Disability, Quality of Life, and Socioeconomic Burden of Cluster Headache: A Critical Review of Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

The profile of refractory chronic cluster headache

INTRODUCTION

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a relatively rare primary headache disorder whose management is often challenging. The prevalence of refractory CCH (rCCH) is unknown. Our aim is to describe the frequency of rCCH within a population of CCH, define the clinical profile of the refractory patients and the treatments they underwent.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study through a review of the medical records of CCH patients in six hospitals in Madrid, Spain. Data on epidemiological, clinical presentation, treatment and disease activity at the moment were collected. The European Headache Federation diagnostic criteria were used for rCCH definition. High disease activity was defined as having at least 3 severe attacks per week that impact quality of life despite treatment. Non-rCCH and rCCH groups were compared.

RESULTS

88 CCH patients were analyzed, 68.2% (60/88) met rCCH criteria at some point in their evolution. A longer diagnostic delay (4.6 ± 7.1 vs. 3.2 ± 3.7 years, p = 0.017) was observed in rCCH. All rCCH patients tried therapies without established evidence from randomized clinical trials. OnabotulinumtoxinA and galcanezumab were initiated in 77.3% (68/88) and 5.7% (5/88), but discontinued in 52.9% (36/68) and 60.0% (3/5), respectively. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) was implanted in 29.6% (26/88), with 50.0% (13/26) still active. Other treatment options are described and discussed. Despite treatment, 60.2% (53/88) still have high disease activity.

CONCLUSION

CCH is a disorder with poor prognosis, meeting refractoriness criteria in more than half. OnabotulinumtoxinA and ONS could be the effective in refractory patients.

Recent advances in diagnosing, managing, and understanding the pathophysiology of cluster headache

Cluster headache, characterised by attacks of severe, recurrent, unilateral headache and ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms, remains a primary headache with an elusive pathophysiology. Recent advances have introduced effective treatments and broadened understanding of the clinical features of cluster headache. These features are similar in patients globally, but regional differences in prevalence and burden exist. International collaborations have led to identification of eight genetic loci associated with cluster headache. The pathophysiological mechanisms are still not fully understood but recent studies show that targeting the trigeminal autonomic reflex by neurostimulation, or targeting the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), might lessen the attack burden. The US Food and Drug Administration has approved galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CGRP, as the first specific preventive treatment for episodic cluster headache. However, a preventive effect was not replicated in chronic cluster headache, and the European Medicines Agency did not approve galcanezumab, restricting its availability in Europe. Owing to the low prevalence of cluster headache, continued collaboration through multicentre clinical trials and data sharing will be imperative for further breakthroughs in understanding and management.

The impact of primary headaches on disability outcomes: a literature review and meta-analysis to inform future iterations of the Global Burden of Disease study

BACKGROUND

The burden and disability associated with headaches are conceptualized and measured differently at patients' and populations' levels. At the patients' level, through patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs); at population level, through disability weights (DW) and years lived with a disability (YLDs) developed by the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD). DW are 0-1 coefficients that address health loss and have been defined through lay descriptions. With this literature review, we aimed to provide a comprehensive analysis of disability in headache disorders, and to present a coefficient referring to patients' disability which might inform future GBD definitions of DW for headache disorders.

METHODS

We searched SCOPUS and PubMed for papers published between 2015 and 2023 addressing disability in headache disorders. The selected manuscript included a reference to headache frequency and at least one PROM. A meta-analytic approach was carried out to address relevant differences for the most commonly used PROMs (by headache type, tertiles of medication intake, tertiles of females' percentage in the sample, and age). We developed a 0-1 coefficient based on the MIDAS, on the HIT-6, and on MIDAS + HIT-6 which was intended to promote future DW iterations by the GBD consortium.

RESULTS

A total of 366 studies, 596 sub-samples, and more than 133,000 single patients were available, mostly referred to cases with migraine. Almost all PROMs showed the ability to differentiate disability severity across conditions and tertiles of medication intake. The indexes we developed can be used to inform future iterations of DW, in particular considering their ability to differentiate across age and tertiles of medication intake.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review provides reference values for the most commonly used PROMS and a data-driven coefficient whose main added value is its ability to differentiate across tertiles of age and medication intake which underlie on one side the increased burden due to aging (it is likely connected to the increased impact of common comorbidities), and by the other side the increased burden due to medication consumption, which can be considered as a proxy for headache severity. Both elements should be considered when describing disability of headache disorders at population levels.

Translating the Cluster Headache Quality of Life Questionnaire (CHQ) from English to Dutch with the TRAPD method

OBJECTIVE

Cluster headache is associated with a decreased quality of life (QoL). The increased focus on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) has led to the creation of a tailored Cluster Headache Quality of Life scale (CHQ). Our objective was to create and authenticate a Dutch version of the CHQ (CHQ-D).

