Exploring the effects of extracranial injections of botulinum toxin type A on prolonged intracranial meningeal nociceptors responses to cortical spreading depression in female rats

Synergism of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies and OnabotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Chronic Migraine: A Real-World Retrospective Chart Review

BACKGROUND

Many patients with chronic migraine do not achieve clinically meaningful improvement in their headache frequency with monotherapy. The burden associated with chronic migraine calls for a multifaceted treatment approach targeting multiple aspects of migraine pathophysiology.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of concurrent anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb) and onabotulinumtoxinA (onabot) treatment on median monthly migraine days (MMD) in patients with chronic migraine, through a retrospective study.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of Cleveland Clinic patients either concurrently (dual therapy) or consecutively (monotherapy) treated with anti-CGRP mAbs and onabot between June 2018 and November 2021 were extracted. Only adult patients (≥ 18 years of age) were included in this study. MMDs for 194 concurrently treated (86.6% female and a median [interquartile range] age of 51 [41-61] years) and 229 consecutively treated (88.2% female and median age of 47 [IQR 39-57] years) patients were examined at baseline, after first therapy of either anti-CGRP mAb or onabot, and following dual therapy for 3 consecutive months. The reduction of MMDs for each treatment group were compared. The same approach was utilized to compare consecutive monotherapy at separate times (n = 229) and dual-therapy groups.

RESULTS

The initial treatment of the dual-therapy group reduced the median (IQR) MMDs from 30 (30-30) to 15 (12-30) [p < 0.0001]. After initiation of dual therapy, the median MMDs was further decreased from 15 (12-30) to 8 (3-22) [p < 0.0001]. A majority [132/194 (68.0%)] of the dual-therapy patients reported a ≥ 50% reduction in MMD and 90/194 (46.4%) reported a ≥ 75% reduction. For the consecutive monotherapy group, median MMDs changed from a baseline of 30 (25-30) to 15 (8-25) from onabot monotherapy and decreased from 25 (15-30) to 12 (4-25) after anti-CGRP mAb monotherapy. Almost half (113/229 [49.3%] from onabot, and 104/229 [45.4%] from anti-CGRP mAb) of these patients achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in MMDs and a minority (38/229 [16.6%] from onabot, and 45/229 [19.7%] from anti-CGRP mAb) achieved a reduction of ≥ 75%. Additionally, dual therapy showed significant improvement in MMDs compared with monotherapy of either treatment (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Dual therapy of anti-CGRP mAbs and onabot may be more efficacious than monotherapy, possibly due to their synergistic mechanisms of action.

CGRP-targeted medication in chronic migraine - systematic review

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.

Onabotulinumtoxin-A: Previous Prophylactic Treatment Might Improve Subsequent Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies Response in Patients with Chronic Migraine

The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether previous preventive treatment with onabotulinumtoxin-A might influence subsequent clinical response following a switch to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). The present retrospective study was conducted at the Headache Centre-Neurology Clinic at the Spedali Civili Hospital of Brescia between November 2018 and May 2023. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcome (monthly headache days (MHDs), monthly migraine days (MMDs), mean analgesics consumption, and clinical disability according to Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS)) following three months (T3) of preventive treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs comparing patients who did and those who did not previously receive treatment with Onabotulinumtoxin-A. Moreover, we aimed to evaluate whether the clinical response to anti-CGRP mAbs was affected by the number of previous Onabotulinumtoxin-A administrations. At T3, compared to Onabotulinumtoxin-A naïve patients, patients who previously received Onabotulinumtoxin-A documented fewer MMDs (3.3 ± 3.7 versus 5.2 ± 5.0; p = 0.017) and a lower MIDAS score (23.2 ± 20.9 versus 37.4 ± 39.6; p = 0.013). Patients who received at least 3 onabotulinumtoxin-A administrations documented, at T3, lower MMDs compared to those who received fewer cycles (respectively, 2.1 ± 2.7 vs. 6.5 ± 4.4; p = 0.024). In conclusion, according to our data, previous treatment with onabotulinumtoxin-A might improve subsequent response to anti-CGRP mAbs preventive treatment.

