Search

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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at http://www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/ and declare: EC has received honoraria from Novartis, Chiesi, Lundbeck, MedScape; his salary has been partially funded by Río Hortega grant Acción Estratégica en Salud 2017–2020, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CM20/00217). He is a junior editor for Cephalalgia. GE received travel grants and honoraria from Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Lusofarmaco, New Penta and Ecupharma. CNC has received honoraria for advisories, educational or commercial symposia from: Abbvie-Allergan, Kern Pharma, Chiesi, Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis and Teva Pharmaceuticals And has participated as subinvestigator in Clinical Trials for: Abbvie-Allergan, Amgen, Biohaven, Lilly, Lundbeck, Pfizer and Teva Pharmaceuticals. JAM has received honoraria as consultant and/or speaker for Lilly, Novartis, Teva. FS-C received honoraria from Novartis, Lilly, TEVA, Abbvie. AM has received honoraria from Teva, Lilly, Roche, UCB, Bial, Chiesi, Allergan, Esai, Zambon, Kern Pharma, Pfizer, Biogen Idec, Novartis, TEVA, Merck, Janssen, Neuraxpharm, Genzyme, Sanofi, Bayer, Almirall and/or Celgene. JS received honoraria from Allergan, Lilly, Teva, Novartis. IBB received honoraria for presentations from Novartis, Lilly, Teva, Lundbeck and Abbvie. MW-P received honoraria from Pfizer, Allergan-Abbvie, TEVA, Polpharma. MW-P is member of Editorial Board: The Journal of Headache and Pain. LP received honoraria from Pfizer, Lilly, Abbvie, TEVA, Novartis. AL-R received honoraria for Abbvie, Lilly, Novartis and Teva. IL received honoraria from Novartis, Abbvie, Teva, Eisai, Tecnifar and Bial. LD received honoraria as a speaker for Allergan, Lilly, Teva and Lundbeck. MRA-E, received honoraria from ABBVIE, Lilly, and Novartis. AM has no COI to declare. The University Clinic Hamburg got an unrestricted scientific grant from Novartis (2019-2023). IPM has received honoraria from Allergan Teva, Novartis, Lundbeck and Eli Lilly for lecturing or participating in advisory boards; is principal investigator for phase IV trials sponsored by Novartis, Lundbeck and Teva. CS has received personal fees for lectures/ advisory boards: Novartis, Abbvie and TEVA. PI received honoraria from TEVA, Novartis, Lilly, Abbvie, Lundbeck, Exeltis. ALR received honoraria from TEVA. ABG-V has received speaker honoraria and/or clinical advisor from Novartis, Lilly, TEVA, Exeltis, Chiesi, Abbvie, Pfizer and Lundbeck. RR has received travel grants and/or honoraria for lectures or advisory boards from Allergan/AbbVie, Hormosan, Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis, Pfizer and Teva. SS reports consultant, speaker or advisory board fees from Abbott, Allergan/Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Medscape, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, Starmed, Teva and Uriach. EC-G received honoraria from TEVA. DGA has received personal compensation for consulting/advising from the WHO. Non-profit board membership in the Spanish Society of Neurology, and the European Union of Medical Specialist section of Neurology. Research funding from the Regional Health Administration (Gerencia Regional de Salud SACYL) in Castilla y Leon, Spain and Carlos III institute, Madrid, Spain. Speaker/travel grants/ clinical trials from Teva, Allergan, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis and Biohaven. JP has received honoraria from Abbvie, Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis and Teva. RG-G received honoraria from Allergan/ Abbvie, Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis, Pfizer, Tecnifar, Teva. MH-V has received honoraria for participating on advisory boards and for collaborations as consultant, scientific communications, speaker, research support as well as funding for travel and congress-attending expenses for Abbie-Allergan, Novartis, Lundbeck, Lilly, Almirall, Chiesi, Esai, Exeltis, Kern Pharma, Menarini, TEVA and Zambon. His research group has received research grants from Abbie-Allergan and has received funding for clinical trials from Lilly, Novartis, TEVA. JVR received honoraria from Novartis, Abbvie, Lilly, TEVA, Lundbeck. SS-L received honoraria from Allergan, Almirall, Amgen, Chiesi, Eisai, Exeltis, Lilly, Lündbeck, Novartis, Pfizer y Teva. MG-S has received honoraria and been involved in research, education and advisory boards with Teva, Lily, Novartis and Abbvie. CT received personal fees for participating in advisory or for speaking at scientific events from AbbVie, Allergan, Biohaven, Dompé, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis and Teva. CT has received research funding from the European Commission, the Italian Ministry of Health and Migraine Research Foundation. JDdT has received honoraria as consultant and/or speaker for Lilly, Novartis, Teva. SDI has received honoraria for advisories, educational or commercial symposia from: Abbvie-Allergan, Fundació Universitat-Empresa, Ipsen Pharma, Kern Pharma, Lilly, Lundbeck, MSD-Organon, Novartis and Teva Pharmaceuticals And has participated as PI in Clinical Trials for: Abbvie-Allergan, Alder, Amgen, Biohaven, Ipsen Pharma, Lilly, Lundbeck, Pfizer and Teva Pharmaceuticals. CGO participated in clinical trials from Novartis, St Jude Medical, Lilly, Lundbeck; TEVA, Biohaven, Pfizer. CGO received honoraria as consultant for Novartis, Lilly, Allergan-abbvie, Lundbeck, TEVA, Pfizer. CGO received honoraria as speaker for Allergan-Abbvie, TEVA, Novartis,Lilly, Chiesi, MSD, Almirall. PB reports personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, research support, collaborated for clinical trials or other activities with Abbvie, Alder, Allergan, Amgen, Angelini, Assosalute, Bayer, Biohaven, ElectroCore, Eli-Lilly, Fondazione Ricerca e Salute, GSK, Lundbeck, Lusofarmaco, 1MED, MSD, New Penta, Noema Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Stx-Med, Teva, Visufarma, Zambon and serves as President with Italian Association of Headache Sufferers. PP-R has received, in the last 3 years, honoraria as a consultant and speaker for: AbbVie, Biohaven, Chiesi, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Medscape, Novartis, Pfizer and Teva. Her research group has received research grants from AbbVie, Novartis and Teva; as well as, Instituto Salud Carlos III, EraNet Neuron, European Regional Development Fund (001-P-001682) under the framework of the FEDER Operative Programme for Catalunya 2014-2020 - RIS3CAT; has received funding for clinical trials from AbbVie, Amgen, Biohaven, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva. She is the Honorary Secretary of the International Headache Society. She is in the editorial board of Revista de Neurologia. She is an associate editor for Cephalalgia, Headache, Neurologia, The Journal of Headache and Pain and Frontiers of Neurology. She is a member of the Clinical Trials Guidelines Committee of the International Headache Society. She has edited the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Headache of the Spanish Neurological Society. She is the founder of www.midolordecabeza.org. PP-R does not own stocks from any pharmaceutical company. VJG, MMV, GV, JR-M, NFF, AJS, RO, GG, YG-O, GC, AL-B, FVJ, JR-V and VO reports no disclosures. RO reports personal fees from Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva, and Pfizer, and non-financial support from Novartis, Teva, and Allergan/AbbVie. CT has received honoraria for lectures from TEVA, Lundbeck and for advisory boards from TEVA. He has received travel support from TEVA and Lundbeck. SS received honoraria from TEVA. AH declares no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. HB received honoraria from Novartis, Teva and Lundbeck. NPRP received honoraria from ABBVIE, Lilly and Novartis. CF received honoraria from Novartis and Abbvie. AAL received honoraria for Abbvie, Lilly, Novartis and Teva. EMS received a grant from the Portuguese Headache Society, supported by Teva. MTF has received honoraria from Allergan-AbbVie, Novartis, Chiesi and Teva. AA has received honoraria from Allergan-AbbVie, Novartis, Chiesi. PT received grants and honoria from Novartis, Teva, Eli-Lilly and Allergan. CA received travel grants from FB-Health, Lusofarmaco, Almirall, Eli-Lilly Novartis and Teva. RDI received speaker honoraria from Eli-Lilly, TEVA and Lundbeck. GS received personal fees as speaker or advisory board from Eli Lilly, Novartis, Teva, Lundbeck, Pfizer. SB has received honoraria from Teva. SC has received honoraria from Teva, Lilly, Roche, UCB, Bial, Chiesi, Allergan, Esai, Zambon, Kern Pharma, Pfizer, Biogen Idec, Novartis, TEVA, Merck, Janssen, Neuraxpharm, Genzyme, Sanofi, Bayer, Almirall and/or Celgene. EP reports personal fees from Novartis, Teva and Lilly. ALGP Research funding from the Regional Health Administration (Gerencia Regional de Salud SACYL) in Castilla y Leon, Spain. Speaker/travel grants/ clinical trials from Teva, Allergan, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis, Pfizer and Biohaven. AS has received honoraria for advisory boards and lectures from Allergan/AbbVie, Hormosan, Lilly, Lundbeck, Novartis, Sanofi, Teva. AGM has received speaker honoraria from TEVA. SQ has received speaker honoraria from Novartis, Lilly and Exeltis. MSR has received consulting fees and honoraria for lectures/presentations from Eli Lily, Lundbeck, Novartis, Teva and Pfizer. Intellectual as Secretary of the European Headache Federation, Review Editor on the Editorial Board of Headache and Neurogenic Pain (specialty section of Frontiers in Neurology). Margarita Sanchez-del-Rio serves as a member of the Board of Directors in the European Headache Federation. ET has received personal fees for lectures/ advisory boards: Novartis, Eli Lilly, Abbvie, TEVA, Roche, Lundbeck, Pfizer, Biogen. Consultant for and owner of stocks and IP in Man & Science. Stocks and IP in Nordic Brain Tech and Keimon Medical. Non-personal research grants from EU, Norwegian Research Council, Dam foundation, KlinBeForsk. Commissioned research (non-personal): Lundbeck, Pfizer. BVP received honoraria from ABBVIE. AOD received honoraria from ABBVIE, Lilly, Teva, Novartis. MR received honoraria from Lilly, Novartis. BC received grants and honoria from Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Teva; SC received travel grants, honoraria for advisory boards, speaker panels or clinical investigation studies from Novartis, Teva, Lilly, Allergan, Abvie, Ibsa, Amgen, Angelini and Lundbeck; FF has received fees for participation on advisory boards, speaker honoraria or consulting activities from Angelini, Cristalfarma, Ecupharma, IBSA, Lundbeck, Novartis, PIAM, Teva; FdO received travel grant, honoraria as a speaker or for partecipating in advisory boards from Novartis, Teva, Neopharmed Gentili, Qbgroup srl, K link srl and Eli-Lilly; MA received grants from Novartis and Lilly; RR received honoraria for speaker panels from Teva, Lilly, Novartis, Allergan, Lundbeck; MZ received travel grants and honoraria from Novartis; MA received travel grants and honoraria from Novartis, Teva, Eli-Lilly and Lundbeck; CF received grants and honoraria from Novartis, Eli Lilly, TEVA, AIM group; AR received travel grants and honoraria from Teva and Eli-Lilly; SZ, RLP, MJRC, VGQ, HCO, SA, IKZ, DGA, IFL, BFP, SB, PRA, AC, AEU, AGG, IM, JPS, VC, AFR, YVE, MT, AS, AC, FZ and MA has no disclosures to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2023 American Academy of Neurology.)