METHODS

The TRAPD model (Translation, Review, Adjudication, Pretesting, Documentation) was used to translate the CHQ from English to Dutch and ensure cross-cultural adaption. Pre-testing was performed in n = 31 participants, and validity was in a new sample of n = 40 participants who completed the CHQ twice at a 2-day interval. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the validity and reproducibility of the CHQ-D.

RESULTS

To produce the CHQ-D, we made five modifications based on pretesting. Participants finished the questionnaire in a median time of 10 min (IQR:10.0, 17.5) and 90% within 20 min. The majority of participants (74.2%) did not find it burdensome at all. The reliability of the CHQ-D was excellent (Cronbach's alpha: 0.94; ICC: 0.94).

CONCLUSION

The CHQ-D is a valid and practical instrument for QoL in individuals with cluster headache. We aim to use CHQ-D as PROM in clinical research in the Netherlands to enforce international collaborations and comparisons of studies.

An Analysis of the Determinants of the Health-Related Quality of Life in Asian Patients With Cluster Headaches During Cluster Periods Using the Time Trade-Off Method

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Patients with cluster headache (CH) exhibit impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). However, there have been few studies related to the HRQoL of patients with CH from Asian backgrounds. This study aimed to determine the impact of CH on HRQoL and to identify the factors affecting HRQoL in patients with CH during cluster periods.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled patients with CH from 17 headache clinics in South Korea between September 2016 and February 2021. The study aimed to determine HRQoL in patients with CH using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) index and the time trade-off (TTO) method. Age- and sex-matched headache-free participants were recruited as a control group.

RESULTS

The study included 423 patients with CH who experienced a cluster period at the time. EQ-5D scores were lower in patients with CH (0.88±0.43, mean±standard deviation) than in the controls (0.99±0.33, p<0.001). The TTO method indicated that 58 (13.6%) patients with CH exhibited moderate-to-severe HRQoL deterioration. The HRQoL states in patients with CH were associated with current smoking patterns, headache severity, frequency, and duration, and scores on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item scale (PHQ-9), 6-item Headache Impact Test, and 12-item Allodynia Symptom Checklist. Multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated that the HRQoL states in patients with CH were negatively correlated with the daily frequency of headaches, cluster period duration, and GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CH experienced a worse quality of life during cluster periods compared with the headache-free controls, but the degree of HRQoL deterioration varied among them. The daily frequency of headaches, cluster period duration, anxiety, and depression were factors associated with HRQoL deterioration severity in patients with CH.

Epidemiology, burden and clinical spectrum of cluster headache: a global update

BACKGROUND

This narrative review aims to broaden our understanding of the epidemiology, burden and clinical spectrum of cluster headache based on updated findings with a global perspective.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on the following topics: (a) epidemiology; (b) burden: quality of life, disability, economic burden, job-related burden and suicidality; and (c) clinical spectrum: male predominance and its changes, age, pre-cluster and pre-attack symptoms, aura, post-drome, attack characteristics (location, severity, duration and associated symptoms), bout characteristics (attack frequency, bout duration and bout frequency), circadian and seasonal rhythmicity and disease course.

RESULTS

New large-scale population-based reports have suggested a lower prevalence than previous estimations. The impact of cluster headache creates a significant burden in terms of the quality of life, disability, economic and job-related burdens and suicidality. Several studies have reported decreasing male-to-female ratios and a wide age range at disease onset. The non-headache phases of cluster headache, including pre-cluster, pre-attack and postictal symptoms, have recently been revisited. The latest data regarding attack characteristics, bout characteristics, and circadian and seasonal rhythmicity from different countries have shown variability among bouts, attacks, individuals and ethnicities. Studies on the disease course of cluster headache have shown typical characteristics of attacks or bouts that decrease with time.

CONCLUSIONS

Cluster headache may be more than a "trigeminal autonomic headache" because it involves complex central nervous system phenomena. The spectrum of attacks and bouts is wider than previously recognised. Cluster headache is a dynamic disorder that evolves or regresses over time.

Different personality profiles in patients with cluster headache: a data-driven approach

INTRODUCTION

Cluster headache (CH) is usually comorbid to mood spectrum disorders, but the psychopathological aspects are poorly explored. We aimed at identifying discrete profiles of personality traits and their association with clinical features.

METHODS

Based on the personality scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III, principal component analysis (PCA) identified psychological patterns of functioning of 56 CH patients. PCA outcomes were used for hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) for sub-groups classification.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven percent of patients had personality dysfunctions. PCA found two bipolar patterns: (i) negativistic, sadic-aggressive, borderline, and compulsive traits were distinctive of the psychological dysregulation (PD) dimension, and (ii) narcissistic, histrionic, avoidant, and schizoid traits loaded under the social engagement (SE) component. PD was associated with disease duration and psychopathology. SE was related to educational level and young age. HCA found three groups of patients, and the one with high PD and low SE had the worst psychological profile.