Multimodal Migraine Management and the Pursuit of Migraine Freedom: A Narrative Review

Migraine is a neurologic disease with a complex pathophysiology that can be controlled with current treatment options but not cured. Therefore, treatment expectations are highly variable. The concept of migraine freedom was recently introduced and can mean different things, with some, for example, expecting complete freedom from headache and associated symptoms and others accepting the occasional migraine attack if it does not impact functioning. Therefore, migraine management should be optimized so that patients can have the best opportunity to achieve their optimal treatment goals. With migraine freedom as a goal and, given the complex pathophysiology of migraine and the high incidence of comorbidities among individuals with migraine, treatment with a single modality may be insufficient, as it may not achieve migraine freedom in those with more frequent or disabling attacks. In this clinical perspective article, we have identified four key, partially overlapping principles of multimodal migraine treatment: (1) manage common comorbidities; (2) control modifiable risk factors for progression by addressing medication and caffeine overuse; (3) diagnose and treat secondary causes of headache, if present; and (4) individualize acute and preventive treatments to minimize pain, functional disability, and allodynia. There are many barriers to pursuing migraine freedom, and strategies to overcome them should be optimized. Migraine freedom should be an aspirational goal both at the individual attack level and for the disease overall. We believe that a comprehensive and multimodal approach that addresses all barriers people with migraine face could move patients closer to migraine freedom.

Mode and site of action of therapies targeting CGRP signaling

Targeting CGRP has proved to be efficacious, tolerable, and safe to treat migraine; however, many patients with migraine do not benefit from drugs that antagonize the CGRPergic system. Therefore, this review focuses on summarizing the general pharmacology of the different types of treatments currently available, which target directly or indirectly the CGRP receptor or its ligand. Moreover, the latest evidence regarding the selectivity and site of action of CGRP small molecule antagonists (gepants) and monoclonal antibodies is critically discussed. Finally, the reasons behind non-responders to anti-CGRP drugs and rationale for combining and/or switching between these therapies are addressed.

Botox (onabotulinumtoxinA) mechanism of action

Studies in the 1920s found that botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT/A) inhibited the activity of motor and parasympathetic nerve endings, confirmed several decades later to be due to decreased acetylcholine release. The 1970s were marked by studies of cellular mechanisms aided by use of neutralizing antibodies as pharmacologic tools: BoNT/A disappeared from accessibility to neutralizing antibodies within minutes, although it took several hours for onset of muscle weakness. The multi-step mechanism was experimentally confirmed and is now recognized to consist broadly of binding to nerve terminals, internalization, and lysis or cleavage of a protein (SNAP-25: synaptosomal associated protein-25 kDa) that is part of the SNARE (Soluble NSF Attachment protein REceptor) complex needed for synaptic vesicle docking and fusion. Clinical use of the BoNT/A product onabotulinumtoxinA was based on its ability to reduce muscle contractions via inhibition of acetylcholine from motor terminals. Sensory mechanisms of onabotulinumtoxinA have now been identified, supporting its successful treatment of chronic migraine and urgency in overactive bladder. Exploration into migraine mechanisms led to anatomical studies documenting pain fibers that send axons through sutures of the skull to outside the head-a potential route by which extracranial injections could affect intracranial processes. Several clinical studies have also identified benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA in major depression, which have been attributed to central responses induced by feedback from facial muscle and skin movement. Overall, the history of BoNT/A is distinguished by basic science studies that stimulated clinical use and, conversely, clinical observations that spurred basic research into novel mechanisms of action.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies for migraine

The introduction of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies represents a step forward in preventive migraine treatment as the first agents to target the underlying pathogenesis of migraine. In trials they act more quickly, have better long-term adherence and appear to be better tolerated than other treatments. Major disadvantages are their high cost and unknown safety in pregnancy and in cardiovascular disease. To mitigate these concerns, they should be used according to guidance produced by professional bodies, with defined starting and stopping criteria. We do not yet know whether they are more effective than standard care; many patients may still be better treated by other means, in particular addressing lifestyle factors and medication-overuse headache.

OnabotulinumtoxinA: Still the Present for Chronic Migraine

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) is one of the few drugs approved for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM). Despite this, some aspects of its mechanism of action are still a matter of debate, and the precise magnitude of BT-A effects needs to be completely elucidated. BT-A acts primarily upon trigeminal and cervical nerve endings, by inhibiting the release of inflammatory mediators such as calcitonin gene-related peptide, as well as reducing the insertion of ionotropic and metabotropic receptors into the neuronal membrane. These actions increase the depolarization threshold of trigeminal and cervical nerve fibers, thus reducing their activation. The central actions of BT-A are still a matter of debate: a retrograde axonal transport has been postulated, but not clearly assessed in humans. Clinically, the efficacy of BT-A in CM has been assessed by large, randomized placebo-controlled trials, such as the Phase 3 REsearch Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) trials. Those results were also confirmed in a wide range of open-label studies, even for long-term periods. Recently, novel findings have led to a better understanding of its pharmacological actions and clinical usefulness in migraine prevention. This narrative review summarizes, updates and critically revises the available data on BT-A and its possible implementation in chronic migraine. Moreover, the current role of BT-A in CM treatment has been discussed.