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., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

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.

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., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Although migraine prevalence decreases with aging, some older patients still suffer from chronic migraine (CM). This study aimed to investigate the outcome of OnabotulinumtoxinA (OBT-A) as preventative therapy in elderly CM patients., Methods: This is a post hoc analysis of real-life prospectively collected data at 16 European headache centers on CM patients treated with OBT-A over the first three treatment cycles (i.e., Cy1-3). We defined: OLD patients aged ≥ 65 years and nonOLD those < 65-year-old. The primary endpoint was the changes in monthly headache days (MHDs) from baseline to Cy 1-3 in OLD compared with nonOLD participants. The secondary endpoints were the responder rate (RR) ≥ 50%, conversion to episodic migraine (EM) and the changes in days with acute medication use (DAMs)., Results: In a cohort of 2831 CM patients, 235 were OLD (8.3%, 73.2% females, 69.6 years SD 4.7). MHDs decreased from baseline (24.8 SD 6.2) to Cy-1 (17.5 SD 9.1, p < 0.000001), from Cy-1 to Cy-2 (14.8 SD 9.2, p < 0.0001), and from Cy-2 to Cy-3 (11.9 SD 7.9, p = 0.001). DAMs progressively reduced from baseline (19.2 SD 9.8) to Cy-1 (11.9 SD 8.8, p < 0.00001), to Cy-2 (10.9 SD 8.6, p = 0.012), to Cy-3 (9.6 SD 7.4, p = 0.049). The 50%RR increased from 30.7% (Cy-1) to 34.5% (Cy-2), to 38.7% (Cy-3). The above outcome measures did not differ in OLD compared with nonOLD patients., Conclusion: In a population of elderly CM patients with a long history of migraine OBT-A provided a significant benefit, over the first three treatment cycles, as good as in non-old patients., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

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., (© 2022. Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia.)