CONCLUSIONS

Personality disorders are common in CH. Our data-driven approach revealed distinct personality patterns which can appear differently among patients. The worst combination arguing against mental health is low SE and high PD. Linking this information with medical history may help clinicians to identify tailored-based therapeutic interventions for CH patients.

Preventive treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preventive treatment for refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) is challenging and many therapies have been tried.

OBJECTIVE

To study what could be considered the therapy of choice in rCCH through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

This review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42021290983). A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov, and the WHO's-International-Clinical-Trials-Registry-Platform. Studies on the preventive treatment for rCCH as defined by the European Headache Federation consensus statement were included. A meta-analysis of the pooled response rate was conducted for the different therapies.

RESULTS

Of 336 results, 45 were eligible for inclusion. Most articles studied the effect of neuromodulation as a preventive treatment for rCCH. The most studied neuromodulation technique was occipital nerve stimulation (ONS), with a pooled response rate in the meta-analysis of 57.3% (95% CI 0.481-0.665). Deep brain stimulation (DBS) was the second most studied treatment with a pooled response rate of 77.0% (95% CI 0.594-0.957). DBS results were more heterogeneous than ONS, which could be related to the different stimulation targets in DBS studies, and reported more serious adverse events than in ONS studies. The remaining therapies (anti-CGRP pathway drugs, warfarin, ketamine-magnesium infusions, serial occipital nerve blocks, clomiphene, onabotulinum toxin A, ketogenic diet, sphenopalatine ganglion radiofrequency or stimulation, vagus nerve stimulation, percutaneous bioelectric current stimulation, upper cervical cord stimulation, and vidian neurectomy) present weaker results or have less quality of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that ONS could be the first therapeutic strategy for patients with rCCH based on the current evidence.

The economic and personal burden of cluster headache: a controlled cross-sectional study

Background

Cluster headache is a less-prevalent primary headache disorder but is overrepresented with regards to use of health care and social services. More insight into the socioeconomic impact is required.

Methods

We investigated both the personal and societal disease burden and cost in 400 patients with well-classified cluster headache according to the ICHD-criteria and 200 sex- and age matched controls. All participants completed a cross sectional questionnaire and semi-structured interview.

Results

Patients with chronic cluster headache constituted 146 out of 400 (37%). Overall, restriction in personal and/or professional life was reported by 94% of patients during attack periods. Even in remission, nine times as many episodic patients rated their health as poor/very poor compared to controls (9% vs 1%, p = 0.002). For chronic patients, the odds of rating health as good/very good were ten times lower compared to controls (OR:10.10, 95%CI:5.29–18.79. p < 0.001) and three times lower compared to episodic patients in remission (OR:3.22, 95%CI:1.90–5.47, p < 0.001). Additionally, chronic cluster headache patients were 5 times more likely to receive disability pension compared to episodic (OR:5.0, 95%CI:2.3–10.9, p < 0.001). The mean direct annual costs amounted to 9,158€ and 2,763€ for chronic and episodic patients, respectively (p < 0.001). We identified a substantial loss of productivity due to absence from work resulting in a higher indirect cost of 11,809 €/year/patient in the chronic population and 3,558 €/year/patient in the episodic population. Presenteeism could not be quantified but productivity was reduced in patients by 65% in periods with attacks compared to controls.

Conclusion

Cluster headache has a major negative impact on personal life, self-perceived health, and societal cost. Patients with the chronic variant are vastly more burdened. Patients with the episodic form were still markedly affected during the remission period. This study highlights the need for more effective therapy to lighten the burden on patients and society.

Patient-identified burden and unmet needs in patients with cluster headache: An evidence-based qualitative literature review

Objectives:

To qualitatively identify evidence-based literature related to the daily burden and unmet treatment and psychosocial needs of patients with cluster headache (CH).

Methods:

A literature search was conducted through October 20, 2020 across MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsychInfo databases exploring quality of life (QoL) and disease burden in adults with CH. The search was restricted to full-text reports in peer-reviewed journals. Methodologic quality was assessed using the Critical Skills Appraisal Program.

Results:

From 11 identified publications, QoL was reduced in persons living with CH, with significant psychological, social, and socio-economic burdens, and work-related disability. The CH disease trajectory is complex, with patients experiencing the impact of their disease across multiple domains beyond the biological manifestation of the disease including stigma, employment limitations, and suicidal ideation, and with a lack of effective treatment from the patient perspective.

