Migraine and risk of cardiovascular diseases: Danish population based matched cohort study

Replicability and replication in the humanities

A large number of scientists and several news platforms have, over the last few years, been speaking of a replication crisis in various academic disciplines, especially the biomedical and social sciences. This paper answers the novel question of whether we should also pursue replication in the humanities. First, I create more conceptual clarity by defining, in addition to the term "humanities," various key terms in the debate on replication, such as "reproduction" and "replicability." In doing so, I pay attention to what is supposed to be the object of replication: certain studies, particular inferences, of specific results. After that, I spell out three reasons for thinking that replication in the humanities is not possible and argue that they are unconvincing. Subsequently, I give a more detailed case for thinking that replication in the humanities is possible. Finally, I explain why such replication in the humanities is not only possible, but also desirable.

Migraine with visual aura is a risk factor for incident atrial fibrillation: A cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Migraine with visual aura is associated with cardioembolic stroke risk. The aim of this study was to test association between migraine with visual aura and atrial fibrillation (AF), in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study.

METHODS

In the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study, a longitudinal, community-based cohort study, participants were interviewed for migraine history in 1993-1995 and were followed for incident AF through 2013. AF was adjudicated using ECGs, discharge codes, and death certificates. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to study the relation between migraine and its subtypes with incident AF, compared with controls without headaches. Mediation analysis was conducted to test whether AF was a mediator of migraine with visual aura-associated stroke risk.

RESULTS

Of 11,939 participants assessed for headache and without prior AF or stroke, 426 reported migraines with visual aura, 1,090 migraine without visual aura, 1,018 nonmigraine headache, and 9,405 no headache. Over a 20-year follow-up period, incident AF was noted in 232 (15%) of 1,516 with migraine and 1,623 (17%) of 9,405 without headache. After adjustment for multiple confounders, migraine with visual aura was associated with increased risk of AF compared to no headache (hazard ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.62) as well as when compared to migraine without visual aura (hazard ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.83). The data suggest that AF may be a potential mediator of migraine with visual aura-stroke risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine with aura was associated with increased risk of incident AF. This may potentially lead to ischemic strokes.

Lasmiditan is an effective acute treatment for migraine: A phase 3 randomized study

Objective

To assess the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan in the acute treatment of migraine.

Methods

Adult patients with migraine were randomized (1:1:1) to a double-blind dose of oral lasmiditan 200 mg, lasmiditan 100 mg, or placebo and were asked to treat their next migraine attack within 4 hours of onset. Over 48 hours after dosing, patients used an electronic diary to record headache pain and the presence of nausea, phonophobia, and photophobia, one of which was designated their most bothersome symptom (MBS).

Results

Of the 1,856 patients who treated an attack, 77.9% had ≥1 cardiovascular risk factors in addition to migraine. Compared with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg were free of headache pain at 2 hours after dosing (32.2% vs 15.3%; odds ratio [OR] 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0–3.6, p< 0.001), similar to those dosed with lasmiditan 100 mg (28.2%; OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6–3.0, p< 0.001). Furthermore, compared with those dosed with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg (40.7% vs 29.5%; OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3–2.1, p< 0.001) and lasmiditan 100 mg (40.9%; OR 1.7, 95% CI, 1.3–2.2, p< 0.001) were free of their MBS at 2 hours after dosing. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in intensity.

Conclusions

Lasmiditan dosed at 200 and 100 mg was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of acute migraine among patients with a high level of cardiovascular risk factors.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT02439320.

Classification of evidence

This study provides Class I evidence that for adult patients with migraine, lasmiditan increases the proportion of subjects who are headache pain free at 2 hours after treating a migraine attack.

Cerebral autoregulation in migraine with aura: A case control study

BACKGROUND

Migraine with aura is independently associated with increased risk of ischemic stroke, especially in younger subjects. This association might be related to an impairment of cerebral autoregulation, which normally maintains cerebral blood flow independent of arterial blood pressure variations.

METHODS

Patients aged 30-55, fulfilling ICHD-3 beta criteria for migraine with aura, were prospectively enrolled and compared with gender- and age-matched healthy controls without a history of migraine. Patients and controls with a history of stroke or any disease potentially impairing cerebral autoregulation were excluded. We assessed cerebral autoregulation with two different methods: Transfer function analysis, and the correlation coefficient index Mx. The transfer function phase and gain reflect responses of cerebral blood flow velocities to relatively fast fluctuations of arterial blood pressure, whereas Mx also reflects responses to slower arterial blood pressure fluctuations.