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., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

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.

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., (© 2022. Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia.)

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.

Objective: To determine whether erenumab is effective and safe in refractory chronic migraine with medication overuse headache., Methods: In this prospective, multicentric, real-life study, chronic migraine with medication overuse headache patients who received erenumab were recruited. Study inclusion was limited to patients who previously failed onabotulinumtoxinA in addition to at least three other pharmacological commonly used migraine preventive medication classes., Results: Of 396 patients who received erenumab, 38% (n = 149) met inclusion criteria. After 3 months, 51% (n = 76) and 20% (n = 30) patients achieved ≥ 50% and ≥ 75% reduction in monthly headache days, respectively. Monthly pain medications intake decreased from 46.1 ± 35.3 to 16.8 ± 13.9 (p < 0.001), while monthly headache days decreased from 25.4 ± 5.4 to 14.1 ± 8.6 (p < 0.001). Increasing efficacy of erenumab over the study period was observed. Allodynia was a negative predictive factor of erenumab response (odds ratio = 0.47; p = 0.03). Clinical conversion to episodic migraine with no medication overuse was observed in 64% (n = 96) patients. No serious adverse events were observed., Conclusions: Erenumab reduced significantly migraine frequency and pain medication intake in refractory chronic migraine with MOH patients., (© 2021. Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia.)

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., (© 2022 American Headache Society.)

Background: Monoclonal antibodies anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (mAbs anti-CGRP) pathway are effective and safe on migraine prevention. However, some drug agencies limited these treatments to one year due to their high costs. This study aimed at evaluating the effect of discontinuing mAbs anti-CGRP on monthly migraine days (MMDs) and disability in high-frequency episodic (HFEM) and chronic migraine (CM) patients., Methods: This observational longitudinal cohort study was conducted at 10 Italian headache centres. Consecutive adult patients were followed-up for three months (F-UP1-3) after discontinuation of a one-year erenumab/galcanezumab treatment. The primary endpoint was the change in F-UP MMDs. Secondary endpoints included variation in pain intensity (Numerical Rating Scale, NRS), monthly acute medication intake (MAMI), and HIT-6 scores. We also assessed from F-UP1 to 3 the ≥50% response rate, relapse rate to CM, and recurrence of Medication Overuse (MO)., Results: We enrolled 154 patients (72.1% female, 48.2 ± 11.1 years, 107 CM, 47 HFEM); 91 were treated with erenumab, 63 with galcanezumab. From F-UP1 to F-UP3, MMDs, MAMI, NRS, and HIT-6 progressively increased but were still lower at F-UP3 than baseline (Friedman's analysis of rank, p < .001). In the F-UP1-3 visits, ≥50% response rate frequency did not differ significantly between CM and HFEM patients. However, the median reduction in response rate at F-UP3 was higher in HFEM (- 47.7% [25th, - 79.5; 75th,-17.0]) than in CM patients (- 25.5% [25th, - 47.1; 75th, - 3.3]; Mann-Whitney U test; p = .032). Of the 84 baseline CM patients who had reverted to episodic migraine, 28 (33.3%) relapsed to CM at F-UP1, 35 (41.7%) at F-UP2, 39 (46.4%) at F-UP3. Of the 64 baseline patients suffering of medication overuse headache ceasing MO, 15 (18.3%) relapsed to MO at F-UP1, 26 (31.6%) at F-UP2, and 30 (42.3%, 11 missing data) at F-UP3. Lower MMDs, MAMI, NRS, and HIT-6 and higher response rate in the last month of therapy characterized patients with ≥50% response rate at F-UP1 and F-UP3 (Mann-Whitney U test; consistently p < .01)., Conclusion: Migraine frequency and disability gradually increased after mAbs anti-CGRP interruption. Most patients did not relapse to MO or CM despite the increase in MMDs. Our data suggest to reconsider mAbs anti-CGRP discontinuation., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: To evaluate the long-term effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of erenumab in a real-world migraine population, looking for putative predictors of responsiveness., Background: Erenumab proved to be effective, safe, and well tolerated in the prevention of episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) in long-term extension studies of double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in patients with no more than two (EM) or three (CM) prior preventive treatment failures., Methods: A 48-week, multicenter, longitudinal cohort real-life study was conducted at 15 headache centers across eight Italian regions between December 20, 2018 and July 31, 2020. We considered all consecutive patients with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or CM aged 18-65 years. Each patient was treated with erenumab 70 mg, administered monthly. The dose was switched to 140 mg in nonresponders and in responders who had become nonresponders for at least 4 weeks. Change in monthly migraine days (MMDs) or monthly headache days (MHDs) at Weeks 45-48 compared with baseline was the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary endpoints encompassed variation in monthly analgesic intake, achievement of a ≥50%, ≥75%, or 100% reduction in migraine or headache days, and any change in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Headache Impact Test-6 scores (HIT-6) during the same time interval., Results: A total of 242 patients with migraine received at least one dose of erenumab 70 mg and were considered for safety analysis, whereas 221 received a monthly erenumab dose for ≥48 weeks and were included in the effectiveness and safety analysis set. All patients had previously been treated unsuccessfully with ≥3 migraine-preventive medication classes. From baseline to Weeks 45-48, erenumab treatment reduced MMD by 4.3 ± 5.3 (mean ± SD) in patients with HFEM, and MHD by 12.8 ± 8.9 (mean ± SD) in subjects with CM. VAS and HIT-6 scores were decreased by 1.8 ± 1.9 (mean ± SD) and 12.3 ± 11 (mean ± SD) in HFEM, and by 3.0 ± 2.2 (mean ± SD) and 13.1 ± 11.2 (mean ± SD) in CM. Median monthly analgesic intake passed from 11.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 10.0-13.0) to 5 (IQR 2.0-8.0) in HFEM and from 20.0 (IQR 15.0-30.0) to 6.0 (IQR 3.8-10.0) in CM. The ≥50% responders were 56.1% (32/57) in HFEM and 75.6% (124/164) in CM; ≥75% responders were 31.6% (18/57) and 44.5% (73/164); and 100% responders were 8.8% (5/57) and 1.2% (2/164), respectively. At Week 48, 83.6% (137/164) of patients with CM had reverted to EM. Erenumab was safe and well tolerated. Responsiveness to erenumab was positively associated with cutaneous allodynia (OR: 5.44, 95% CI: 1.52-19.41; p = 0.009) in HFEM. In patients with CM, ≥50% responsiveness was positively associated with male sex (OR: 2.99, 95% CI: 1.03-8.7; p = 0.044) and baseline migraine frequency (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.05-1.20; p = 0.001) and negatively associated with psychiatric comorbidities (OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.15-0.87; p = 0.023) and prior treatment failures (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.92; p = 0.004)., Conclusions: Long-term (48-week) erenumab treatment provides sustained effectiveness, safety, and tolerability in real-life patients with HFEM or CM with ≥3 prior preventive treatment failures. The dose of 140 mg was required in most patients along the study and should be taken into consideration as the starting dose. Allodynia (in HFEM), male sex, and baseline migraine frequency (in CM) might represent positive responsiveness predictors. Conversely, psychiatric comorbidities and multiple prior preventive treatment failures could be negative predictors in patients with CM., (© 2021 American Headache Society.)