Discussion:

These findings strengthen comprehension of the CH patient experience, enabling a deeper understanding of the patients’ perspective and experience of their disease andunmet needs, providing a basis for future research into this debilitating condition. Minor limitations of this study include data extraction and study selection biases.

Cluster headache pathophysiology: What we have learned from advanced neuroimaging

Background

Although remarkable progress has been achieved in understanding cluster headache (CH) pathophysiology, there are still several gaps about the mechanisms through which independent subcortical and cortical brain structures interact with each other. These gaps could be partially elucidated by structural and functional advanced neuroimaging investigations.

Objective

Although we are aware that substantial achievements have come from preclinical, neurophysiological, and biochemical experiments, the present narrative review aims to summarize the most significant findings from structural, microstructural, and functional neuroimaging investigations, as well as the consequent progresses in understanding CH pathophysiological mechanisms, to achieve a comprehensive and unifying model.

Results

Advanced neuroimaging techniques have contributed to overcoming the peripheral hypothesis that CH is of cavernous sinus pathology, in transitioning from the pure vascular hypothesis to a more comprehensive trigeminovascular model, and, above all, in clarifying the role of the hypothalamus and its connections in the genesis of CH.

Conclusion

Altogether, neuroimaging findings strongly suggest that, beyond the theoretical model of the “pain matrix,” the model of the “neurolimbic pain network” that is accepted in migraine research could also be extended to CH. Indeed, although the hypothalamus’ role is undeniable, the genesis of CH attacks is complex and seems to not be just the result of a single “generator.” Cortical‐hypothalamic‐brainstem functional interconnections that can switch between out‐of‐bout and in‐bout periods, igniting the trigeminovascular system (probably by means of top‐down mechanisms) and the consensual trigeminal autonomic reflexes, may represent the “neuronal background” of CH.

Challenges and complexities in designing cluster headache prevention clinical trials: A narrative review

Objective

To provide a review of challenges in clinical trials for the preventive treatment of cluster headache (CH) and highlight considerations for future studies.

Background

Current guidelines for preventive treatment of CH are largely based on off‐label therapies supported by a limited number of small randomized controlled trials. Guidelines for clinical trial design for CH treatments from the International Headache Society were last issued in 1995.

Methods/Results

Randomized controlled clinical trials were identified in the European and/or United States clinical trial registries with a search term of “cluster headache,” and manually reviewed. Cumulatively, there were 27 unique placebo‐controlled prevention trials for episodic and/or chronic CH, of which 12 were either ongoing, not yet recruiting, or the status was unknown. Of the remaining 15 trials, 5 were terminated early and 7 of the 10 completed trials enrolled fewer patients than planned or did not report the planned sample size. A systematic search of PubMed was also utilized to identify published manuscripts reporting results from placebo‐controlled preventive trials of CH. This search yielded 16 publications, of which 7 were registered. Through critical review of trial data and published manuscripts, challenges and complexities encountered in clinical trials for the preventive treatment of CH were identified. For example, the excruciating pain associated with CH demands a suitably limited baseline duration, rapid treatment efficacy onset, and poses a specific issue regarding duration of investigational treatment period and length of exposure to placebo. In episodic CH, spontaneous remission as part of natural history, and the unpredictability and irregularity of cluster periods across patients present additional key challenges.

Conclusions

Optimal CH trial design should balance sound methodology to demonstrate efficacy of a potential treatment with patient needs and the natural history of the disease, including unique outcome measures and endpoint timings for chronic versus episodic CH.

Cluster Headache Impact Questionnaire (CHIQ) - a short measure of cluster headache related disability

BACKGROUND

Cluster headache (CH) is a severe, highly disabling primary headache disorder. However, there is little research on CH-related disability, and most of it is based on non CH-specific questionnaires. The aim of this study was to develop a short, CH-specific disability questionnaire.

METHODS

The 8-item Cluster Headache Impact Questionnaire (CHIQ) was developed based on a literature review and patient and expert interviews. The questionnaire was tested in 254 CH patients (171 males; 47.5 ± 11.4 years; 111 chronic CH, 85 active episodic CH, 52 episodic CH in remission) from our tertiary headache center or from a German support group.

RESULTS

Reliability and validity of the CHIQ was evaluated in active episodic and chronic CH patients (n = 196). Internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.88) and test-retest reliability (ICC 0.91, n = 41) were good. Factor analysis identified a single factor. Convergent validity was shown by significant correlations with the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6, r = 0.58, p < 0.001), subscales of the depression, anxiety and stress scales (DASS, r = 0.46-0.62; p < 0.001) and with CH attack frequency (r = 0.41; p < 0.001). CHIQ scores significantly differentiated between chronic CH (25.8 ± 6.5), active episodic CH (23.3 ± 6.9) and episodic CH patients in remission (13.6 ± 11.9, p < 0.05 for all 3 comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

The CHIQ is a short, reliable, valid, and easy to administer measure of CH-related disability, which makes it a useful tool for clinical use and research.

