What's New in the Treatment of Migraine?

Cellular and Molecular Roles of Immune Cells in the Gut-Brain Axis in Migraine

Migraine is a complex and multi-system dysfunction. The realization of its pathophysiology and diagnosis is developing rapidly. Migraine has been linked to gastrointestinal disorders such as irritable bowel syndrome and celiac disease. There is also direct and indirect evidence for a relationship between migraine and the gut-brain axis, but the exact mechanism is not yet explained. Studies have shown that this interaction appears to be influenced by a variety of factors, such as inflammatory mediators, gut microbiota, neuropeptides, and serotonin pathways. Recent studies suggest that immune cells can be the potential tertiary structure between migraine and gut-brain axis. As the hot interdisciplinary subject, the relationship between immunology and gastrointestinal tract is now gradually clear. Inflammatory signals are involved in cellular and molecular responses that link central and peripheral systems. The gastrointestinal symptoms associated with migraine and experiments associated with antibiotics have shown that the intestinal microbiota is abnormal during the attacks. In this review, we focus on the mechanism of migraine and gut-brain axis, and summarize the tertiary structure between immune cells, neural network, and gastrointestinal tract.

An exploratory comparative case series of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies in patients with migraine with rosacea

Rosacea is associated with > 50% of cases of migraine. Recent data have shown that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is elevated in rosacea skin. CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) prevent migraine with known safety profiles, but their effect on rosacea is not known. This exploratory retrospective study examined rosacea in patients with migraines, before and after CGRP mAbs. Of 13 eligible patients on stable or unchanged concurrent rosacea medications, the majority experienced improvement after receiving CGRP mAbs. Mean (SD) rosacea severity scores for the periods before and while on CGRP mAbs were, respectively, 1.19 (0.65) and 0.58 (0.70) (P = 0.01). Prospective, placebo-controlled clinical trials are needed to further assess the use of CGRP mAbs in rosacea.

The NMDA receptor antagonists memantine and ketamine as anti-migraine agents

Migraine is a debilitating disorder affecting females more frequently than males. There is some evidence that drugs targeting glutamate receptors: memantine and ketamine might be beneficial in the therapy of this entity. Therefore, the purpose of this work is to present NMDA receptor antagonists, memantine and ketamine, as potential anti-migraine agents. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and clinical trials submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov to find publications describing eligible trials published between database inception and December 31, 2021. This comprehensive literature review summarizes data on the use of the NMDA receptor antagonists memantine and ketamine in the pharmacotherapy of migraine. Results from 20 previous and recent preclinical experiments are discussed and correlated with 19 clinical trials (including case series, open-label, and randomized placebo-controlled trials). For the purposes of this review, the authors hypothesized that the propagation of SD is a major mechanism in the pathophysiology of migraine. In several animal studies and in vitro studies, memantine and ketamine inhibited or reduced propagation of the SD. In addition, the results of clinical trials suggest that memantine or ketamine may be an effective treatment option for migraine. However, most studies on these agents lack control group. Although further clinical trials are needed, the results suggest that ketamine or memantine may be promising molecules for the treatment of severe migraine. Particular attention should be paid to people who have a treatment-resistant form of migraine with aura or have exhausted existing treatment options. For them, the drugs under discussion could represent an interesting alternative in the future.

Eptinezumab-jjmr, a humanized monoclonal specific to Calcitonin Gene Related Peptide, for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults

Purpose of Review

Migraines are prevalent and cause significant morbidity, decline in quality of life and healthcare costs universally. Treatment options are varied, but efficacy is limited. This review centers on Eptinezumab-jjmr, a humanized monoclonal specific to CGRP for the prevention of migraines in adults. Herein presented are the science and mechanism of action, indication and clinical evidence for use.

Recent Findings

Migraines are severe, recurrent headaches, which are either episodic or chronic in nature. The pain is severe, often accompanied by co-morbid symptoms, such as photophobia, phonophobia, nausea and emesis, and is limiting in nature. It is a prevalent disorder that causes significant, worldwide disability, morbidity, suffering, and costs.

