Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundMigraine is a highly prevalent and disabling neurological disorder which is commonly linked with a broad range of psychiatric comorbidities, especially among subjects with migraine with aura or chronic migraine. Defining the exact nature of the association between migraine and psychiatric disorders and bringing out the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the comorbidity with psychiatric conditions are relevant issues in the clinical practice.MethodsA systematic review of the most relevant studies about migraine and psychiatric comorbidity was performed using “PubMed”, “Scopus”, and “ScienceDirect” electronic databases from 1 January 1998 to 15 July 2018. Overall, 178 studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the current review.ResultsAccording to the most relevant findings of our overview, the associations with psychiatric comorbidities are complex, with a bidirectional association of major depression and panic disorder with migraine. Importantly, optimizing the pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment of either migraine or its psychiatric comorbidities might help clinicians to attenuate the burden of both these conditions.ConclusionsThe available data highlight the need for a comprehensive evaluation of psychiatric disorders in migraine in order to promote an integrated model of care and carefully address the burden and psychosocial impairment related to psychiatric comorbidities in migraine.

BackgroundWe aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of erenumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody inhibiting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRPr), for the prevention of migraine in a real-life setting.Main bodyWe included in our observational study all patients with episodic or chronic migraine treated with erenumab during the year 2019 in the Abruzzo region, central Italy, and with a 6-month follow-up. We included 89 patients; 76 (85.4%) received 6 doses of erenumab, 11 (12.4%) autonomously withdrew the drug due to perceived inefficacy, and 2 (2.2%) due to adverse events. Seventy-eight patients (87.6%) were female, with a mean age of 46.8 ± 11.2 years; 84 (94.4%) had chronic migraine, and 64 (71.9%) medication overuse. All patients had ≥2 prior preventive treatment failures. Fifty-three patients (69.7%) had a 50% decrease in monthly migraine days (MMDs) within the first three doses; 46 (71.9%) of 64 patients withdrew medication overuse. In the 76 patients who completed a 6-dose treatment, erenumab decreased median MMDs from 19 (interquartile range [IQR] 12–27.5) to 4 (IQR 2–9.5; P < 0.001), median monthly days of analgesic use from 10 (IQR 4.5–20) to 2 IQR 0–5; P < 0.001), and median monthly days of triptan use from 5 (IQR 0–15.5) to 1 (IQR 0–4; P < 0.001). We recorded 27 adverse events in 20 (22.5%) patients, the most common being constipation (13.5%). One adverse event, i.e. allergic reaction, led to treatment discontinuation in one patient.ConclusionsOur real-life data confirm the efficacy and tolerability of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in a difficult-to-treat population of patients with a high prevalence of chronic migraine and medication overuse.

Migraine is a complex condition in which genetic predisposition interacts with other biological and environmental factors determining its course. A hyperresponsive brain cortex, peripheral and central alterations in pain processing, and comorbidities play a role from an individual biological standpoint. Besides, dysfunctional psychological mechanisms, social and lifestyle factors may intervene and impact on the clinical phenotype of the disease, promote its transformation from episodic into chronic migraine and may increase migraine-related disability.Thus, given the multifactorial origin of the condition, the application of a biopsychosocial approach in the management of migraine could favor therapeutic success. While in chronic pain conditions the biopsychosocial approach is already a mainstay of treatment, in migraine the biomedical approach is still dominant. It is instead advisable to carefully consider the individual with migraine as a whole, in order to plan a tailored treatment. In this review, we first reported an analytical and critical discussion of the biological, psychological, and social factors involved in migraine. Then, we addressed the management implications of the application of a biopsychosocial model discussing how the integration between non-pharmacological management and conventional biomedical treatment may provide advantages to migraine care.

BackgroundA previous European Headache Federation (EHF) guideline addressed the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway to prevent migraine. Since then, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence have expanded the evidence and knowledge for those treatments. Therefore, the EHF panel decided to provide an updated guideline on the use of those treatments.MethodsThe guideline was developed following the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The working group identified relevant questions, performed a systematic review and an analysis of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote recommendations. Where the GRADE approach was not applicable, expert opinion was provided.ResultsWe found moderate to high quality of evidence to recommend eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in individuals with episodic and chronic migraine. For several important clinical questions, we found not enough evidence to provide evidence-based recommendations and guidance relied on experts’ opinion. Nevertheless, we provided updated suggestions regarding the long-term management of those treatments and their place with respect to the other migraine preventatives.ConclusionMonoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway are recommended for migraine prevention as they are effective and safe also in the long-term.

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

IntroductionHeadache is the most prevalent neurological manifestation in adults and one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. In children and adolescents, headaches are arguably responsible for a remarkable impact on physical and psychological issues, yet high-quality evidence is scarce.Material and methodsWe searched cross-sectional and cohort studies in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases from January 1988 to June 2022 to identify the prevalence of headaches in 8–18 years old individuals. The risk of bias was examined with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scale. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of pediatric headache. Subgroup analyses based on headache subtypes were also conducted.ResultsOut of 5,486 papers retrieved electronically, we identified 48 studies that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of primary headaches was 11% for migraine overall [95%CI: 9–14%], 8% for migraine without aura (MwoA) [95%CI: 5–12%], 3% for migraine with aura (MwA) [95%CI:2–4%] and 17% for tension-type headache (TTH) [95% CI: 12–23%]. The pooled prevalence of overall primary headache in children and adolescents was 62% [95% CI: 53–70%], with prevalence in females and males of 38% [95% CI: 16–66%] and 27% [95% CI: 11–53%] respectively. After the removal of studies ranked as low-quality according to the JBI scale, prevalence rates were not substantially different. Epidemiological data on less common primary headaches, such as trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, were lacking.ConclusionWe found an overall remarkably high prevalence of primary headaches in children and adolescents, even if flawed by a high degree of heterogeneity. Further up-to-date studies are warranted to complete the picture of pediatric headache-related burden to enhance specific public interventions.