A retrospective cohort study of clinical factors, visit patterns, and demographic factors associated with use of remote communications in patients with headache

OBJECTIVE

To identify the characteristics associated with high utilization of remote communications (RCs) in patients with headache.

BACKGROUND

Patients with headache frequently communicate with their providers using secure portal messaging and telephone calls. However, clinical and demographic factors as well as visit patterns associated with RC utilization remain poorly characterized.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with headache who were evaluated in the ambulatory neurology faculty practice at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York between January 1 and June 30, 2019. We extracted clinical and demographic characteristics, total office visits, secure MyChart portal messages, and telephone encounters from our institutional data warehouse. We defined high RC and MyChart utilization as the top tertile of RC and MyChart message volume, respectively, and assessed the relationship between patient characteristics and high RC (primary outcome), as well as high MyChart utilization (secondary outcome). We characterized the relationship between clinicodemographic characteristics and the ratio of MyChart messages to total RCs (secondary outcome).

RESULTS

We identified 1390 patients, of whom 477 (34.3%) were high RC utilizers and 321 (23.1%) were high MyChart utilizers. High RC utilizers generated 3306/3921 (84.3%) RCs. The presence of chronic headache (aOR 2.31, 95% CI 1.75-3.03, p < 0.0001), cluster headache (aOR 18.3, 95% CI 5.0-71.7, p = 0.001), and migraine (aOR 3.82, 95% CI 1.93-9.3, p = 0.011) was associated with high RC utilization. Patients ≥65 years of age were less likely to engage in MyChart messaging as a proportion of RC (191/680, 28.1%) compared with patients 18-30 years of age (243/620, 39.2%, p = 0.049) and 30-64 years of age (1172/2721, 43.1%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

A minority of patients with headache (477/1390; 34.3%) generated the majority (3306/3921; 84.3%) of RCs. Our findings should be validated in external patient cohorts with the objective of developing strategies to optimize RC utilization.

Cluster Headache: Clinical Characteristics and Opportunities to Enhance Quality of Life

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cluster headache is a highly disabling primary headache disorder characterized by severe pain and autonomic features. We present the existing body of literature on psychological factors associated with cluster headache and recommendations to address gaps in current clinical care with regards to psychological treatments for cluster headache.

RECENT FINDINGS

People with cluster headache often endorse depressive symptoms, are more likely than the general population to report suicidal ideation and behaviors, and experience significantly decreased quality of life. Psychological treatments such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy may be particularly valuable for patients with cluster headache given that they are transdiagnostic in nature and can therefore simultaneously address the disease burden and common psychiatric comorbidities that present. Greater understanding of the debilitating nature of cluster headache and behavioral interventions that seek to reduce the burden of the disease and improve the quality of life of people with cluster headache is paramount.

Temporary resolution of hemicrania continua following ipsilateral ear piercing

Background

Hemicrania continua is an uncommon subtype of trigeminal autonomic cephalgia that exhibits dramatic therapeutic response to indomethacin. Unfortunately, indomethacin is associated with a range of adverse effects, including neuropsychiatric complications, which limits its use in many patients. Although no other effective pharmacologic agents exist, there is emerging evidence for interventional treatments such as occipital nerve and vagus nerve stimulation, which may act by modulating neural activity within the trigeminovascular system.

Case

We present a 30-year-old woman with long-standing refractory hemicrania continua who suffered adverse effects to indomethacin. She experienced temporary, but near-complete, symptom resolution following piercing of the crus of the ear helix ipsilateral to her headache, whereas contralateral piercing produced no benefit.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this case is the first to describe a therapeutic benefit following ear piercing in a patient with trigeminal autonomic cephalgia. We argue that symptom relief was obtained through a similar mechanism to occipital or vagus nerve stimulation.

The impact of the disease burden on the quality of life of cluster headache patients

Background:

Cluster headache cannot be cured, and not all attacks can be aborted or prevented. Nevertheless, therapeutic guidelines focus solely on the attacks and ignore reverberations of the disorder on patients’ lives. However, it is likely that not only pain reduces patients’ quality of life (QoL).

Objective:

To investigate whether the interictal burden independently influence the QoL of subjects suffering from cluster headache.

Methods:

In this cross-sectional study, we asked patients with a self-reported cluster headache diagnosis to answer a modified EUROLIGHT questionnaire that included the EURO-HIS QoL scale. We built a generalised linear model and included the QoL as the dependent variable. Independent variables comprised both the ictal and the interictal burden.