The pathophysiology of migraines is actively studied, though recent research points to an initiating event causing migraine generation, that is then propagated by other brain regions, a significant one being the trigeminocervical complex. This is driven by biochemical transmitters, chiefly CGRP. This discovery led to the development of CGRP-targeting drugs, including gepants (small molecular antagonists) and anti-CGRP antibodies, such as Eptinezumab-jjmr.

Traditional therapy includes preventative and abortive treatment; however, adherence with preventative treatment has been historically poor, and certain types of abortive therapy carry risks and side effects that preclude them from a large patient population. Moreover, traditional therapy often falls short in migraine therapy. CGRP antagonist, including Eptinezumab, aims to cover the gaps in migraine therapy. We present here evidence to support the safe and effective use of Eptinezumab for the prevention of migraines.

Summary

Migraines are a prevalent primary headache disorder causing significant morbidity worldwide. Traditional abortive and preventative treatments fall short for many patients. Eptinezumab is part of new generation of CGRP-targeting medications and has shown significant evidence to support its use for the prevention of migraines. Further research is required to properly compare eptinezumab with existing pharmacotherapy and update guidelines on the appropriate combinations of therapies that are not available and the correct patient selection for each.

Different dosage regimens of erenumab for the treatment of migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a worldwide epidemic neurological disorder that has a significant influence on the quality of life. Migraine attacks are considered to be related to a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) signaling molecule, and anti-CGRP medications are used to abort and prevent migraine attacks. Erenumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the CGRP receptor, is the first migraine preventive medication approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. In the present study, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of erenumab.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of erenumab as a migraine preventive treatment compared to a placebo.

METHODS

Randomized, placebo-controlled, single or double-blind trials were searched through MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to May 2022. The efficacy outcomes we collected include changes from baseline on monthly migraine days, monthly acute migraine-specific medication days, ≥50% responder rate, ≥75% responder rate, and 100% responder rate at week 12. Safety outcomes include treatment emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and any adverse event that leads to discontinuation of treatment. The study was registered with PROSPERO (Registry number: CRD42022338861).

RESULT

In all eight included trials, we found that erenumab (28, 70, and 140 mg) is very effective and has a significantly greater reduction in baseline monthly migraine days (28 mg: mean difference [MD] = -1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.0 to -0.2, p = 0.020; 70 mg: MD = -1.4, 95% CI: -1.8 to -1.1, p < 0.001, I²  = 26%; 140 mg: MD = -1.8, 95% CI: -2.1 to -1.4, p < 0.001, I²  = 0%) than placebo at week 12, especially with 140 mg. Otherwise, we found that there were no statistical differences in the occurrence of adverse events (7 mg: risk ratio [RR] = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.7 to 1.2, p = 0.570; 21 mg: RR = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.8 to 1.2, p = 0.730; 28 mg: RR = 0.9, 95% CI: 0.7 to 1.1, p = 0.340; 70 mg: RR = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.0, p = 0.230, I²  = 0%; 140 mg: RR = 1.0, 95% CI: 0.9 to 1.1, p = 0.880, I²  = 40%) between the erenumab and placebo groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, we found that erenumab, especially at the dose of 140 mg, is an effective and well-tolerated preventive treatment for migraine.

Rimegepant for the treatment of migraine

Migraine is a common form of primary headache, affecting up to 1 in every 6 Americans. The pathophysiology is an intricate interplay of genetic factors and environmental influence and is still being elucidated in ongoing studies. The trigeminovascular system is now known to have a significant role in the initiation of migraines, including the release of pain mediators such as CGRP and substance P. Traditional treatment of migraine is usually divided into acute and preventive treatment. Acute therapy includes non-specific therapy, such as NSAIDs and other analgesics, which may provide relief in mild to moderate migraines. 5-HT1 agonists may provide relief in severe migraine, but are not universally effective and carry a significant side-effect profile with frequent redosing requirement. Prophylactic therapy may reduce the occurrence of acute migraine attacks in selected patients, but does not completely eliminate it. More recently, CGRP antagonism has been studied and shown to be effective in both abortion and prevention of migraine. Novel medications, targeting CGRP, divide into CGRP antibodies and receptor antagonists (gepants). Rimegepant, a second-generation gepant, has shown efficacy in several clinical trials in treating acute migraine. Ongoing trials are also evaluating its role in migraine prophylaxis, and results are promising. It is also generally safer for use than existing options, does not appear to increase the chance of developing chronic migraines, and carries a very tolerable side effects profile. It is a part of a growing arsenal in migraine treatment, and may present the silver bullet for treatment of this disease.

