Explore the vast range of titles available.

Migraine is the most prevalent neurological disorder worldwide and it has immense socioeconomic impact. Currently, preventative treatment options for migraine include drugs developed for diseases other than migraine such as hypertension, depression and epilepsy. During the last decade, however, blocking calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has emerged as a possible mechanism for prevention of migraine attacks. CGRP has been shown to be released during migraine attacks and it may play a causative role in induction of migraine attacks. Here, we review the pros and cons of blocking CGRP in migraine patients. To date, two different classes of drugs blocking CGRP have been developed: small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants), and monoclonal antibodies, targeting either CGRP or the CGRP receptor. Several trials have been conducted to test the efficacy and safety of these drugs. In general, a superior efficacy compared to placebo has been shown, especially with regards to the antibodies. In addition, the efficacy is in line with other currently used prophylactic treatments. The drugs have also been well tolerated, except for some of the gepants, which induced a transient increase in transaminases. Thus, blocking CGRP in migraine patients is seemingly both efficient and well tolerated. However, CGRP and its receptor are abundantly present in both the vasculature, and in the peripheral and central nervous system, and are involved in several physiological processes. Therefore, blocking CGRP may pose a risk in subjects with comorbidities such as cardiovascular diseases. In addition, long-term effects are still unknown. Evidence from animal studies suggests that blocking CGRP may induce constipation, affect the homeostatic functions of the pituitary hormones or attenuate wound healing. However, these effects have so far not been reported in human studies. In conclusion, this review suggests that, based on current knowledge, the pros of blocking CGRP in migraine patients exceed the cons.

Introduction Limited clinical evidence is available regarding the potential effectiveness of anti‐CGRP monoclonal antibodies for the preventive treatment of migraine with aura. Aim of the Study This observational study involved a series of migraine patients affected by either migraine with or without aura, who were investigated for any changes in their frequencies and their migraine aura attack characteristics observed during treatment with anti‐CGRP Mabs over a 1‐year period. Patients and Methods Twelve migraine patients were included, seven of whom were treated with erenumab, 2 with fremanezumab, and 3 with galcanezumab. Clinical data were collected at baseline, which were defined as 3 months prior to the initiation of treatment, and thereafter at each trimester, over the 1‐year treatment period. The parameters included the number of headache and migraine days/month, the frequency of aura episodes, the number of days with acute drug intakes/month, and the scores from the migraine disability status scale (MIDAS), and the Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT‐6). Results Anti‐CGRP Mbs antibodies induced significant decreases in mean headache and migraine without aura days per month, the number of days with medication intake, as well as MIDAS and HIT‐6 scores (p < 0.0001). In contrast, the anti‐CGRP Mab treatment did not appear to impact the frequency of migraine with aura attacks but seemed to reduce both the intensity and the duration of headache phases of migraine aura. Furthermore, some migraine patients referred to having aura attacks without headache over the course of the treatment period. Conclusions Based on the above findings, we hypothesize that anti‐CGRP Mabs did not influence neuronal and vascular events related to cortical spreading depression (CSD) which is considered the pathophysiological substrate of aura. Conversely, these antibodies are able to counteract, via their peripheral mechanisms of action, the sensitization of the trigemino‐vascular pathway which is triggered by CSD. This aforementioned might explain why in our patients, migraine aura attacks remained unchanged in their frequencies, but the headache phases were either reduced or absent. This observational study involving a series of migraine patients affected by both migraine with and without aura reveals that anti‐CGRP antibodies induced a significant decrease in headache frequency of migraine without aura but not of migraine with aura attacks. Conversely, a reduction of the frequency and intensity of the headache phase of migraine aura and sometimes aura episodes without headache were recorded.