Objectives: This observational study aimed to assess the difference in disability, burden, and sensitization between migraine patients with low-frequency headache attack (1-8 headache days/month), high-frequency headache attack (9-14 headache days/months), and patients with chronic migraine (>14 headache days/months)., Methods: Migraine patients with or without aura were divided into three groups according to headache frequency (low-frequency episodic migraine; high-frequency episodic migraine; chronic migraine). Questionnaires were used to assess the burden of headache, quality of life, phycological burden, and symptoms related to sensitization (estimated by the Central Sensitization Inventory). Differences among migraine groups were assessed using Chi-Quadro test, ANOVA, or Kruskal-Wallis as appropriate., Results: 136 patients were included (68 low-frequency episodic migraine, 45 high-frequency episodic migraine, 23 chronic migraine). Patients with high frequency episodic migraine and chronic migraine differed from patients with low frequency episodic migraine showing a worse burden of headache (p=0.002; p=0.002), worse level of physical (p=0.001; p<0.001) and mental (p=0.002; p=0.001) quality of life, worse level of depression (p=0.008; p=0.003), and increase presence of symptoms related to sensitization (p<0.001; p=0.003). No differences were found in any variables between patients with high-frequency episodic migraine and patients with chronic migraine (p>0.05)., Conclusions: Patients with high-frequency episodic migraine and chronic migraine could be considered in the same segment of the migraine population, with similar degrees of disability and sensitization related symptoms., (© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.)

Objective: To develop a dedicated Italian chronic migraine (CM) database (IRON project) to overcome disease misconceptions, improve clinical administration, reduce patients' burden, and rationalize economic resource allotment., Background: Proper CM management requires a comprehensive appraisal of its full clinical, social, and economic complexity., Methods: In this cross-sectional study, CM patients were screened in 24 certified headache centers with face-to-face interviews. Information on sociodemographic factors, medical history, characteristics of CM, and of prior episodic migraine (EM), and healthcare resource use was gathered using a semistructured web-based questionnaire., Results: A total of 866 CM patients were enrolled. CM started ~20 years after EM onset (age at EM onset 17.4 ± 9.1 vs. age at CM onset 35.3 ± 12.5 [mean ± SD]). CM prophylaxis, used by 430/866 (49.6%) of the patients, was often ineffective, not tolerated, and prematurely discontinued. Medications and diagnostic workup, frequently inappropriate, were mostly subsidized by the Italian national health service. CM patients with ≥25 headache days/month revealed substantial clinical differences and heavier disability and economic burden compared with those with <25 headache days/month., Conclusions: CM is a heterogeneous headache disorder deserving more in-depth clinical characterization, sharper diagnostic criteria, and tailored treatments. CM registries are expected to improve clinical management, resulting in increased disease awareness, better healthcare resource allocation, and reduced economic burden., (© 2021 American Headache Society.)