Nonimprovement in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Relation to Activity Patterns, Uplifts and Hassles, and Autonomic Dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

To test a model of nonimprovement in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) using self-report activity patterns (e.g., "push-crash"), uplifts and hassles, and a biological measure of cardiac autonomic function. Activity pattern impacts on symptoms and objective measures of autonomic and physical activity were also examined.

METHODS

This prospective study in CFS collected all data remotely, including 6 months of weekly web diaries that recorded symptom ratings, activity patterns, and hassles and uplifts. In addition, 6 months of weekly heart monitoring and 3 months of daily waking actigraphy data were collected. Improvement or nonimprovement status was assessed using semistructured interviews at the 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 148 individuals (87.2% female) were enrolled, and 12.2% were lost to follow-up. Participants reporting nonimprovement ( n = 92), as compared with improvement ( n = 38), showed greater autonomic dysfunction (lower heart rate variability, group difference = 5.93 [SE = 2.73] milliseconds; p = .032) and lower mean intensity of behavioral uplifts (group difference = 0.14 [SE = 0.16]; p = .043), but no significant differences in any activity pattern, including push-crash, limiting activity, and healthy pacing.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provided evidence for linking patient-reported nonimprovement to a biological variable indexing autonomic dysfunction and a behavioral measure indicating a deficit in psychological uplifts. These findings suggest a possible marker of illness trajectory that could potentially advance the biomedical underpinnings of CFS.Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02948556.

Efficacy and Safety of Chuanxiong Qingnao Granule in Patients with Migraine: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Chuanxiong Qingnao Granule (CQG) to treat migraine.

METHOD

This study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. All migraineurs were recruited and randomly assigned into a treatment group treated with CQG and a control group treated with a placebo. The whole research process included a 4-week baseline, 12-week intervention, and 12-week follow-up. The primary outcome was responder rate, defined as the percentage of migraineurs with 50% or more reduction in the frequency of migraine attack during treatment and posttreatment period compared with the baseline. The secondary outcomes were the number of migraine days, migraine attack frequency, visual analogue scale (VAS), Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS).

RESULTS

A total of 346 migraineurs completed the research and were included in the intention-treatment analyses. The response rates differed significantly between the treatment group and the control group (71.5% vs. 12.1% at week 12 and 83.1% vs. 3.4% at week 24). Attack frequency, days of headache attack, VAS, FSS, HAMD, and MIDAS decreased at week 12 in both groups with more reduction in the treatment group (P < 0.001). No severe adverse events were observed in this trial.

CONCLUSION

Chuanxiong Qingnao Granule can significantly improve headache symptoms in patients with migraine while improving disability, fatigue, and depression with a good safety profile.

Survey of Pain Medicine Specialists' Familiarity with Migraine Management

OBJECTIVE

Pain specialists treat patients with headache and interface with those who use opioids more so than neurologists and headache specialists. We assessed headache medicine knowledge and needs of pain specialists.

DESIGN/SETTING

Cross-sectional online survey.

SUBJECTS

Members of the American Academy of Pain Medicine.

METHODS

Survey was based on a prior survey on primary care providers' knowledge and needs and was iteratively updated by four headache specialists, two with pain medicine affiliations.