Results:

The data of 625 participants entered the analysis. Several aspects of the interictal burden independently reduced the QoL. Among them were fear of pain, self-concealment, and private life difficulties due to the disorder.

Conclusion:

Both the ictal and the interictal burden of cluster headache independently reduce patients’ QoL. We advocate adopting a more holistic approach to cluster headache management extending the focus towards the afflicted person and their QoL, which would generate novel therapeutic goals and strategies, complementary to treating and preventing cluster headache attacks.

Noninvasive Neuromodulation in Headache: An Update

Background

Migraine is a common disabling primary headache condition. Although strives have been made in treatment, there remains an unmet need for safe, effective acute, and preventative treatments. The promising concept of neuromodulation of relevant neuronal targets in a noninvasive fashion for the treatment of primary headache disorders has led to the trial of numerous devices over the years.

Objective

We aimed to review the evidence on current neuromodulation treatments available for the management of primary headache disorders.

Methods

Randomized controlled trial as well as open-label and real-world studies on central and peripheral cephalic and noncephalic neuromodulation modalities in primary headaches were critically reviewed.

Results

The current evidence suggests a role of single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, supraorbital nerve stimulation, and remote noncephalic electrical stimulation as migraine abortive treatments, with stronger evidence in episodic rather than in chronic migraine. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation and supraorbital nerve stimulation also hold promising evidence in episodic migraine prevention and initial positive evidence in chronic migraine prevention. More evidence should clarify the therapeutic role of the external vagus nerve stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation in migraine. However, external vagus nerve stimulation may be effective in the acute treatment of episodic but not chronic cluster headache, in the prevention of hemicrania continua and paroxysmal hemicrania but not of short-lasting neuralgiform headache attacks. The difficulty in setting up sham-controlled studies has thus far prevented the publication of robust trials. This limitation along with the cost of these therapies has meant that their use is limited in most countries.

Conclusion

Neuromodulation is a promising nonpharmacological treatment approach for primary headaches. More studies with appropriate blinding strategies and reduction of device cost may allow more widespread approval of these treatments and in turn increase clinician's experience in neuromodulation.

Cluster Headache: What's New?

Background

Cluster headache is a highly disabling primary headache disorder which is widely described as the most painful condition a human can experience.

Aim

To provide an overview of the clinical characteristics, epidemiology, risk factors, differential diagnosis, pathophysiology and treatment options of cluster headache, with a focus on recent developments in the field.

Methods

Structured review of the literature on cluster headache.

Results

Cluster headache affects approximately one in 1000 of the population. It is characterised by attacks of severe unilateral head pain associated with ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms, and the tendency for attacks to occur with circadian and circannual periodicity. The pathophysiology of cluster headache and other primary headache disorders has recently become better understood and is thought to involve the hypothalamus and trigeminovascular system. There is good quality evidence for acute treatment of attacks with parenteral triptans and high flow oxygen; preventive treatment with verapamil; and transitional treatment with oral corticosteroids or greater occipital nerve injection. New pharmacological and neuromodulation therapies have recently been developed.

Conclusion

Cluster headache causes distinctive symptoms, which once they are recognised can usually be managed with a variety of established treatments. Recent pathophysiological understanding has led to the development of newer pharmacological and neuromodulation therapies, which may soon become established in clinical practice.

The sensitivity to change of the cluster headache quality of life scale assessed before and after deep brain stimulation of the ventral tegmental area

Background

Cluster headache (CH) is a trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia (TAC) characterized by a highly disabling headache that negatively impacts quality of life and causes limitations in daily functioning as well as social functioning and family life. Since specific measures to assess the quality of life (QoL) in TACs are lacking, we recently developed and validated the cluster headache quality of life scale (CH-QoL). The sensitivity of CH-QoL to change after a medical intervention has not been evaluated yet.

Methods

This study aimed to test the sensitivity to change of the CH-QoL in CH. Specifically we aimed to (i) assess the sensitivity of CH-QoL to change before and following deep brain stimulation of the ventral tegmental area (VTA-DBS), (ii) evaluate the relationship of changes on CH-QoL with changes in other generic measures of quality of life, as well as indices of mood and pain. Ten consecutive CH patients completed the CH-QoL and underwent neuropsychological assessment before and after VTA-DBS. The patients were evaluated on headache frequency, severity, and load (HAL) as well as on tests of generic quality of life (Short Form-36 (SF-36)), mood (Beck Depression Inventory, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale), and pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire, Headache Impact Test, Pain Behaviour Checklist).

Results

The CH-QoL total score was significantly reduced after compared to before VTA-DBS. Changes in the CH-QoL total score correlated significantly and negatively with changes in HAL, the SF-36, and positively and significantly with depression and the evaluative domain on the McGill Pain Questionnaire.