Dual therapy with Erenumab and onabotulinumtoxinA: No synergistic effect in chronic migraine: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether dual therapy with erenumab and onabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) was more effective than erenumab alone in chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is crucial in migraine. Erenumab binds to the canonical CGRP receptor in Aδ-fibers, and BoNTA prevents the release of CGRP from meningeal and extracranial C-fibers. It is still unknown whether dual therapy is more effective.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study in a Headache Unit. There was a thorough revision of charts of patients receiving erenumab from December 2019 to March 2021. The cohort was divided into three groups according to BoNTA at the start of erenumab: (1) WBT: were on BoNTA and maintained it as dual therapy; (2) WoBT: were on BoNTA and discontinued; (3) NoBT: were not on BoNTA. Primary endpoint was reduction in monthly headache days (MHD) at 12 weeks. Secondary endpoints were percent improvement and ≥50% reduction in MHD.

RESULTS

Of 237 charts reviewed, 187 met the inclusion criteria. Seventy-three (39%) were included in WBT, 44 (23.5%) in WoBT, and 70 (37.4%) in NoBT. The reduction in MHD was less with dual therapy [WBT 4.7 ± 7.68, WoBT 5.12 ± 7.98 (p = 0.80), NoBT 8.21 ± 7.84 p = 0.009]. The percentage of improvement was higher in the erenumab-alone group [NoBT 35%, WoBT 22.3% (p = 0.92), WBT 21.7% (p = 0.001)]. The probability of achieving a ≥ 50% reduction in MHD was lower in WBT than in WoBT (OR 0.66, p = 0.35) and in the NoBT group (OR 0.57, p = 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that dual therapy is less effective than erenumab alone. However, since the design has multiple limitations, further prospective studies are required to validate these data.

OnabotulinumtoxinA Add-On to Monoclonal Anti-CGRP Antibodies in Treatment-Refractory Chronic Migraine

We sought to assess the effectiveness of combining dual therapy with onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX) add-on to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP MAbs) in treatment-refractory patients with chronic migraine (CM). We retrospectively reviewed the medical files of 19 treatment-refractory patients with CM who had failed to two oral migraine preventatives, at least three consecutive BTX cycles (less than 30% response rate), at least three consecutive sessions with either fremanezumab or erenumab (less than 30% response rate), and were eventually switched to dual therapy with BTX add-on to any of the already-given anti-CGRP MAbs. We then assessed from baseline to each monotherapy or dual intervention predefined efficacy follow-up the changes in the following efficacy outcomes: (i) monthly headache days (MHD), (ii) monthly days with moderate/severe peak headache intensity, and (iii) monthly days with intake of any acute headache medication. Response (50% reduction in MHD) rates, safety, and tolerability were also determined. In the majority of cases (n = 14), dual targeting proved effective and was associated with clinically meaningful improvement in all efficacy variables; 50% response rates (also disability and QOL outcomes) coupled with favorable safety/tolerability. Our results advocate in favor of the view that dual therapy is effective and should be considered in difficult-to-treat CM patients who have failed all available monotherapies.

The association between onabotulinumtoxinA and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a reliable option for the optimal treatment of chronic migraine

Chronic migraine (CM) is a great challenge for physicians dealing with headaches. Despite the introduction of the monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) acting against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) that has revolutionized the treatment of CM, some patients still experience an incomplete relief. So, the association of two preventive treatments may be a reliable option for these patients. So, onabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) and anti-CGRP mAbs may be used together, and some pre-clinical and clinical evidence of an additive action of the 2 drugs is emerging. In particular, since BT-A acts mainly on C-fibers and anti-CGRP mAbs on Aδ ones, their association may prevent the wearing-off phenomenon of BT-A, thus giving an additional benefit in those patients experiencing an incomplete response to BT-A alone. Despite this, the clinical studies available in the literature have a small sample size, often a retrospective design, and are heterogeneous in terms of the outcomes chosen. Considering this, the evidence of a favorable effect of the association between BT-A and anti-CGRP mAbs is still scarce. Furthermore, this association is explicitly forbidden by many National regulatory agencies, due to the high costs of both treatments. Anyway, their association could help in reducing the burden associated with the most severe cases of CM, thus relieving the direct and indirect costs of this condition. More well-designed studies with big samples are needed to unveil the real therapeutic gain of this association. Moreover, pharmacoeconomics studies should be performed, to assess the economic suitability of this association.