BackgroundMigraine is a major public health issue associated with significant morbidity, considerable negative impact on quality of life, and significant socioeconomic burden. Preventive treatments are required to reduce the occurrence and the severity of acute attacks and to minimize the use of abortive medications and the associate risk of drug-related adverse events, as well as the onset of medication-overuse headache and chronification of migraine. We performed a review of all available evidence on the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor for the preventive treatment of migraine to provide evidence-based guidance on their use in clinical practice.Abstract main bodyMonoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor are mechanism-specific drugs for the preventive treatment of migraine. Double-blind randomized clinical trials have shown that monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor are effective across all the spectrum of migraine patients who require prevention and have a good safety and tolerability profile. Nevertheless, high costs limit the affordability of those drugs at the moment.ConclusionsSpecificity, long half-life, efficacy, tolerability, and ease of use make monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor an appealing treatment option for migraine prevention. Optimal strategies to manage treatment over time still need to be clarified with real-life data.

Chronic headache is particularly prevalent in migraineurs and it can progress to a condition known as medication overuse headache (MOH). MOH is a secondary headache caused by overuse of analgesics or other medications such as triptans to abort acute migraine attacks. The worsening of headache symptoms associated with medication overuse (MO) generally ameliorates following interruption of regular medication use, although the primary headache symptoms remain unaffected. MO patients may also develop certain behaviors such as ritualized drug administration, psychological drug attachment, and withdrawal symptoms that have been suggested to correlate with drug addiction. Although several reviews have been performed on this topic, to the authors best knowledge none of them have examined this topic from the addiction point of view. Therefore, we aimed to identify features in MO and drug addiction that may correlate. We initiate the review by introducing the classes of analgesics and medications that can cause MOH and those with high risk to produce MO. We further compare differences between sensitization resulting from MO and from drug addiction, the neuronal pathways that may be involved, and the genetic susceptibility that may overlap between the two conditions. Finally, ICHD recommendations to treat MOH will be provided herein.

BackgroundMonoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide, including erenumab, are migraine-specific preventive treatments, whose long-term effectiveness has still to be evaluated in real-life settings. We assessed early outcomes of erenumab discontinuation after a 52-week treatment in patients with a continuous positive response to the drug.MethodsWe evaluated the early outcomes after treatment completion in migraineurs from a real-life multicenter register. All patients received monthly erenumab for 52 weeks and attended a 8-week follow-up after treatment completion. Primary outcomes were responder rates and changes in monthly migraine days (MMDs), acute medications days (AMDs), and pain intensity on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS score) during weeks 1–4 after erenumab treatment completion.ResultsThe 32 included patients reported a decrease in MMDs, AMDs, and NRS score during the last 4 weeks of treatment compared with baseline (P<0.001). During weeks 1–4 after treatment completion, all the outcome measures increased compared with the last 4 weeks of treatment (P < 0.001) despite staying lower than baseline (MMDs and AMDs P < 0.001, NRS score P = 0.005). Over the same time frame, 18 (56%) patients maintained a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in MMDs. At week 4 after treatment completion, 10 (31%) patients restarted treatment due to disease rebound to baseline levels.ConclusionsMore than half patients had an early disease worsening, while the remaining patients maintained their responder status during weeks 1–4 after treatment completion. Further studies might identify predictors of prolonged response to erenumab and define the optimal treatment duration according to patients’ characteristics.

BackgroundHeadache disorders are a global public health concern affecting diverse populations. This review examines headache service organizations in low-, middle-, and high-income countries. It addresses global challenges in pharmacological headache treatment, with a focus on safety, tolerability, reproductive and child health, and outlines disparities in accessing innovative treatments worldwide.Main bodyOrganized headache services are essential due to the wide prevalence and varying severity of headache disorders. The tiered headache service model is globally recognized, although its implementation varies based on financial and workforce considerations. Headache burden affects well-being, causing disability, economic challenges, and work limitations, irrespective of location or income. All nations still require improved diagnosis and treatment, and the majority of countries face obstacles including limited access, awareness, economic barriers, and inadequate health policies. Provided adequate internet availability, telemedicine could help improve health equity by expanding access to headache care, since it can offer patients access to services without lengthy waiting times or extensive travel and can provide healthcare unavailable in underserved areas due to staff shortages.Numerous health disparities restrict global access to many headache medications, especially impacting individuals historically excluded from randomized controlled trials, such as those with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular conditions, as well as pregnant women. Furthermore, despite advancements in researching migraine treatments for young patients, the options for treatment remain limited.Access to headache treatment relies on factors like medication availability, approval, financial coverage, and healthcare provider expertise. Inadequate public awareness leads to neglect by policymakers and undertreatment by patients and healthcare providers. Global access discrepancies are exacerbated by the introduction of novel disease-specific medications, particularly impacting Asian, African, and Latin American nations excluded from clinical trials. While North America and Europe experience broad availability of migraine treatments, the majority of countries worldwide lack access to these therapies.ConclusionsHealthcare disparities, treatment access, and medication availability are concerning issues in headache medicine. Variations in national healthcare systems impact headache management, and costly innovative drugs are widening these gaps. Healthcare practitioners and experts should acknowledge these challenges and work towards minimizing access barriers for equitable global headache care in the future.