Search

Background: Chronic migraine (CM) is a disabling and hard-to-treat condition, associated with high disability and high cost. Among the preventive treatments, botulinum toxin A (BoNT-a) and monoclonal antibodies against the calcitonin gene-related protein (anti-CGRP mAbs) are the only disease-specific ones. The assessment of the disease burden is complex, and among others, tools such as the allodynia symptoms checklist (ASC-12) and headache impact test (HIT-6) are very useful. This exploratory study analysed the impact of these two therapies on migraine burden. Methods: The RAMO study was a multicentre, observational, retrospective investigation conducted in two headache centres: the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta (Milan) and the Fondazione Policlinico Campus Bio-Medico (Rome). This study involved patients with chronic migraine treated with mAbs or BoNT-A. We conducted a subgroup exploratory analysis on HIT-6 and ASC-12 scores in the two groups. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Fisher's exact test, and ANOVA were performed. Results: Of 126 patients, 36 on mAbs and 90 on BoNT-A had at least one available follow-up. mAbs resulted in a mean reduction of −11.1 and −11.4 points, respectively, in the HIT-6 at 6 and 12 months, while BoNT-A was reduced −3.2 and −3.6 points, respectively; the mAbs arm resulted in mean reductions in ASC-12 at 6 and 12 months of follow-up of −5.2 and −6.0 points, respectively, while BoNT-A showed lesser mean changes of −0.5 and −0.9 points, respectively. The adjusted analysis confirmed our results. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis, anti-CGRP mAbs showed superior effectiveness for HIT-6 and ASC12 compared to BoNT-A. Reductions in terms of month headache days (MHD), migraine disability assessment test (MIDAS), and migraine acute medications (MAM) were clinically relevant for both treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prodrome or premonitory phase is the initial phase of a migraine attack, and it is considered as a symptomatic phase in which prodromal symptoms may occur. There is evidence that attacks start 24–48 hours before the headache phase. Individuals with migraine also report several potential triggers for their attacks, which may be mistaken for premonitory symptoms and hinder migraine research. Methods: This review aims to summarize published studies that describe contributions to understanding the fine difference between prodromal/premonitory symptoms and triggers, give insights for research, and propose a way forward to study these phenomena. We finally aim to formulate a theory to unify migraine triggers and prodromal symptoms. For this purpose, a comprehensive narrative review of the published literature on clinical, neurophysiological and imaging evidence on migraine prodromal symptoms and triggers was conducted using the PubMed database. Results: Brain activity and network connectivity changes occur during the prodromal phase. These changes give rise to prodromal/premonitory symptoms in some individuals, which may be falsely interpreted as triggers at the same time as representing the early manifestation of the beginning of the attack. By contrast, certain migraine triggers, such as stress, hormone changes or sleep deprivation, acting as a catalyst in reducing the migraine threshold, might facilitate these changes and increase the chances of a migraine attack. Migraine triggers and prodromal/premonitory symptoms can be confused and have an intertwined relationship with the hypothalamus as the central hub for integrating external and internal body signals. Conclusions: Differentiating migraine triggers and prodromal symptoms is crucial for shedding light on migraine pathophysiology and improve migraine management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]