Preclinical assessment of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of mild traumatic brain injury-related acute and persistent post-traumatic headache

Objective

Investigation of onabotulinumtoxinA in a murine model of acute and persistent post-traumatic headache.

Methods

Mild traumatic brain injury was induced with a weight drop method. Periorbital and hindpaw cutaneous allodynia were measured for 14 days. Mice were then exposed to bright light stress and allodynia was reassessed. OnabotulinumtoxinA (0.5 U) was injected subcutaneously over the cranial sutures at different post-injury time points.

Results

After milt traumatic brain injury, mice exhibited periorbital and hindpaw allodynia that lasted for approximately 14 days. Allodynia could be reinstated on days 14–67 by exposure to stress only in previously injured mice. OnabotulinumtoxinA administration at 2 h after mild traumatic brain injury fully blocked both transient acute and stress-induced allodynia up to day 67. When administered 72 h post-mild traumatic brain injury, onabotulinumtoxinA reversed acute allodynia, but only partially prevented stress-induced allodynia. OnabotulinumtoxinA administration at day 12, when initial allodynia was largely resolved, produced incomplete and transient prevention of stress-induced allodynia. The degree of acute allodynia correlated positively with subsequent stress-induced allodynia.

Conclusion

Mild traumatic brain injury induced transient headache-like pain followed by long lasting sensitization and persistent vulnerability to a normally innocuous stress stimulus, respectively modeling acute and persistent post-traumatic headache.. Administration of onabotulinumtoxinA following the resolution of acute post-traumatic headache diminished persistent post-traumatic headache but the effects were transient, suggesting that underlying persistent mild traumatic brain injury-induced maladaptations were not reversed. In contrast, early onabotulinumtoxinA administration fully blocked both acute post-traumatic headache as well as the transition to persistent post-traumatic headache suggesting prevention of neural adaptations that promote vulnerability to headache-like pain. Additionally, the degree of acute post-traumatic headache was predictive of risk of persistent post-traumatic headache.

Real-World Evidence for the Safety and Efficacy of CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment for Migraine Prevention in Adult Patients With Chronic Migraine

Background: OnabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) target different migraine pathways, therefore, combination treatment may provide additional effectiveness for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM) than either treatment alone. The objective of this study was to collect real-world data to improve the understanding of the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of adding a CGRP mAb to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for the preventive treatment of CM. Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal study conducted using data extracted from a single clinical site's electronic medical records (EMR) of adult patients (≥18 years) with CM treated with ≥2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA before ≥1 month of continuous onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAb (erenumab, fremanezumab, or galcanezumab) combination treatment. Safety was evaluated by the rate of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE). The proportion of patients who discontinued either onabotulinumtoxinA, a CGRP mAb, or combination treatment, and the reason for discontinuation, if available, was collected. The effectiveness of combination preventive treatment was assessed by the reduction in monthly headache days (MHD). Outcome data were extracted from EMR at the first CGRP mAb prescription (index) and up to four assessments at ~3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-index. The final analyses were based on measures consistently reported in the EMR. Results: EMR were collected for 192 patients, of which 148 met eligibility criteria and were included for analysis. Erenumab was prescribed to 56.7% of patients, fremanezumab to 42.6%, and galcanezumab to 0.7%. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) MHD were 20.4 (6.6) prior to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment and 14.0 (6.9) prior to the addition of a CGRP mAb (baseline). After real-world addition of a CGRP mAb, there were significant reductions in MHD at the first assessment (~3 months) (mean -2.6 days/month, 95% CI -3.7, -1.4) and at all subsequent visits. After ~12 months of continuous combination treatment, MHD were reduced by 4.6 days/month (95% CI -6.7, -2.5) and 34.9% of patients achieved ≥50% MHD reduction from index. AEs were reported by 18 patients (12.2%), with the most common being constipation (n = 8, 5.4% [onabotulinumtoxinA plus erenumab only]) and injection site reactions (n = 5, 3.4%). No SAEs were reported. Overall, 90 patients (60.8%) discontinued one or both treatments. The most common reason for discontinuing either treatment was lack of insurance coverage (40%); few (~14%) patients discontinued a CGRP mAb and none discontinued onabotulinumtoxinA due to safety/tolerability. Conclusion: In this real-world study, onabotulinumtoxinA was effective at reducing MHD and the addition of a CGRP mAb was safe, well-tolerated and associated with incremental and clinically meaningful reductions in MHD for those who stayed on the combination treatment. No new safety signals were identified. Of those who discontinued, the majority reported lack of insurance coverage as a reason. Prospective real-world and controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the safety and potential benefits of this combination treatment paradigm for people with CM.