Background: Migraine and depression are highly prevalent and partly overlapping disorders that cause strong limitations in daily life. Patients tend to respond poorly to the therapies available for these diseases. OnabotulinumtoxinA has been proven to be an effective treatment for both migraine and depression. While many studies have addressed the effect of onabotulinumtoxinA in migraine or depression separately, a growing body of evidence suggests beneficial effects also for patients comorbid with migraine and depression. The current meta-analysis systematically investigates to what extent onabotulinumtoxinA is efficient in migraineurs with depression., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed based on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science from the earliest date till October [Formula: see text], 2020. Mean, standard deviation (SD) and sample size have been used to evaluate improvement in depressive symptoms and migraine using random-effects empirical Bayes model., Results: Our search retrieved 259 studies, eight of which met the inclusion criteria. OnabotulinumtoxinA injections administered to patients with both chronic migraine and major depressive disorder led to mean reduction of [Formula: see text] points (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) in the BDI scale, of [Formula: see text] points (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) in the BDI-II scale and of [Formula: see text] points (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) in the PHQ-9 scale, when evaluating depressive symptoms. In the case of the migraine-related symptoms, we found mean reductions of [Formula: see text] (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) points in the HIT6 scale, [Formula: see text] (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) in the MIDAS scale, [Formula: see text] (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) points in the VAS scale and of [Formula: see text] (CI [[Formula: see text]], [Formula: see text]) migraine episodes per month. Comorbid patients showed slightly better improvements in BDI, HIT6 scores and migraine frequency compared to monomorbid patients. The latter group manifested better results in MIDAS and VAS scores., Conclusion: Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA leads to a significant reduction of disease severity of both chronic migraine and major depressive disorder in patients comorbid with both diseases. Comparative analyses suggest an equivalent strong effect in monomorbid and comorbid patients, with beneficial effects specifically seen for certain migraine features.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic and the consequent lockdown came as a storm disrupting people's everyday life. This study aimed at observing whether the COVID-19 related lockdown influenced migraine frequency and disability in migraine patients on therapy with monoclonal antibodies inhibiting the CGRP pathway., Methods: In this longitudinal observational cohort study, 147 consecutive patients receiving monthly administration of erenumab or galcanezumab were enrolled in four Italian headache centers. All patients filled a questionnaire concerning working and household settings, recent flu symptoms or COVID-19 diagnosis, and family loss due to COVID-19 infection. Monthly migraine days (MMDs), monthly painkiller intake (MPI), and HIT-6 disability relative to the first month of lockdown imposition (T-lock) and the month before (T-free) were also collected., Results: From T-free to T-lock, the cohort displayed a reduction in MMDs (from 10.5 ± 7.6 to 9.8 ± 7.6, p = .024) and HIT-6 scores (from 59.3 ± 8.3 men reduced MPI more frequently than women (p = .005)., Conclusions: Our study observed that the lockdown impact to 57.8 ± 8.8, p = .009), while MPI resulted unchanged (from 11.6 ± 11.5 to 11.1 ± 11.7; p = .114). MMDs, MPI, and HIT-6 variations from T-free to T-lock did not differ according to work settings or household. Patients beyond the first 3 months of therapy presented less often a reduction in MMDs (p = .006) and on everyday life did not affect the migraine load in patients receiving monoclonal antibodies inhibiting the CGRP pathway. Patients in the first months of therapy experienced a greater improvement according to drug pharmacokinetics, while women more frequently needed rescue medications, possibly indicating presenteeism or cephalalgophobia.

To optimize chronic migraine (CM) ascertainment and phenotype definition, provide adequate clinical management and health care procedures, and rationalize economic resources allocation, we performed an exploratory multicenter pilot study aimed at establishing a CM database, the first step for developing a future Italian CM registry. We enrolled 63 consecutive CM patients in four tertiary headache centers screened with face-to-face interviews using an ad hoc dedicated semi-structured questionnaire gathering detailed information on life-style, behavioral and socio-demographic factors, comorbidities, and migraine features before and after chronicization and healthcare resource use. Our pilot study provided useful insights revealing that CM patients (1) presented in most cases symptoms of peripheral trigeminal sensitization, a relatively unexpected feature which could be useful to unravel different CM endophenotypes and to predict trigeminal-targeted treatments' responsiveness; (2) had been frequently admitted to emergency departments; (3) had undergone, sometime repeatedly, unnecessary or inappropriate investigations; (4) got rarely illness benefit exemption or disability allowance only. We deem that the expansion of the database-shortly including many other Italian headache centers-will contribute to more precisely outline CM endophenotypes, hence improving management, treatment, and economic resource allocation, ultimately reducing CM burden on both patients and health system.

Objective: The aim of this work was to assess through a questionnaire the features of vertiginous episodes, accompanying symptoms, familial history, and migraine precursors in a sample of 252 subjects with a diagnosis of definite vestibular migraine., Background: Migraine is a common neurological disorder characterized by episodic headaches with specific features. About two-thirds of cases run in families, and patients may refer symptoms occurring in infancy and childhood, defined as episodic syndromes that may be associated with migraine. Migraine is associated with episodic vertigo, called vestibular migraine, whose diagnosis mainly relies on clinical history showing a temporary association of symptoms., Methods: In this cross-sectional multicentric study, 252 subjects were recruited in different centers; a senior specialist through a structured questionnaire assessed features of vestibular symptoms and accompanying symptoms., Results: The age of onset of migraine was 23 years, while onset of vertigo was at 38 years. One hundred and eighty-four subjects reported internal vertigo (73%), while 63 subjects (25%) reported external vertigo. The duration of vertigo attacks was less than 5 minutes in 58 subjects (23%), between 6 and 60 minutes in 55 (21.8%), between 1 and 4 hours in 29 (11.5%), 5 and 24 hours in 44 (17.5%), up to 3 days in 14 (5.5%), and more than 3 days in seven (2.8%); 14 subjects (5.5%) referred attacks lasting from less than 5 minutes and up to 1 hour, nine (3.6%) referred attacks lasting from less than 5 minutes and up to 1 to 4 hours, six (2.4%) referred attacks lasting from less than 5 minutes and up to 5 to 24 hours, and five (2%) cases referred attacks lasting from less than 5 minutes and up to days. Among accompanying symptoms, patients referred the following usually occurring, in order of frequency: nausea (59.9%), photophobia (44.4%), phonophobia (38.9%), vomiting (17.8%), palpitations (11.5%), tinnitus (10.7%), fullness of the ear (8.7%), and hearing loss (4%). In total, 177 subjects referred a positive family history of migraine (70.2%), while 167 (66.3%) reported a positive family history of vertigo. In the sample, 69% of patients referred at least one of the pediatric precursors, in particular, 42.8% of subjects referred motion sickness. The age of onset of the first headache was lower in the subsample with a familial history of migraine than in the total sample. Among the pediatric precursors, benign paroxysmal vertigo - BPV, benign paroxysmal torticollis, and motion sickness were predictive of a lower age of onset of vertigo in adulthood; cyclic vomiting was predictive for vomiting during vertigo attacks in adults., Conclusions: Our results may indicate that vestibular symptoms in pediatric patients may act as a predisposing factor to develop vestibular migraine at an earlier age in adulthood., (© 2017 American Headache Society.)

In the past few years, research on chronicization of headache has focussed primarily on migraine, even though there are other types of primary headache that over time can turn into chronic forms. Only a minority of migraine sufferers will develop a chronic condition, with attacks that are likely to vary in their clinical features. As a result, in chronic migraine the specific diagnostic criteria for this headache type do not always exhibit the typical features of migraine. Among the factors that play a major role in favouring chronicization are a high frequency of migraine attacks since the beginning, overuse of symptomatic medication and onset of depression or arterial hypertension. Several neurophysiology, biochemistry and functional neuroimaging studies suggest that chronic migraine may be associated with structural, functional and metabolic changes in the brain, especially involving the brainstem.