RESULTS

Of the 105 respondents, 71.4% were physicians, 34.3% were women, and they averaged 20.0 ± 13.6 years in practice. The most common specialty was anesthesia (36.1%, n = 35/97) followed by neurology (14.4%, n = 14/97). About half of providers (55.7%, n = 34/61 and 53.3%, n = 32/60) were familiar with the American Academy of Neurology Guidelines for pharmacological migraine prevention and the Choosing Wisely Campaign recommendations for limiting neuroimaging and opioids. Less than half of all providers (39.7%, n = 23/58) were familiar with the American Headache Society guidelines for emergency management of migraine. Providers were aware of Level A evidence-based nonpharmacological therapies, with over three-fourths recognizing cognitive behavioral therapy (80.7%, n = 50/62) and biofeedback (75.8%, n = 47/62) as evidence-based interventions. About 80% of providers (n = 50/64) estimate making migraine diagnoses in ≤ 50% of their patients with headache. Providers consider starting preventive headache therapy at 7.1 ± 3.9 days/month and report referring 34.3%±34.2% of patients to behavioral interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissemination and implementation of headache guidelines is needed for pain medicine specialists. Providers may need help diagnosing migraine based on currently accepted guidelines and referring for evidence-based behavioral therapies.

Reduction of headache intensity and frequency with maxillary stabilization splint therapy in patients with temporomandibular disorders-headache comorbidity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze the effectiveness of maxillary stabilization splint (SS) therapy to reduce headache (HA) intensity and HA frequency in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)-HA comorbidity. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using full-arch coverage, hard resin, and maxillary SS therapy were included. Electronic databases, including Cochrane Library, MEDLINE through PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE, were searched. The risk of bias was analyzed based on Cochrane's handbook. The search yielded 247 references up to January 28, 2020. Nine RCTs were included at a high risk of bias. The comparison groups included other splints, counseling, jaw exercises, medications, neurologic treatment, and occlusal equilibration. Four studies reported a statistically significant reduction in HA intensity, and five studies reported significant improvement in HA frequency from baseline at 2-12 months in patients with TMD-HA comorbidity treated with a full-arch hard maxillary SS. HA frequency in tension-type HA (TTH) comorbid with TMD diagnoses of myofascial pain (MFP) or capsulitis/synovitis improved significantly with SS than that with full-arch maxillary non-occluding splint (NOS) in two studies. Comparison groups receiving hard partial-arch maxillary splint nociceptive trigeminal inhibition (NTI) showed statistically significant improvements in HA intensity in patients with mixed TMD phenotypes of MFP and disc displacement comorbid with "general HA." Comparison groups receiving partial-arch maxillary resilient/soft splint (Relax) showed significant improvements in both HA intensity and frequency in patients with HA concomitant with MFP. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the improvement of pain intensity at 2-3 months with comparison of the splints (partial-arch soft [Relax], hard [NTI], and full-arch NOS) or splint use compliance at 6-12 months with comparison of the splints (partial-arch Relax and full-arch NOS) versus the SS groups in patients with various TMD-HA comorbidities. In conclusion, although SS therapy showed a statistically significant decrease in HA intensity and HA frequency when reported, the evidence quality was low due to the high bias risk and small sample size. Therefore, further studies are required.

Additive Interaction Between Onabotulinumtoxin-A and Erenumab in Patients With Refractory Migraine

In the last decade, notable progresses have been observed in chronic migraine preventive treatments. According to the European Headache Federation and national provisions, onabotulinumtoxin-A (BTX-A) and monoclonal antibodies acting on the pathway of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP-mAbs) should not be administered in combination due to supposed superimposable mechanism of action and high costs. On the other hand, preclinical observations demonstrated that these therapeutic classes, although operating directly or indirectly on the CGRP pathway, act on different fibers. Specifically, the CGRP-mAbs prevent the activation of the Aδ-fibers, whereas BTX-A acts on C-fibers. Therefore, it can be argued that a combined therapy may provide an additive or synergistic effect on the trigeminal nociceptive pathway. In the present study, we report a case series of 10 patients with chronic migraine who experienced significant benefits with the combination of both erenumab and BTX-A compared to each therapeutic strategy alone. A reduction in frequency and intensity of headache attacks (although not statistically significant probably due to the low sample size) was observed in migraine patients treated with a combined therapy with BTX-A and erenumab compared to both BTX-A and erenumab alone. Moreover, the combined therapy with BTX-A and erenumab resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the symptomatic drug intake and in migraine-related disability probably related to a reduced necessity or also to a better responsiveness to rescue treatments. Present data suggest a remodulation of current provisions depriving patients of an effective therapeutic strategy in peculiar migraine endophenotypes.

