Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundMonoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor have changed migraine preventive treatment. Those treatments have led to reconsidering the outcomes of migraine prevention. Available data mostly considered benefits in terms of relative efficacy (percent or absolute decrease in monthly migraine days [MMDs] or headache days compared with baseline). However, not enough attention has been paid to residual MMDs and/or migraine-related disability in treated patients. In the present study, we aimed at comparing the relative and absolute efficacy of erenumab.MethodsESTEEMen was a collaborative project among 16 European headache centers which already performed real-life data collections on patients treated with erenumab for at least 12 weeks. For the present study, we performed a subgroup analysis on patients with complete data on MMDs at baseline and at weeks 9-12 of treatment. Starting from efficacy thresholds proposed by previous literature, we classified patients into 0-29%, 30-49%, 50-74%, and ≥75% responders according to MMD decrease from baseline to weeks 9-12 of treatment. For each response category, we reported the median MMDs and Headache Impact test-6 (HIT-6) scores at baseline and at weeks 9-12. We categorized the number of residual MMDs at weeks 9-12 as follows: 0-3, 4-7, 8-14, ≥15. We classified HIT-6 score into four categories: ≤49, 50-55, 56-59, and ≥60. To keep in line with the original scope of the ESTEEMen study, calculations were performed in men and women.ResultsOut of 1215 patients, at weeks 9-12, 381 (31.4%) had a 0-29% response, 186 (15.3%) a 30-49% response, 396 (32.6%) a 50-74% response, and 252 (20.7%) a ≥75% response; 246 patients (20.2%) had 0-3 residual MMDs, 443 (36.5%) had 4-7 MMDs, 299 (24.6%) had 8-14 MMDs, and 227 (18.7%) had ≥15 MMDs. Among patients with 50-74% response, 246 (62.1%) had 4-7 and 94 (23.7%) 8-14 residual MMDs, while among patients with ≥75% response 187 (74.2%) had 0-3 and 65 (25.8%) had 4-7 residual MMDs.ConclusionsThe present study shows that even patients with good relative response to erenumab may have a clinically non-negligible residual migraine burden. Relative measures of efficacy cannot be enough to thoroughly consider the efficacy of migraine prevention.

BackgroundTreatment with onabotulinumtoxin A (BT-A) is safe and effective for chronic migraine (CM). Several studies assessed possible predictors of response to treatment with BT-A, but there is little knowledge on the frequency and predictors of sustained response. The aim of this study was to evaluate sustained response to BT-A in patients with CM.Main bodyIn this prospective open-label study, 115 patients with CM and treated with BT-A were consecutively enrolled in two Italian headache centers and followed up for 15 months. Anytime responders were defined as those patients who achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in headache days during any three-month treatment cycle compared with the 3 months prior to initiation of BT-A treatment. Sustained responders were defined as those who achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in headache days within the third treatment cycle and maintained response until the end of follow-up. Non-responders were defined as those patients who never achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in headache days during the follow-up. Headache characteristics prior to BT-A treatment were assessed in order to evaluate their ability in predicting treatment response.The 115 enrolled patients (84.3% female; median age 50 years) had a median migraine duration of 30 years (interquartile range 22–38). At the end of follow-up, 66 patients (57.4%) were classified as anytime responders. Among the 51 patients who achieved a clinical response within the third month of treatment, 33 (64.7%) were sustained responders. Patients with sustained response had a lower CM duration (median 31 vs 65 months; P = 0.030) and a lower number of headache days (median 25 vs 30; P = 0.013) at baseline compared with non-responders.ConclusionsAbout two thirds of patients who gain ≥50% response to BT-A within the third cycle of treatment maintain this positive response over time. More recent onset of CM and more headache-free days at baseline are associated with sustained response. We suggest not to delay preventive treatment of CM with BT-A, in order to increase the likelihood to achieve sustained clinical response.