Conclusions

Our findings demonstrate that changes after VTA-DBS in CH-QoL total scores are associated with the reduction of frequency, duration, and severity of headache attacks after surgery. Moreover, post VTA-DBS improvement in CH-QoL scores is associated with an amelioration in quality of life assessed with generic measures, a reduction of depressive symptoms, and evaluative pain experience after VTA-DBS. These results support the sensitivity to change of the CH-QoL and further demonstrate the validity and applicability of CH-QoL as a disease specific measure of quality of life for CH.

Cluster Headache and Other Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are relatively rare, but they represent a distinct set of syndromes that are important to recognize. Despite their unique features, TACs often go undiagnosed or misdiagnosed for several years, leading to unnecessary pain and suffering. A significant proportion of TAC presentations may have secondary causes.

RECENT FINDINGS

The underlying pathophysiology of TACs is likely rooted in hypothalamic dysfunction and derangements in the interplay of circuitry involving trigeminovascular, trigeminocervical, trigeminoautonomic, circadian, and nociceptive systems. Recent therapeutic advancements include a better understanding of how to use older therapies more effectively and the identification of new approaches.

SUMMARY

TAC syndromes are rare but important to recognize because of their debilitating nature and greater likelihood for having potentially serious underlying causes. Although treatment options have remained somewhat limited, scientific inquiry is continually advancing our understanding of these syndromes and how best to manage them.

Cluster headache, beyond the pain: a comparative cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the presence of allodynia, pain catastrophizing, and the impact of headaches on patients with cluster headache (CH) and healthy individuals. Our second aim was to analyze the relationship between catastrophism, psychological comorbidities, and the impact in CH.

METHODS

We designed this cross-sectional study to compare various factors among 47 patients diagnosed with CH and 40 healthy controls, and then focus on catastrophism, anxiety, depression, and impact in the CH group.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences between CH and the asymptomatic group in Allodynia Symptom Checklist (ASC) (p < 0.001), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (p < 0.001), and HIT-6 (p < 0.001) scores. We found a correlation among ASC, PCS, anxiety-depression, EuroQoL, and HIT-6 for the CH group. In this group, we observed a strong positive correlation between PCS and anxiety (rho = 0.69; p < 0.001), PCS and depression (rho = 0.62; p < 0.001) and depression and EuroQoL (rho = - 0.68; p < 0.001). The regression model showed that the combination of anxiety and HIT-6 was a significant predictor of PCS (adjusted R² = 0.52).

DISCUSSION

Our findings reveal significant differences regarding allodynia, pain catastrophism, and impact in CH group compared with controls. We found a significant relationship between psychological comorbidity, pain catastrophism, and quality of life in CH patients. Anxiety and HIT-6 were a predictor (adjusted R² = 52%) of pain catastrophism. Screening for these comorbidities should be implemented through a multidisciplinary approach.

Mapping Assessments Instruments for Headache Disorders against the ICF Biopsychosocial Model of Health and Disability

Headache disorders have a strong impact on sufferers’ lives. However, the “content” of assessment instruments addressing concepts, such as disability and quality of life (QoL), has not comprehensively been addressed. We searched SCOPUS for research papers in which outcome measures were used in adult populations of patients with migraine, tension-type headache (TTH), and cluster headache (CH). The content of single instruments was then mapped against the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. A total of 150 papers and 26 instruments were included: 15 addressed disability or impact, two addressed work-related difficulties, and nine addressed QoL. Few instruments were commonly used across the conditions and covered domains of functioning were impact on daily life activities, homework, school, and work-related tasks, leisure time, informal and family relations, pain, emotional difficulties, energy level, and impulse control. Most of the research is based on instruments that were developed for migraine, which is critical for CH, and the impact of headache disorders on work-related activities is poorly acknowledged. Further research is needed to expand the scope of headaches impact on daily life activities, and on environmental factors relevant to headache disorders to raise knowledge on the less represented areas, e.g., TTH impact.

Drug profile: galcanezumab for prevention of cluster headache

Introduction: Cluster headache [CH] is a severely disabling trigeminal autonomic cephalalgia [TAC]. Approximately 1 in 1,000 adults are affected by CH. Calcitonin gene-related peptide [CGRP] is an important mediator in the pathophysiology of CH. Galcanezumab is a monoclonal antibody with an affinity for the CGRP peptide, FDA approved for the prevention of episodic CH. Areas covered: Search words queried were 'cluster headache,' 'cluster headache, and CGRP,' 'cluster headache, and galcanezumab.' Over 99 articles in Pubmed and prescribing information for galcanezumab were reviewed. Some of the data pertaining to CH trials with fremanezumab were reviewed using clinical trials.org. Expert opinion: Galcanezumab has shown benefit in decreasing the weekly frequency of CH attacks across week 1 through week 3 in patients with CH; 8.7 attacks in the galcanezumab group, as compared with 5.2 in the placebo group (95% confidence interval, 0.2 to 6.7; P = 0.04). It has a favorable risk-benefit ratio. The prevention of CH with CGRP inhibition represents a novel advance for a condition with a significant unmet need. The negative trial results of galcanezumab for chronic cluster headache [CCH] may be due to the refractory nature and sheds light on the critical need to investigate the underlying biology and therapeutic options.