Background: There are limited literature data on migraine-like accompanying features (MLF) in patients with cluster headache (CH). These symptoms are frequently reported by patients and may delay CH diagnosis., Objective: The aim of the present study was to investigate the occurrence of migraine-like symptoms in an Italian case series of CH patients and to determine whether these features influence the clinical phenotype of CH., Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed in all consecutive patients referred to the Parma Headache Centre between 1975 and 2013 affected by CH; the cases were subsequently reviewed applying the ICHD3-beta criteria. Our initial study sample consisted of 785 subjects, 569 men (72.5%) and 216 women (27.5%). We then identified those patients who reported at least one of the migraine accompanying symptoms (ie, nausea or vomiting or photophobia and phonophobia)., Results: We found 362 patients (46%) with MLF, 250 men (43.9% of the initial male sample) and 112 women (51.9% of the initial female sample), and 423 patients (54%) without MLF, 319 men (56.1% of the initial male sample) and 104 women (48.1% of the initial female sample). Multiple logistic regression analysis highlighted some demographic and clinical features that significantly characterized patients with MLF after adjusting for confounding: they were more frequently female (OR 1.78, CI 1.11-2.80), with a relatively younger age of onset (OR 1.82, CI 1.06-2.91) than expected, attacks were longer in duration (OR 1.85, CI 1.04-2.46) and accompanied by a more frequent ptosis (OR 1.67, CI 1.04-2.34), sweating (OR 1.63, CI 1.02-2.21), and miosis (OR 1.54, CI 1.12-1.93); osmophobia was also more frequently reported (OR 1.76, CI 1.28-2.46)., Conclusion: Our study confirms the high proportion of CH patients with MLF, which is reported in literature. The presence of MLF seems to relate to some peculiar demographic and clinical characteristics of CH sufferers. Whether these features influence the response to therapy remains to be determined., (© 2016 American Headache Society.)

Chronic migraine is a debilitating headache, whose treatment is often complicated by the concomitant overuse of symptomatic medication and by the poor efficacy of standard prophylactic treatments. The PREEMPT studies have demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of onabotulinum toxin A (Botox(®)) in the treatment of this headache type. Data about its use in clinical practice are still scarce. Our study evaluated all subjects with chronic migraine who were treated with onabotulinum toxin A between February 2014 and November 2015 at the Parma Headache Centre. Botox was injected according to the PREEMPT paradigm every 3 months. The data about variations in the number of headache days and in symptomatic medication intake before and after the Botox injections were collected from the patients' headache diaries. The study also evaluated tolerability to treatment, disability, and depressive symptoms. Of the 52 treated subjects, 14 received Botox treatment for at least 9 months and showed a significant decrease in the median number of headache days (from 19 to 14.5, p = 0.011) and in the median number of days of symptomatic medications intake and symptomatic drugs. Overall, the treatment was well tolerated. The average MIDAS and BDI-II scores after 9 months were reduced, though not significantly. The treatment with Botox proved effective and well tolerated in our clinical practice. Further studies on larger patient samples will help shed light on the persistence of the drug's effect at long term and identify the predictive factors of response to treatment.

All migraine patients need symptomatic treatment to stop individual attacks or, at least, significantly relieve pain. When attacks are very frequent (more than 3 days of headache per month on average), they will also need preventive treatment. The first physician the patient must address to for preventive treatment is the general practitioner (GP). If the medication prescribed by the GP is not effective or there is overuse of symptomatic drugs, the patient will have to be referred to a neurologist or a headache clinic. The drugs to be used as symptomatic treatment are triptans and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Combination therapy with antiemetics is also important. While specialists will base their therapeutic decisions on guidelines in the literature and on their personal experience, GPs do not yet have any easy-to-use tools to support them. To fill this gap, an algorithm is proposed here that can be easily used by GPs to make decisions during their patients' migraine attacks.

Once migraine becomes chronic and has transformed into a form of headache that occurs daily or almost, the treatment options available are few and complex. This makes it important to take action before this point is reached, using all the measures that can be obtained from our current knowledge of chronic migraine (or transformed migraine) on the one hand, and on the potential factors of chronification (or transformation) on the other. Therefore, in order to reduce the risk of migraine chronification, it would appear important to: (a) administer suitable preventive treatments for subjects who have been suffering from migraines ≥4 days a month for ≥3 months; (b) take special care not to overuse symptomatic medications, particularly when they contain substances with a sedative effect; and (c) investigate the concomitant presence of depression, hypertension and excess weight and administer appropriate treatment when present.

In a minority of cases, the natural history of migraine without aura (MO) is characterised over time by its evolution into a form of chronic migraine (CM). In order to detect the possible factors predicting this negative evolution of MO, we searched in our Headache Centre files for all clinical records that met the following criteria: (a) first visit between 1976 and 1998; (b) diagnosis of MO or of common migraine at the first observation, with or without association with other primary headache types; (c) <15 days per month of migraine at the first observation; and (d) at least one follow-up visit at least 10 years after the first visit. The patients thus identified were then divided into two groups based on a favourable/steady evolution (Group A: n = 243, 195 women and 48 men) or an unfavourable evolution (Group B: n = 72, 62 women and 10 men) of their migraine over time. In the two groups, we compared various clinical parameters that were present at the first observation or emerged at the subsequent follow-up visits. The parameters that were statistically significantly more frequent in Group B--and can therefore be considered possible negative prognostic factors--were: (a) ≥ 10 days per month of migraine at the first observation; (b) presence of depression at the first visit in males; and (c) onset of depression or arterial hypertension after the first observation but before transformation to CM in females. Based on these findings, in MO patients the high frequency of migraine attacks, comorbidity with depression, and the tendency to develop arterial hypertension should require particular attention and careful management to prevent evolution into CM.