Migraine is a common neurologic disorder characterized by attacks consisting of unilateral, throbbing headache accompanied by photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea which remarkably reduces the patients' quality of life. Not migraine-specific non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective in patients affected by mild episodic migraine whilst in moderate or severe episodic migraine and in chronic migraineurs triptans and preventative therapies are needed. Since these treatments are endowed with serious side effects and have limited effectiveness new pharmacological approaches have been investigated. The demonstrated pivotal role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has fostered the development of CGRP antagonists, unfortunately endowed with liver toxicity, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) toward circulating CGRP released during migraine attack or targeting its receptor. Currently, four mAbs, eptinezumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab for CGRP and erenumab for CGRP canonical receptor, have been studied in clinical trials for episodic and chronic migraine. Apart from the proven effectiveness, these antibodies have resulted well tolerated and could improve the compliance of the patients due to their long half-lives allowing less frequent administrations. This study aims at investigating the still poorly clear pathogenesis of migraine and the potential role of anti-CGRP mAbs in the scenario of prophylaxis of migraine.

BackgroundMigraine is responsible for significant disability and societal burden. Recently, drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway raised new hopes. CGRP, a potent vasodilator, plays a key role in the pathogenesis of migraine attacks. The deficiency of CGRP is involved in Raynaud’s phenomenon, which consists of abnormal vasoconstriction of the digits. We aimed to assess the potential association of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting drugs, analyzing real-world data from the World Health Organization (VigiBase®).MethodsWe queried all reports of Raynaud’s phenomenon involving a CGRP-targeting drug. We sought disproportionate reporting of Raynaud’s phenomenon with these drugs. For this purpose, we relied on the calculation of the Information Component (IC). A positive lower end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the IC defines a statistically significant association. As migraine patients are prone to Raynaud’s phenomenon, we also calculated the IC of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting drugs compared to 5HT1B/D agonists (triptans), and beta-blockers used in the treatment of migraine.ResultsOverall, 99 reports of Raynaud’s phenomenon involving CGRP-targeting drugs have been yielded in VigiBase®. The most reported CGRP-targeting drug was erenumab, with 56 reports (56.6%). The median time to onset was 84 days. No fatality was notified, but one patient suffered from gangrene and extremity necrosis. As a whole, CGRP-targeting drugs were significantly associated with Raynaud’s phenomenon, with an IC of 3.3 (95%CI: 3.0–3.5). There was a disproportionate reporting of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting drugs compared to triptans (IC 0.4; 95%CI: 0.1–0.6) and to beta-blockers (IC 0.5; 95%CI: 0.2–0.7) as well.ConclusionsThere is a significant disproportionality signal of Raynaud’s phenomenon with CGRP-targeting. This signal stands out when CGRP-targeting drugs are compared to other drugs used in patients with migraine. This study is limited by missing data in pharmacovigilance reports. CGRP-targeting drugs may be subject to Weber effect and reporting bias. Nonetheless, CGRP blockade might be the last straw that disrupts the physiological balance of vascular response in patients at-risk of Raynaud’s phenomenon. Pending further data regarding vascular safety of CGRP-targeting drugs, caution is warranted in these patients.

Background The role of beta calcitonin gene-related peptide (beta-CGRP) in gastrointestinal tract is obscure, but experimental models suggest an effect on the homeostasis of the intestinal mucosa. We measured beta-CGRP circulating levels in a large series of subjects with a recent diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), in order to assess the potential role of this neuropeptide in IBD pathogenesis. Methods Morning serum beta-CGRP levels were measured by ELISA (CUSABIO, China) in 96 patients recently diagnosed of IBD and compared with those belonging from 50 matched healthy controls (HC) and 50 chronic migraine (CM) patients. Results Beta-CGRP levels were lower in patients with IBD (3.1 ± 1.9 pg/mL; 2.9 [2.4-3.4] pg/mL) as compared to HC (4.7 ± 2.6; 4.9 [4.0-5.8] pg/mL; p  < 0.001) and to CM patients (4.6 ± 2.6; 4.7 [3.3-6.2] pg/mL; p  < 0.001). Beta-CGRP levels in CM were not significantly different to those of HC ( p  = 0.92). Regarding IBD diagnostic subtypes, beta-CGRP levels for ulcerative colitis (3.0 ± 1.9pg/mL; 2.5 [2.1-3.4] pg/mL) and Crohn’s disease (3.3 ± 2.0 pg/mL; 3.2 [2.4-3.9] pg/mL) were significantly lower to those of HC ( p  < 0.01 and p  < 0.05, respectively) and CM ( p  < 0.01 and p  < 0.05, respectively). Conclusions We have found a significant reduction in serum beta-CGRP levels in patients with a recent diagnosis of all kinds of IBD as compared to two control groups without active intestinal disease, HC and CM, which may suggest a role for this neuropeptide in the pathophysiology of IBD. Our data indicate a protective role of beta-CGRP in the homeostasis of the alimentary tract. Graphical Abstract