OnabotulinumtoxinA alters inflammatory gene expression and immune cells in chronic headache patients

Occipital headache, the perception of pain in the back of the head, is commonly described by patients diagnosed with migraine, tension-type headache, and occipital neuralgia. The greater and lesser occipital nerves play central role in the pathophysiology of occipital headache. In the clinical setup, such headaches are often treated with onabotulinumtoxinA, a neurotoxin capable of disrupting ability of nociceptors to get activated and/or release proinflammatory neuropeptides. Attempting to understand better onabotulinumtoxinA mechanism of action in reducing headache frequency, we sought to determine its effects on expression of inflammatory genes in injected occipital tissues.

To achieve this goal, we injected 40 units of onabotulinumtoxinA into four muscle groups (occipitalis, splenius capitis, semispinalis capitis, and trapezius muscles—all located on one side of the occiput) of patients with chronic bilateral occipital headache scheduled for occipital nerve decompression surgery 1 month later. At the time of surgery, we collected discarded muscle, fascia and periosteum tissues from respective locations on both sides of the neck and occiput and performed targeted transcriptome analyses to determine expression level of inflammatory genes in onabotulinumtoxinA-injected and onabotulinumA-uninjected tissues.

We found that (i) onabotulinumtoxinA alters expression of inflammatory genes largely in periosteum, minimally in muscle and not at all in fascia; (ii) expression of inflammatory genes in uninjected periosteum and muscle is significantly higher in historical onabotulinumA responders than historical non-responders; (iii) in historical responders’ periosteum, onabotulinumA decreases expression of nearly all significantly altered genes, gene sets that define well recognized inflammatory pathways (e.g. pathways involved in adaptive/innate immune response, lymphocyte activation, and cytokine, chemokine, NF-kB, TNF and interferon signalling), and abundance of 12 different immune cell classes (e.g. neutrophils, macrophages, cytotoxic T-, NK-, Th1-, B- and dendritic-cells), whereas in historical non-responders it increases gene expression but to a level that is nearly identical to the level observed in the uninjected periosteum and muscle of historical responders; and surprisingly (iv) that the anti-inflammatory effects of onabotulinumA are far less apparent in muscles and absent in fascia.

These findings suggest that in historical responders’ periosteum—but not muscle or fascia—inflammation contributes to the pathophysiology of occipital headache, and that further consideration should be given to the possibility that onabotulinumA mechanism of action in migraine prevention could also be achieved through its ability to reduce pre-existing inflammation, likely through localized interaction that lead to reduction in abundance of immune cells in the calvarial periosteum.

Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review

INTRODUCTION

Combination use of onabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has the potential to be more effective than either therapy alone for migraine prevention.

METHODS

This retrospective, longitudinal chart review included adults with chronic migraine treated at one clinical site with ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA and ≥ 1 month of subsequent combination treatment with CGRP mAbs. Charts at time of mAb prescription (baseline) and up to four visits ~ 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-baseline were reviewed for safety, tolerability, and outcome measures (monthly headache days [MHDs], headache intensity, and migraine-related disability [MIDAS]).

RESULTS

Of 300 charts reviewed, 257 patients met eligibility criteria (mean age: 50 years; 82% women). Average headache frequency was 21.5 MHDs before initiation of onabotulinumtoxinA and 12.1 MHDs before adding CGRP mAb therapy. Prescribed mAbs were erenumab (78%), fremanezumab (6%), and galcanezumab (16%). Over the entire study, patients discontinued CGRP mAb more frequently than onabotulinumtoxinA (23 vs. 3%). Adverse events occurred in 28% of patients, most commonly constipation (9%). Compared with onabotulinumtoxinA alone (baseline), MHDs decreased significantly at all visits (mean decrease: 3.5-4.0 MHDs over ~ 6-12 months of combination treatment); 45.1% of patients had clinically meaningful improvement in migraine-related disability (≥ 5-point reduction in MIDAS score) after ~ 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, combination treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAbs was well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified, and was associated with additional clinically meaningful benefits. More real-world and controlled trials should be considered to further assess safety and potential benefits of combination treatment. Video abstract: Real-world data suggests that CGRP inhibitors improve onabotulinumtoxinA efficacy for chronic migraine (MP4 20,067 kb).