Meta-analysis of melatonin levels in cluster headache-Review of clinical implications

Cluster headache (CH) has been associated with circadian disturbances. The present systematic review examined available evidence for the utilization of melatonin (MT) in CH prophylaxis. First, case-control studies assessing nocturnal MT or its urine-expelled metabolite 6-sulfatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) in CH individuals and healthy controls (HC) were reviewed and meta-analyzed. Secondly, the results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies evaluating MT's use in the prevention of CH were discussed. Literature search included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, trial registries, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey. Bouts and remissions were assessed separately. Ten case-control studies (adult participants) were retrieved. Seven evaluated serum MT; meta-analysis involved only three of them (due to deficient reporting, n: bout = 31, remission = 38, HC = 31). Results were compatible with lower nocturnal serum MT levels during bouts [bout-HC; FE-MD = -29.89 pg/mL, 95% CI = (-46.00, -13.78), remission-HC; FE-MD = -2.40 pg/mL, 95% CI = (-16.57, 21.38), bout-remission; RE-MD = -32.10 pg/mL, 95% CI = (-56.78, -7.42)]. Nocturnal urinary melatonin was appraised in two studies, but reporting issues impeded the capitalization of the results. Nocturnal urine aMT6s was evaluated by two studies (n: bout = 29, remission = 22, HC = 20), and pooled results were indicative of lower aMT6s concentration in CH individuals during both active and inactive periods [bout-HC; FE-MD = -9.63 μg/nocturnal urine collection, 95% CI = (-14.40, -4.85), remission-HC; FE-MD = -9.12 μg/nocturnal urine collection, 95% CI = (-14.63,-3.62), bout-remission; FE-MD = -0.58 μg/nocturnal urine collection, 95% CI = (-4.58, 3.42)]. Regarding CH prophylaxis, one RCT and two non-randomized trials were retrieved, involving a total of 41 adult CH individuals (11-episodic, 31-chronic) and rendering the deduction of any conclusions precarious. Overall, available data for the role use of MT in CH are insufficient and inconclusive. Complementary studies evaluating endogenous MT concentrations and MT administration to patients with CH are warranted.

Effect of calcitonin gene-related peptide (-receptor) antibodies in chronic cluster headache: Results from a retrospective case series support individual treatment attempts

Objective

To assess the efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor in chronic cluster headache (CCH) treatment under real world conditions.

Background

Calcitonin gene-related peptide has an important pathophysiological role in cluster headache. Although the randomised controlled trial with the calcitonin gene-related peptide antibody galcanezumab was negative, chronic cluster headache patients with insufficient response to other preventive treatments have been receiving individual off-label treatment attempts with calcitonin gene-related peptide-(receptor) antibodies.

Methods

Data from 22 chronic cluster headache patients who received at least one dose of a calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor) antibody and recorded attack frequency in a headache diary were retrospectively collected at eight headache centres.

Results

The number of previous preventive therapies was 6.5 ± 2.4 (mean ± standard deviation, range: 2–11). The average number of attacks per week was 23.3 ± 16.4 at baseline and significantly decreased by −9.2 ± 9.7 in the first month of treatment with a calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor) antibody (p < 0.001). Fifty-five percent of the patients were 50% responders and 36% were 75% responders with respect to attack frequency. Significant reduction of attack frequency started at week 1 (−6.8 ± 2.8 attacks, p < 0.01). Results were corroborated by significant decreases in weekly uses of acute headache medication (−9.8 ± 7.6, p < 0.001) and pain intensity during attacks (−1.2 ± 2.0, numerical rating scale (NRS) [0–10], p < 0.01) in the first month. In months 2 (n = 14) and 3 (n = 10), reduction of attack frequency from baseline was −8.0 ± 8.4 (p = 0.004) and −9.1 ± 10.0 (p = 0.024), respectively.

Conclusion

Under real-world conditions, individual treatment with calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor) antibodies was effective in 55% of our chronic cluster headache patients. This finding supports individual off-label treatment attempts with calcitonin gene-related peptide-(receptor) antibodies in chronic cluster headache patients insufficiently responding to other therapies.