RESULTS

A total of 22 migraine with aura patients (median age [IQR]: 39.5 [12.5] years) and 22 controls (39 [9.75] years) were included. Transfer function parameters and Mx were not different between patients and controls. However, Mx was inversely correlated with age in patients (ρ = -0.567, p = 0.006) and not in controls (ρ = -0.084, p = 0.509). Mx was also inversely correlated with migraine with aura duration (ρ = -0.617, p = 0.002), suggesting improvement of cerebral autoregulation efficiency with disease duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Cerebral autoregulation did not differ between patients and controls aged 30-55. However, cerebral autoregulation efficiency was strongly correlated with migraine with aura duration. Further studies in younger patients are needed to determine whether cerebral autoregulation is impaired early in the course of disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02708797.

Episodic Migraine With and Without Aura: Key Differences and Implications for Pathophysiology, Management, and Assessing Risks

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the pathophysiologic, epidemiologic, and clinical evidence for similarities and differences between migraine with and without aura.

RECENT FINDINGS

The ICHD-3 has recently refined the diagnostic criteria for aura to include positive symptomatology, which better differentiates aura from TIA. Although substantial evidence supports cortical spreading depression as the cause of visual aura, the role (if any) of CSD in headache pain is not well understood. Recent imaging evidence suggests a possible hypothalamic origin for a headache attack, but further research is needed. Migraine with aura is associated with a modest increase in the risk of ischemic stroke. The etiology for this association remains unclear. There is a paucity of evidence regarding treatments specifically aimed at the migraine with aura subtype, or whether migraine with vs without aura responds to treatment differently. Migraine with typical aura is therefore often treated similarly to migraine without aura. Lamotrigine, daily aspirin, and flunarizine have evidence for efficacy in prevention of migraine with aura, and magnesium, ketamine, furosemide, and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation have evidence for use as acute treatments. Although triptans have traditionally been contraindicated in hemiplegic migraine and migraine with brainstem aura, this prohibition is being reconsidered in the face of evidence suggesting that use may be safe. The debate as to whether migraine with and without aura are different entities is ongoing. In an era of sophisticated imaging, genetic advancement, and ongoing clinical trials, efforts to answer this question are likely to yield important and clinically meaningful results.

Migraine and cerebrovascular disease: still a dangerous connection?

Migraine is a common type of headache in young adults, with an estimated prevalence of 4% before puberty and as high as 25% in women by their mid to late 30s. About one third of migraineurs experience transient neurological symptoms known as auras, which characterize a variant known as migraine with aura. Many evidences have shown an increased risk of vascular events in patients affected by migraine, particularly among women and among migraine patients with aura. Potential underlying mechanisms include endothelial dysfunction, hypercoagulability, platelet aggregation, vasospasm, cardiovascular risk factors, paradoxical embolism, spreading depolarization, shared genetic risk, use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and immobilization. The risk of vascular events in migraine patients is also linked by concomitant oral contraception; moreover, the common finding of increased incidence of right to left cardiac shunt in migraine patients might have a pathogenetic role. Finally, many MRI studies in migraine patients, particularly in migraine with aura, have shown subcortical lesions particularly in the cerebellum as a common finding. In this review, we analyzed the more recent findings regarding the topic of migraine as a risk factor in stroke.

The efficacy and safety of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody for episodic migraine: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) for episodic migraine prevention.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to April 2018. Studies considered to be eligible were randomized controlled trials about efficacy and safety of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody for episodic migraine prevention.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials involving 2292 patients were included. The outcomes of this meta-analysis presented that CGRP monoclonal antibodies for preventive treatment of episodic migraine significantly reduced the monthly migraine days from baseline [weighted mean difference (WMD) = - 1.52; 95%CI, - 1.92 to - 1.11; Z = 7.40; P < 0.001] and monthly acute migraine-specific medication consumption from baseline [WMD = - 1.45; 95%CI, - 2.17 to - 0.72; Z = 3.93; P < 0.001], as compared with placebo group. CGRP monoclonal antibodies for preventive treatment of episodic migraine significantly increased the ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in migraine days per month [RR = 1.54; 95%CI, 1.38 to1.71; Z = 7.88; P < 0.001]. The adverse events were similar between the CGRP monoclonal antibody group and placebo group (P = 0.998). The outcomes of subgroup analysis showed that erenumab, galcanezumab, and fremanezumab significantly reduced the monthly migraine days from baseline and increased the ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in migraine days per month. Both erenumab and fremanezumab significantly reduced from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this meta-analysis, CGRP monoclonal antibodies significantly reduced the monthly migraine days and acute migraine-specific medication. CGRP monoclonal antibodies were effective and safe for preventive treatment of episodic migraine.