In the field of so-called chronic daily headache, it is not easy for migraine that worsens progressively until it becomes daily or almost daily to find a precise and universally recognized place within the current international headache classification systems. A proposal is advanced to differentiate between a form of high-frequency migraine without aura (10-20 days of headache per month for at least 3 months), to be considered as a migraine without aura subtype, and a form of transformed migraine (TM), to be considered as a complication of migraine. TM--a name that should be preferred to chronic migraine (CM)--would then replace the latter, from which it would distinguish itself by the more restrictive diagnostic criteria (at least 20 days of headache per month for at least 1 year, with no more than 5 consecutive days free of symptoms; same clinical features of migraine without aura for at least 10 of those 20 days).

Chronic daily headache is a major problem due to severe disability and high socio-economic costs. In the last years, some trials have shown potential benefit from new therapeutic approach by occipital neurostimulation techniques, already applied with some success for the treatment of chronic cluster headache. Due to the extremely heterogeneous population suffering from refractory chronic daily headaches, we propose a national multicenter experimental study involving Italian ANIRCEF Headache Centres with the aim to evaluate the efficacy of occipital neurostimulation in a selected group representative for the drug-resistant chronic migraine. Patients with chronic migraine according to Manzoni's modified IHS criteria-2011, with or without medication overuse headache, will be selected. Duration of illness should be at least 2 years and pharmacological refractoriness defined strictly for experimental-surgical purposes as those patients who have properly tried without success almost all available classes of prophylactic medications. Those presenting with medication overuse should have tried at least two previous detoxification treatments. A full psychopathological assessment will be performed by a psychiatrist, to exclude mainly psychotic disorder, ongoing severe status of an affective disorder, severe post traumatic stress disorder. Headache characteristics and abortive treatments used will be reported daily on a predisposed diary during 3-month baseline and continuously through the post implant follow up, while disability and QoL scale (MIDAS, SF-12) will be completed baseline, 6 and 12 months after implant.

Background: In the literature there are few data about the prevalence of primary headaches, including migraine, in the Italian general population. The PACE study (PArma CEfalea, or 'Headache in Parma') is an observational study aimed at detecting the prevalence and clinical features of primary headaches in the city of Parma's adult general population., Materials and Methods: A total of 904 subjects representative of Parma's adult general population were interviewed face-to-face by a physician from the Parma Headache Centre. They were given a specially designed and validated questionnaire for the diagnosis of primary headaches according to the ICHD-II criteria., Results: Past-year adjusted prevalence of definite migraine, including migraine with and without aura and chronic migraine, was 24.7% (95% CI 21.9 to 27.5); 13% (95% CI 9.7 to 16.4) were men and 32.9% (95% CI 28.8 to 37.0) were women. Past-year prevalence of probable migraine was 5.1% (95% CI 3.6 to 6.5): 5.2% (95% CI 3.0 to 7.4) in men and 5% (95% CI 3.1 to 6.9) in women., Conclusions: The high prevalence of definite migraine is the major difference between our results and the literature data. Such a difference in results may be due to the use of a different investigational approach compared with the other epidemiological studies. However, an actual higher frequency of migraine in the Italian general population cannot be excluded given the lack of studies on this topic.

In the field of so-called chronic daily headache, it is not easy for migraine that worsens progressively until it becomes daily or almost daily to find a precise and universally recognized place within the current international headache classification systems. In line with the 2006 revision of the second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2R), the current prevailing opinion is that this headache type should be named chronic migraine (CM) and be characterized by the presence of at least 15 days of headache per month for at least 3 consecutive months, with headache having the same clinical features of migraine without aura for at least 8 of those 15 days. Based on much evidence, though, a CM with the above characteristics appears to be a heterogeneous entity and the obvious risk is that its definition may be extended to include a variety of different clinical entities. A proposal is advanced to consider CM a subtype of migraine without aura that is characterized by a high frequency of attacks (10-20 days of headache per month for at least 3 months) and is distinct from transformed migraine (TM), which in turn should be included in the classification as a complication of migraine. Therefore, CM should be removed from its current coding position in the ICHD-2 and be replaced by TM, which has more restrictive diagnostic criteria (at least 20 days of headache per month for at least 1 year, with no more than 5 consecutive days free of symptoms; same clinical features of migraine without aura for at least 10 of those 20 days).

Introduction: Our study objective was to investigate the mode of occurrence of traumatic head injury in episodic cluster headache and migraine patients., Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on 400 male patients, 200 with cluster headache (cases) and 200 with migraine (controls). We investigated the frequency and mode of occurrence of traumatic head injury and some lifestyle habits., Results: The number of traumatic head injuries was significantly higher in cases than in controls (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5-2.8). Cases were more often responsible for the head traumas (adjusted OR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.3-4.9) and reported a significantly higher proportion of injuries during scuffles or brawls (OR = 6.5; 95% CI = 2.9-14.8). Compared with other cluster headache patients, cases responsible for traumatic head injuries were more frequently heavy alcohol (p = .000), heavy tobacco (p = .03) and heavy coffee consumers (p = .003)., Conclusions: Cluster headache patients (a) had traumatic head injuries more frequently than migraineurs; and (b) were more often responsible for them, perhaps due to particular behaviours related to their lifestyles.

The objective of this paper was to assess prevalence and characteristics of anxiety and depression in migraine without aura and tension-type headache, either isolated or in combination. Although the association between headache and psychiatric disorders is undisputed, patients with migraine and/or tension-type headache have been frequently investigated in different settings and using different tests, which prevents meaningful comparisons. Psychiatric comorbidity was tested through structured interview and the MINI inventory in 158 adults with migraine without aura and in 216 persons with tension-type headache or migraine plus tension-type headache. 49 patients reported psychiatric disorders: migraine 10.9%, tension-type headache 12.8%, and migraine plus tension-type headache 21.4%. The MINI detected a depressive episode in 59.9, 67.0, and 69.6% of cases. Values were 18.4, 19.3, and 18.4% for anxiety, 12.7, 5.5, and 14.2%, for panic disorder and 2.3, 1.1 and 9.4% (p = 0.009) for obsessive-compulsive disorder. Multivariate analysis showed panic disorder prevailing in migraine compared with the other groups (OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.2-7.0). The association was higher (OR 6.3; 95% CI 1.4-28.5) when migraine (with or without tension-type headache) was compared to pure tension-type headache. This also applied to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OR 4.8; 95% CI 1.1-20.9) in migraine plus tension-type headache. Psychopathology of primary headache can reflect shared risk factors, pathophysiologic mechanisms, and disease burden.