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) is one of the few drugs approved for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM). Despite this, some aspects of its mechanism of action are still a matter of debate, and the precise magnitude of BT-A effects needs to be completely elucidated. BT-A acts primarily upon trigeminal and cervical nerve endings, by inhibiting the release of inflammatory mediators such as calcitonin gene-related peptide, as well as reducing the insertion of ionotropic and metabotropic receptors into the neuronal membrane. These actions increase the depolarization threshold of trigeminal and cervical nerve fibers, thus reducing their activation. The central actions of BT-A are still a matter of debate: a retrograde axonal transport has been postulated, but not clearly assessed in humans. Clinically, the efficacy of BT-A in CM has been assessed by large, randomized placebo-controlled trials, such as the Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) trials. Those results were also confirmed in a wide range of open-label studies, even for long-term periods. Recently, novel findings have led to a better understanding of its pharmacological actions and clinical usefulness in migraine prevention. This narrative review summarizes, updates and critically revises the available data on BT-A and its possible implementation in chronic migraine. Moreover, the current role of BT-A in CM treatment has been discussed.

Onabotulinumtoxin-A (onabotA) is a neurotoxin widely used for several indications, including chronic migraine (CM) preventive treatment, due to its well-demonstrated efficacy, tolerability, and safety. However, onabotA safety during pregnancy and breastfeeding remains unclear, as these populations are typically excluded from clinical trials. The action of onabotA starts locally at the injection sites, modulating the pain pathway with minimal systemic absorption, which theoretically minimizes risks to the fetus or breastfeeding infant. Preclinical studies demonstrate that onabotA does not distribute systemically in significant amounts after administration, although adverse fetal outcomes in rats and rabbits were reported when injected at high doses. Limited human data suggest that onabotA exposure during pregnancy may not be associated with major malformations or significant adverse outcomes for the fetus, especially when used at therapeutic doses for migraine prevention during the first trimester or earlier. Data on breastfeeding are even scarcer but indicate a low likelihood of drug transfer into breast milk. This narrative review highlights the available evidence on the use of onabotA in pregnancy and breastfeeding women, including real-word evidence, with a focus on the use for CM.

BackgroundErenumab is a monoclonal antibody blocking the calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor, which has been approved for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM). The aim of this study was to explore the safety and effectiveness of erenumab in patients suffering from CM and medication overuse headache (MOH) in a real-life setting, up to 1 year.MethodsData regarding 81 patients treated with erenumab were retrospectively analyzed. Every 3 months, the following variables were collected: the mean number of headache days per month (headache index (HI)), the average number of painkillers taken per month (analgesic consumption (AC)), the mean number of days with painkiller consumption (number of days on medication (NDM)), the headache intensity (numeric rating scale (NRS) score), the 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), and the Self-Reported Instrument to Assess Work-Related Difficulties in Patients With Migraine (HEADWORK) scores.ResultsThe HI, AC, and NDM and the NRS, HIT-6, and HEADWORK scores were significantly lower at every time point from the 3rd month onward compared to baseline (all P < 0.0001). No significant differences were found between patients who underwent painkiller detoxification before starting erenumab and those who did not (all P > 0.05). No significant differences were found between patients taking erenumab in combination with other preventive treatments and the ones taking it alone (all P ≥ 0.05). Five patients dropped out because of adverse events, which resolved after stopping erenumab.ConclusionErenumab was safe and effective for CM complicated with MOH. Painkiller withdrawal and the association with other preventive treatment(s) seem useless.

Objective Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody acting against calcitonin gene‐related peptide receptor and approved for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. The aim of the present study is to identify clinical predictors of good response in patients with chronic migraine and medication overuse‐headache. Material and methods This was a retrospective single‐center not funded study. Enrolled patients were affected by chronic migraine and medication overuse‐headache treated with erenumab monthly, up to 1 year. At 1 year, patients were classified as good responders if they displayed a ≥50% reduction in the number of headache days per months compared to the baseline. Results After 1 year, a significant improvement in the number of headache days per months, analgesic consumption, 6‐items headache impact test, and migraine disability assessment questionnaire scores were obtained compared to the baseline. Patients who obtained a ≥50% reduction in the number of headache days per month compared to the baseline displayed a longer history of medication overuse‐headache, a higher number of painkillers taken per month at the baseline and a higher number of failed preventive treatments in the past. Conclusions Patients with longer medication overuse‐headache duration, higher analgesic intake, and a higher number of previous preventive treatment failures may receive less benefit with erenumab. Patients affected by chronic migraine and medication overuse headache and treated with Erenumab for one year were more likely to be ≥50% responders if they had a longer duration of medication overuse‐headache, a higher number of painkillers taken per month and if had failed a higher number of preventive treatments for migraine.