OnabotulinumtoxinA affects cortical recovery period but not occurrence or propagation of cortical spreading depression in rats with compromised blood-brain barrier

ABSTRACT

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) is an Food and Drug Administration-approved, peripherally acting preventive migraine drug capable of inhibiting meningeal nociceptors. Expanding our view of how else this neurotoxin attenuates the activation of the meningeal nociceptors, we reasoned that if the stimulus that triggers the activation of the nociceptor is lessened, the magnitude and/or duration of the nociceptors' activation could diminish as well. In the current study, we further examine this possibility using electrocorticogram recording techniques, immunohistochemistry, and 2-photon microscopy. We report (1) that scalp (head) but not lumbar (back) injections of BoNT-A shorten the period of profound depression of spontaneous cortical activity that follows a pinprick-induced cortical spreading depression (CSD); (2) that neither scalp nor lumbar injections prevent the induction, occurrence, propagation, or spreading velocity of a single wave of CSD; (3) that cleaved SNAP25-one of the most convincing tools to determine the anatomical targeting of BoNT-A treatment-could easily be detected in pericranial muscles at the injection sites and in nerve fibers of the intracranial dura, but not within any cortical area affected by the CSD; (4) that the absence of cleaved SNAP25 within the cortex and pia is unrelated to whether the blood-brain barrier is intact or compromised; and (5) that BoNT-A does not alter vascular responses to CSD. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of peripherally applied BoNT-A's ability to alter a neuronal function along a central nervous system pathway involved in the pathophysiology of migraine.

Could treatment with botulinum toxin protect against subsequent infection with COVID-19?

We report comparative results, over three months, of the impact of SARS-CoV2 in our patients injected with botulinum toxin for functional purposes, compared to the general population. Botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNT/A) is known to block acetylcholine (ACh) as well as many other neuroreceptors and neuromodulators. The recent mention of a potential protective effect of nicotine in COVID 19, by blocking ACh, attracted our attention and guided the present study.

Our results show a significant difference between the number of infected individuals in the general population and the number of patients injected with BoNT/A who showed signs of COVID 19.

Combined onabotulinumtoxinA/atogepant treatment blocks activation/sensitization of high-threshold and wide-dynamic range neurons

Background

OnabotulinumtoxinA and agents that block calcitonin gene‒receptor peptide action have both been found to have anti-migraine effects, but they inhibit different populations of meningeal nociceptors. We therefore tested the effects of combined treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA and the calcitonin gene‒receptor peptide antagonist atogepant on activation/sensitization of trigeminovascular neurons by cortical spreading depression.

Material and methods

Single-unit recordings were obtained of high-threshold and wide-dynamic-range neurons in the spinal trigeminal nucleus, and cortical spreading depression was then induced in anesthetized rats that had received scalp injections of onabotulinumtoxinA 7 days earlier and intravenous atogepant infusion 1 h earlier. The control group received scalp saline injections and intravenous vehicle infusion.

Results

OnabotulinumtoxinA/atogepant pretreatment prevented cortical spreading depression-induced activation and sensitization in both populations (control: Activation in 80% of high-threshold and 70% of wide-dynamic-range neurons, sensitization in 80% of high-threshold and 60% of wide-dynamic-range neurons; treatment: activation in 10% of high-threshold and 0% of wide-dynamic-range neurons, sensitization in 0% of high-threshold and 5% of wide-dynamic-range neurons).

Discussion

We propose that the robust inhibition of high-threshold and wide-dynamic-range neurons by the combination treatment was achieved through dual blockade of the Aδ and C classes of meningeal nociceptors. Combination therapy that inhibits meningeal C-fibers and prevents calcitonin gene‒receptor peptide from activating its receptors on Aδ-meningeal nociceptors may be more effective than a monotherapy in reducing migraine days per month in patients with chronic migraine.