Headache is one of the most common types of pain and, in the absence of biological markers, headache diagnosis depends only on information obtained from clinical interviews and physical and neurological examinations. Headache diaries make it possible to record prospectively the characteristics of every attack and the use of headache calendars is indicated for evaluating the time pattern of headache, identifying aggravating factors, and evaluating the efficacy of preventive treatment. This may reduce the recall bias and increase accuracy in the description. The use of diagnostic headache diaries does have some limitations because the patient's general acceptance is still limited and some subjects are not able to fill in a diary. In this chapter, we consider diaries and calendars specially designed for migraine and, in particular, aim to: (1) determine what instruments are available in clinical practice for diagnosis and follow-up of treatments; and (2) describe the tools that have been developed for research and their main applications in the headache field. In addition, we include information on diaries available online and proposals for future areas of research., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The question in the title of this article arises from ambiguities in the diagnostic criteria for chronic migraine (CM) included in the 2004 International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd Edition (ICHD-II), and in the 2006 revision. More broadly speaking, it also arises from the fact that to date the general subject of chronic daily headaches (CDH) has not been approached in a correct and appropriate way. For all its limitations, ICHD-II has unquestionable merits and remains a fundamental tool. However, it is a tool that gets a snapshot picture of headache; so, it is not applicable to a dynamic form that evolves from and is transformed by a chain of events. If these events are ignored, there will be no accurate interpretation of the final clinical picture. Today, we still do not have any classification of headache syndromes to complement ICHD-II. Currently, then, the only way to approach the CDH issue is to put patients at the center and to focus on their life histories. If we reason strictly in terms of diagnostic classification criteria, which for this headache subtype are artificial and ambiguous, we may have trouble finding an answer to the title question. However, if we reason in broader clinical terms, putting at the center of our reasoning not only headache features, but patients with all their histories, the answer can only be that CM and chronic tension-type headache are two different clinical entities.

Headache is one of the most common types of pain and, in the absence of biological markers, headache diagnosis depends only on information obtained from clinical interviews and physical and neurological examinations. Headache diaries make it possible to record prospectively the characteristics of every attack and the use of headache calendars is indicated for evaluating the time pattern of headache, identifying aggravating factors and evaluating the efficacy of preventive treatment. This may reduce the recall bias and increase accuracy in the description. The use of diagnostic headache diaries does have some limitations because the patient's general acceptance is still limited and some subjects are not able to fill in a diary. In this review, we considered diaries and calendars especially designed for migraine and, in particular, we aimed at: (i) determining what instruments are available in clinical practice for diagnosis and follow-up of treatments; and (ii) describing the tools that have been developed for research and their main applications in the headache field. In addition to the literature review, we added two paragraphs concerning the authors' experience of the use of diaries and calendars in headache centres and their proposals for future areas of research.

Migraine without aura is typically considered a female condition. The purpose of this study was to determine if there have been any changes in the female-to-male ratio of the disease over time. We included in the study all patients with migraine without aura (n = 3457) referred to the Parma University Headache Centre between 1976 and 1995. They were divided into subgroups with respect to gender and year-range of onset of migraine (before 1960, in the 1960s, in the 1970s, in the 1980s, and between 1990 and 1995). Gender ratio ranged from 3.6:1 (in patients with onset before 1960) to 2.8:1 (in patients with onset in the 1980s), with no statistically significant changes during the observation period.

General population studies suggest a non-casual association (co-morbidity) between migraine, major depression and anxiety disorders (panic attack disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, generalised anxiety disorder). The risk of developing affective and anxiety disorders has not increased uniformly in the different migraine subtypes, but it is more elevated in migraine with aura patients. The relationship between migraine and depression is "bi-directional" (i. e., migraineurs have a more than three-fold risk of developing depression compared with non-migraine patients, while depression patients that have never suffered from migraine before have a more than three-fold risk of developing migraine compared with non-depressed patients) and specific (i. e., the presence of migraine or severe non-migraine headache increases a patient's risk of developing depression or panic attack disorder, whereas the presence of depression or panic attack disorder is associated with a greater risk of developing migraine, but not severe non-migraine headache). The association described in this review has significant pathogenetic, clinical and therapeutical implications.

In order to investigate the prevalence of migraine with aura (MA) attacks according to the criteria set by the International Headache Society (IHS) for diagnosis down to the three-digit level of classification, and to determine the recurrence and possible variability of MA attacks over time, we conducted a 6-15-month-long prospective study on 64 MA patients (42 women and 22 men) consecutively referred for the first time to the University of Parma Headache Centre. At the end of the follow-up period, diagnosis was the same as at the first visit for 80.0% of patients, while it was changed for 20.0%. Throughout the duration of the study, the average number of attacks for each patient was 5.3 +/- 6.2 (range 0-30). Attacks of migraine with typical aura were the most frequent (69.1% of patients), but migraine aura without headache (29.1%) and migraine with prolonged aura (20.0%) were also common; by contrast, basilar migraine and migraine with acute onset aura were reported only by one patient in either case. Migraine aura without headache was statistically significantly more frequent in males than in females. Our study results suggest that in most cases the frequency of recurrent MA attacks is relatively low and provide interesting indications about the prevalence of the different MA subtypes listed in the IHS classification, albeit in a headache clinic population.

We investigated the evolution over time of migraine with aura (MA) in a number of MA patients consecutively referred to the University of Parma Headache Center in the period 1976-86. The follow-up period chosen for our review of the clinical condition of patients varied from a minimum of 10 years to a maximum of 20 years. The study group comprised 81 patients (55F, 26M), 21 of them (14.2%) with at least one parent with MA. Migraine without aura (MO) was also present in 29.6% of the patients studied. Currently, 35% of patients (29.4% F, 46.1% M) have been free from attacks for at least 1 year and 19.4% (13.6% F, 30.8% M) for over 5 years. Moreover, the frequency of attacks has decreased considerably in 54.4% of cases (50% F, 63.7% M); it has increased in only 25% (26.1% F, 22.7% M). The headache has disappeared completely in 11.1% of patients (8.0% F, 18.2% M); it has become less severe in 36.2% and more severe in only 5.5%. The results of our investigation point to a favorable evolution of MA over time.