ObjectiveTo determine whether erenumab is effective and safe in refractory chronic migraine with medication overuse headache.MethodsIn 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionsErenumab reduced significantly migraine frequency and pain medication intake in refractory chronic migraine with MOH patients.

The notion that smoking cannabis may damage the respiratory tract has been introduced in recent years but there is still a paucity of studies on this subject. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between cannabis smoking, pneumothorax and bullous lung disease in a population of operated patients. We performed a retrospective study on patients operated on for spontaneous pneumothorax. Patients were divided into three groups according to their smoking habit: cannabis smokers, only-tobacco smokers and nonsmokers. Cannabis lifetime exposure was expressed in dose-years (1d/y = 1 gram of cannabis/week for one year). Clinical, radiological and perioperative variables were collected. The variables were analyzed to find associations with smoking habit. The impact of the amount of cannabis consumption was also investigated by ROC curves analysis. Of 112 patients, 39 smoked cannabis, 23 smoked only tobacco and 50 were nonsmokers. Median cannabis consumption was 28 dose/years, median tobacco consumption was 6 pack/years. Cannabis smokers presented with more severe chronic respiratory symptoms and bullous lung disease and with a higher incidence of tension pneumothorax than both tobacco smokers and nonsmokers. Cannabis smokers also developed a larger pneumothorax, experienced prolonged postoperative stay and demonstrated a higher incidence of pneumothorax recurrence after the operation than nonsmokers did. The risk of occurrence of chronic respiratory symptoms and bullous lung disease in cannabis smokers was dose-related. Cannabis smoking seems to increase the risk of suffering from respiratory complaints and can have detrimental effects on lung parenchyma, in a dose-dependent manner. Cannabis smoking also negatively affected the outcome of patients operated for spontaneous pneumothorax. A history of cannabis abuse should always be taken in patients with pneumothorax. There may be need for a specific treatment for pneumothorax in cannabis smokers.

BackgroundErenumab is a monoclonal antibody acting against calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor which has been found effective even for the treatment of chronic migraine (CM) complicated with medication overuse headache (MOH). According to the present guidelines, the treatment with erenumab should continue for up to 1 year. The aim of the present study is to explore the evolution of patients affected by CM and MOH at the baseline, after erenumab discontinuation.MethodsOne hundred and eighty-five patients affected by CM and MOH were recruited and followed up after erenumab discontinuation. The number of migraine days per month, the number of painkillers taken per month, the number of days in which one medication was used for a month were collected every 30 days for the 3 months following erenumab suspension.ResultsAt the 3rd month after suspension, patients displayed a significantly higher number of migraine days per month, a significantly higher painkiller consumption, and a significantly higher migraine-related disability. A high body mass index and the presence of aura were positively correlated with the relapse of CM and MOH.ConclusionPatients affected by CM and MOH at the baseline displayed a significant worsening of their headaches after erenumab discontinuation.

Background Galcanezumab is a monoclonal antibody acting against the calcitonin gene‐related peptide approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. The aim of this article is to explore its effectiveness and safety of galcanezumab in chronic migraine (CM) with medication overuse‐headache (MOH). Methods Seventy‐eight patients were consecutively enrolled at the Modena headache center and followed up for 15 months. Visits were scheduled every 3 months, and the following variables were collected: the number of migraine days per month (MDM); the painkillers taken per month (PM); the number of days per month in which the patient took, at least, one painkiller; the six‐item headache impact test; and the migraine disability assessment questionnaire (MIDAS) score. Demographic features of the analyzed sample were collected at the baseline and adverse events (AEs) were collected at every visit. Results After 12 months, galcanezumab significantly reduced the MDM, the PM, the number of days on medication, the HIT‐6 as well as the MIDAS scores (all p < .0001). The greatest amelioration was obtained in the first trimester of treatment. A higher MDM, a higher NRS score at the baseline, and a higher number of failed preventive treatments negatively predict the CM relief at the year of treatment. No serious AEs were registered and only one drop‐out was due to AE. Conclusions Galcanezumab is effective and safe for the treatment of patients affected by CM and MOH. Patients with a higher impairment at the baseline may found less benefits with galcanezumab.