Ubrogepant does not induce latent sensitization in a preclinical model of medication overuse headache

BACKGROUND

Ubrogepant, a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, was recently approved as an oral medication for the acute treatment of migraine. This study aimed to determine whether ubrogepant shows efficacy in a preclinical model of migraine-like pain and whether repeated oral administration of ubrogepant induces latent sensitization relevant to medication overuse headache in rats.

METHODS

A "two-hit" priming model of medication overuse headache was used. Female Sprague-Dawley rats received six oral doses of sumatriptan 10 mg/kg over 2 weeks to induce latent sensitization (i.e. "priming"). Cutaneous allodynia was measured periodically over 20 days in the periorbital and hindpaw regions using von Frey filaments. The rats were then subjected to a 1-hour bright light stress challenge on two consecutive days. At the start of the second bright light stress exposure, oral sumatriptan 10 mg/kg, oral ubrogepant 25, 50, or 100 mg/kg, or vehicle was administered; thereafter, cephalic and hindpaw sensory thresholds were monitored hourly over 5 hours to determine the efficacy of ubrogepant in reversing bright light stress-induced cutaneous allodynia. A dose of ubrogepant effective in the medication overuse headache model (100 mg/kg) was then selected to determine if repeated administration would produce latent sensitization. Rats were administered six oral doses of ubrogepant 100 mg/kg, sumatriptan 10 mg/kg (positive control), or vehicle over 2 weeks, and cutaneous allodynia was evaluated regularly. Testing continued until mechanosensitivity returned to baseline levels. Rats were then challenged with bright light stress on days 20 and 21, and periorbital and hindpaw cutaneous allodynia was measured. On days 28 to 32, the same groups received a nitric oxide donor (sodium nitroprusside 3 mg/kg, i.p.), and cutaneous allodynia was assessed hourly over 5 hours.

RESULTS

Sumatriptan elicited cutaneous allodynia in both cephalic and hindpaw regions; cutaneous allodynia resolved to baseline levels after cessation of drug administration (14 days). Sumatriptan priming resulted in generalized and delayed cutaneous allodynia, evoked by either bright light stress (day 21) or nitric oxide donor (day 28). Ubrogepant dose-dependently blocked both stress- and nitric oxide donor-induced cephalic and hindpaw allodynia in the sumatriptan-induced medication overuse headache model with a 50% effective dose of ∼50 mg/kg. Unlike sumatriptan, ubrogepant 100 mg/kg in repeated effective doses did not produce cutaneous allodynia or latent sensitization.

CONCLUSIONS

Both ubrogepant and sumatriptan demonstrated efficacy as acute medications for stress- and nitric oxide donor-evoked cephalic allodynia in a preclinical model of medication overuse headache, consistent with their clinical efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. However, in contrast to sumatriptan, repeated treatment with ubrogepant did not induce cutaneous allodynia or latent sensitization. These studies suggest ubrogepant may offer an effective acute treatment of migraine without risk of medication overuse headache.Trial Registration Number: Not applicable.

An Evidence-Based Review of Fremanezumab for the Treatment of Migraine

Migraine headache is a common, chronic, debilitating disease with a complex etiology. Current therapy for migraine headache comprises either treatments targeting acute migraine pain or prophylactic therapy aimed at increasing the length of time between migraine episodes. Recent evidence suggests that calcium gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a critical component in the pathogenesis of migraines. Fremanezumab, a monoclonal antibody against CGRP, was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) after multiple studies showed that it was well-tolerated, safe, and effective in the treatment of migraines. Further research is needed to elucidate the long-term effects of fremanezumab and CGRP-antagonists in general, and additional data is required in less healthy patients to estimate its effects in these populations and potentially increase the eligible group of recipients. This is a comprehensive review of the current literature on the efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for the treatment of chronic migraine. In this review we provide an update on the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and current treatment of migraine, and summarize the evidence for fremanezumab as a treatment for migraine.