Objective The neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been established to be a key signaling molecule in migraine, but little is known about the differences between the two isoforms: αCGRP and βCGRP. Previous studies have been hampered by their close similarity, making the development of specific antibodies nearly impossible. In this study we sought to test the hypothesis that αCGRP and βCGRP localize differently within the neurons of the mouse trigeminal ganglion (TG), using αCGRP knock out (KO) animals. Methods We applied immunohistochemistry (IHC) on 15 TGs from three different genotypes of mice; wild type (WT) αCGRP heterozygote (Het) and αCGRP KOs, with a primary antibody targeting the mature neuropeptide sequence of both αCGRP and βCGRP. Subsequently, the localization patterns of the two isoforms were analyzed. Furthermore, similar IHCs were produced in KO animals after being treated with monoclonal CGRP antibodies to study the origin of the observed CGRP. Additional IHCs were conducted in KO and WT mice to locate CGRP sorting peptides within neuronal cell bodies. Lastly, bioinformatical analyses of the primary, secondary, and tertiary structure of the two isoforms were conducted. Results The IHC showed that the key isoform localized within the axons of the mouse TG neurons, is αCGRP and not βCGRP. Furthermore, differences in intensities indicate that the model used in this study successfully knocks out αCGRP. We further categorized the localization patterns of CGRP in neuronal cell bodies in the TG and found using bioinformatic analyses that differences in localization might be explained by intracellular peptide sorting. IHC following injections with monoclonal CGRP antibodies in KO mice ruled out the possibility that the βCGRP observed in trigeminal neurons had peripheral origins. This conclusion was enhanced by IHC experiments which showed the presence of CGRP co-localizing sorting peptides in KO mice. Conclusion Our data show that mainly αCGRP and not βCGRP locate within the axons of the mouse TG neurons. The βCGRP observed within the TG neuronal cell bodies is synthesized intracellularly and not taken up from the environment. Furthermore, the isoforms appear to be sorted differentially into secretory vesicles in the cell bodies of TG neurons.

Background Chronic migraine is a highly debilitating condition that is often difficult to manage, particularly in the presence of medication overuse headache. Drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), or its receptor have shown promising results in treating this disorder. Methods We searched Pubmed and Embase to identify randomized clinical trials and real-world studies reporting on the use of medication targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in patients with chronic migraine. Results A total of 270 records were identified. Nineteen studies qualified for the qualitative analysis. Most studies reported on monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP (anti-CGRP mAbs), that overall prove to be effective in decreasing monthly migraine days by half in about 27.6–61.4% of the patients. Conversion from chronic to episodic migraine was seen in 40.88% of the cases, and 29–88% of the patients stopped medication overuse. Obesity seems to be the main negative predictor of response to anti-CGRP mAbs. There is no evidence to suggest the superiority of one anti-CGRP mAb. Despite the lack of strong evidence, the combination of anti-CGRP medication with onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine is likely to bring benefits for resistant cases. Atogepant is the first gepant to demonstrate a significant decrease in monthly migraine days compared to placebo in a recent trial. Further, anti-CGRP mAb and gepants have a good safety profile. Conclusion There is strong evidence from randomized trials and real-world data to suggest that drugs targeting CGRP are a safe and effective treatment for chronic migraine.

BackgroundCalcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is expressed throughout the body and is a known mediator of migraine, exerting this biological effect through activation of trigeminovascular, meningeal and associated neuronal pathways located in close proximity to the central nervous system. Monoclonal antibodies (mAb) targeting the CGRP pathway are an effective new preventive treatment for migraine, with a generally favourable adverse event profile. Pre-clinical evidence supports an anti-inflammatory/immunoregulatory role for CGRP in other organ systems, and therefore inhibition of the normal action of this peptide may promote a pro-inflammatory response.CasesWe present a case series of eight patients with new or significantly worsened inflammatory pathology in close temporal association with the commencement of CGRP mAb therapy.ConclusionThis case series provides novel insights on the potential molecular mechanisms and side-effects of CGRP antagonism in migraine and supports clinical vigilance in patient care going forward.

Migraine is an extremely disabling, common neurological disorder characterized by a complex neurobiology, involving a series of central and peripheral nervous system areas and networks. A growing increase in the understanding of migraine pathophysiology in recent years has facilitated translation of that knowledge into novel treatments, which are currently becoming available to patients in many parts of the world and are substantially changing the clinical approach to the disease. In the first part of this review, we will provide an up to date overview of migraine pathophysiology by analyzing the anatomy and function of the main regions involved in the disease, focusing on how these give rise to the plethora of symptoms characterizing the attacks and overall disease. The second part of the paper will discuss the novel therapeutic agents that have emerged for the treatment of migraine, including molecules targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (gepants and monoclonal antibodies), serotonin 5-HT 1F receptor agonists (ditans) and non-invasive neuromodulation, as well as providing a brief overview of new evidence for classic migraine treatments.

BackgroundVestibular migraine has recently been recognized as a novel subtype of migraine. However, the mechanism that relate vestibular symptoms to migraine had not been well elucidated. Thus, the present study investigated vestibular dysfunction in a rat model of chronic migraine (CM), and to dissect potential mechanisms between migraine and vertigo.MethodsRats subjected to recurrent intermittent administration of nitroglycerin (NTG) were used as the CM model. Migraine- and vestibular-related behaviors were analyzed. Immunofluorescent analyses and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction were employed to detect expressions of c-fos and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in the trigeminal nucleus caudalis (TNC) and vestibular nucleus (VN). Morphological changes of vestibular afferent terminals was determined under transmission electron microscopy. FluoroGold (FG) and CTB-555 were selected as retrograde tracers and injected into the VN and TNC, respectively. Lentiviral vectors comprising CGRP short hairpin RNA (LV-CGRP) was injected into the trigeminal ganglion.ResultsCM led to persistent thermal hyperalgesia, spontaneous facial pain, and prominent vestibular dysfunction, accompanied by the upregulation of c-fos labeling neurons and CGRP immunoreactivity in the TNC (c-fos: vehicle vs. CM = 2.9 ± 0.6 vs. 45.5 ± 3.4; CGRP OD: vehicle vs. CM = 0.1 ± 0.0 vs. 0.2 ± 0.0) and VN (c-fos: vehicle vs. CM = 2.3 ± 0.8 vs. 54.0 ± 2.1; CGRP mRNA: vehicle vs. CM = 1.0 ± 0.1 vs. 2.4 ± 0.1). Furthermore, FG-positive neurons was accumulated in the superficial layer of the TNC, and the number of c-fos+/FG+ neurons were significantly increased in rats with CM compared to the vehicle group (vehicle vs. CM = 25.3 ± 2.2 vs. 83.9 ± 3.0). Meanwhile, CTB-555+ neurons dispersed throughout the VN. The structure of vestibular afferent terminals was less pronounced after CM compared with the peripheral vestibular dysfunction model. In vivo knockdown of CGRP in the trigeminal ganglion significantly reduced the number of c-fos labeling neurons (LV-CGRP vs. LV-NC = 9.9 ± 3.0 vs. 60.0 ± 4.5) and CGRP mRNA (LV-CGRP vs. LV-NC = 1.0 ± 0.1 vs. 2.1 ± 0.2) in the VN, further attenuating vestibular dysfunction after CM.ConclusionsThese data demonstrates the possibility of sensitization of vestibular nucleus neurons to impair vestibular function after CM, and anti-CGRP treatment to restore vestibular dysfunction in patients with CM.