they presented headache not better accounted for by another headache disorder other than acute headache attributed to systemic viral infection. Several demographic and clinical variables were studies in both groups. We determined the plasmatic levels of 45 different cytokines and interleukins from the first hospitalization plasma extraction in both groups. Results One hundred and four patients were included in the study, aged 67.4 (12.8), 43.3% female. Among them, 29 (27.9%) had headache. Patients with headache were younger (61.8 vs. 69.5 years, p = 0.005) and had higher frequency of fever (96.6 vs. 78.7%, p = 0.036) and anosmia (48.3% vs. 22.7%, p = 0.016). In the comparison of the crude median values of cytokines, many cytokines were different between both groups. In the comparison of the central and dispersion parameters between the two groups, GROa, IL-10, IL1RA, IL-21, IL-22 remained statistically significant. After adjusting the values for age, sex, baseline situation and COVID-19 severity, IL-10 remained statistically significant (3.3 vs. 2.2 ng/dL, p = 0.042), with a trend towards significance in IL-23 (11.9 vs. 8.6 ng/dL, p = 0.082) and PIGF1 (1621.8 vs. 110.6 ng/dL, p = 0.071). Conclusions The higher levels of IL-10 -an anti-inflammatory cytokine- found in our sample in patients with headache may be explained as a counteract of cytokine release, reflecting a more intense immune response in these patients.

Abstract Introduction Headache is one of the most frequent neurologic manifestations in COVID-19. We aimed to analyze which symptoms and laboratory abnormalities were associated with the presence of headache and to evaluate if patients with headache had a higher adjusted in-hospital risk of mortality. Methods Retrospective cohort study. We included all consecutive patients admitted to the Hospital with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March 8th and April 11th, 2020. We collected demographic data, clinical variables and laboratory abnormalities. We used multivariate regression analysis. Results During the study period, 576 patients were included, aged 67.2 (SD: 14.7), and 250/576 (43.3%) being female. Presence of headache was described by 137 (23.7%) patients. The all-cause in-hospital mortality rate was 127/576 (20.0%). In the multivariate analysis, patients with headache had a lower risk of mortality (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17–0.88, p = 0.007). After adjusting for multiple comparisons in a multivariate analysis, variables that were independently associated with a higher odds of having headache in COVID-19 patients were anosmia, myalgia, female sex and fever; variables that were associated with a lower odds of having headache were younger age, lower score on modified Rankin scale, and, regarding laboratory variables on admission, increased C-reactive protein, abnormal platelet values, lymphopenia and increased D-dimer. Conclusion Headache is a frequent symptom in COVID-19 patients and its presence is an independent predictor of lower risk of mortality in COVID-19 hospitalized patients.

Abstract Background White matter alterations have been observed in patients with migraine. However, no microstructural white matter alterations have been found particularly in episodic or chronic migraine patients, and there is limited research focused on the comparison between these two groups of migraine patients. Methods Fifty-one healthy controls, 55 episodic migraine patients and 57 chronic migraine patients were recruited and underwent brain T1-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI acquisition. Using Tract-Based Spatial Statistics (TBSS), fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, radial diffusivity and axial diffusivity were compared between the different groups. On the one hand, all migraine patients were compared against healthy controls. On the other hand, patients from each migraine group were compared between them and also against healthy controls. Correlation analysis between clinical features (duration of migraine in years, time from onset of chronic migraine in months, where applicable, and headache and migraine frequency, where applicable) and Diffusion Tensor Imaging measures was performed. Results Fifty healthy controls, 54 episodic migraine and 56 chronic migraine patients were finally included in the analysis. Significant decreased axial diffusivity (p

Abstract Background Head trauma has been described as a precipitating event in Nummular Headache (NH). We aimed to describe the largest NH published series and compare characteristics between idiopathic and post-traumatic cases. Methods Patients attended in a Headache Unit in a tertiary hospital (January 2008–January 2018). NH diagnosed according to International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD) criteria. We prospectively considered clinical and epidemiological data, comparing idiopathic cases with those precipitated by a cranial trauma. Results We included 225 patients (145 women, 80 men) with NH. Median latency between onset and diagnosis was 10 months (IQR: 5–24). Symptomatic treatment was used in 190 patients (84.4%) among which 142 (74.7%) experienced response to it. Preventive treatment was necessary in 127 patients (51.4%), among which 95 (74.8%) achieved response. 29 patients (23 women, 6 men) described a head trauma related to beginning of pain. When comparing groups with or without previous trauma, age of onset was higher among post-traumatic patients (59.9 ± 17.4 vs 48.1 ± 18 years, p: 0.001). Allodynia upon palpation was encountered more frequently in trauma triggered painful areas (53.3% vs. 32.7%, p: 0.02). No other clinical characteristics differences were observed. Conclusion Cranial trauma is not a rare trigger of NH. Patients with post-traumatic forms are older and the presence of allodynia is more frequent.