Activation of Peripheral and Central Trigeminovascular Neurons by Seizure: Implications for Ictal and Postictal Headache

An epileptic seizure can trigger a headache during (ictal) or after (postictal) the termination of the event. Little is known about the pathophysiology of seizure-induced headaches. In the current study, we determined whether a seizure can activate nociceptive pathways that carry pain signals from the meninges to the spinal cord, and if so, to what extent and through which classes of peripheral and central neurons. To achieve these goals, we used single-unit recording techniques and an established animal model of seizure (picrotoxin) to determine the effects of epileptic seizure on the activity of trigeminovascular Aδ-, C-, wide-dynamic range, and high-threshold neurons in male and female rats. Occurrence of seizure activated 54%, 50%, 68%, and 39% of the Aδ-, C-, wide-dynamic range, and high-threshold neurons, respectively. Regardless of their class, activated neurons exhibited a twofold to fourfold increase in their firing, which started immediately (1 min) or up to 90 min after seizure initiation, and lasted as short as 10 min or as long as 120 min. Administration of lidocaine to the dura prevented activation of all neuronal classes but not the initiation or maintenance of the seizure. These findings suggest that all neuronal classes may be involved in the initiation and maintenance of seizure-induced headache, and that their activation patterns can provide a neural substrate for explaining the timing and duration of ictal and possibly postictal headaches. By using seizure, which is evident in humans, this study bypasses controversies associated with cortical spreading depression, which is less readily observed in humans.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This preclinical study provides a neural substrate for ictal and postictal headache. By studying seizure effects on the activity of peripheral (C and Aδ) and central (wide dynamic range and high-threshold) trigeminovascular neurons in intact and anesthetized dura, the findings help resolve two outstanding questions about the pathophysiology of headaches of intracranial origin. The first is that abnormal brain activity (i.e., seizure) that is evident in human (unlike cortical spreading depression) gives rise to specific and selective activation of the different components of the trigeminovascular system, and the second is that the activation of all components of the trigeminovascular pathway (i.e., peripheral and central neurons) depends on activation of the meningeal nociceptors from their receptors in the dura.

Low-dose interleukin-2 reverses behavioral sensitization in multiple mouse models of headache disorders

Headache disorders are highly prevalent and debilitating, with limited treatment options. Previous studies indicate that many proinflammatory immune cells contribute to headache pathophysiology. Given the well-recognized role of regulatory T (Treg) cells in maintaining immune homeostasis, we hypothesized that enhancing Treg function may be effective to treat multiple headache disorders. In a mouse model of chronic migraine, we observed that repeated nitroglycerin (NTG, a reliable trigger of migraine in patients) administration doubled the number of CD3 T cells in the trigeminal ganglia without altering the number of Treg cells, suggesting a deficiency in Treg-mediated immune homeostasis. We treated mice with low-dose interleukin-2 (ld-IL2) to preferentially expand and activate endogenous Treg cells. This not only prevented the development of NTG-induced persistent sensitization but also completely reversed the established facial skin hypersensitivity resulting from repeated NTG administration. The effect of ld-IL2 was independent of mouse sex and/or strain. Importantly, ld-IL2 treatment did not alter basal nociceptive responses, and repeated usage did not induce tolerance. The therapeutic effect of ld-IL2 was abolished by Treg depletion and was recapitulated by Treg adoptive transfer. Furthermore, treating mice with ld-IL2 1 to 7 days after mild traumatic brain injury effectively prevented as well as reversed the development of behaviors related to acute and chronic post-traumatic headache. In a model of medication overuse headache, Ld-IL2 completely reversed the cutaneous hypersensitivity induced by repeated administration of sumatriptan. Collectively, this study identifies ld-IL2 as a promising prophylactic for multiple headache disorders with a mechanism distinct from the existing treatment options.

Dual Therapy With Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies and Botulinum Toxin for Migraine Prevention: Is There a Rationale?

OBJECTIVE

To narratively review the pathophysiological rationale of dual therapy with anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and botulinum toxin type A in treatment-resistant chronic migraine prevention.

BACKGROUND

For the prevention of chronic migraine, several pharmacological therapies are available, including oral medications, botulinum toxin type A, and the newly approved monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor. However, monotherapy does not yield benefits in some affected individuals, which raises the question of whether dual therapy with monoclonal antibodies and botulinum toxin type A hold promise in patients with treatment-resistant chronic migraine.

METHOD

We searched MEDLINE for articles published from database inception to December 31st, 2019. Publications were largely selected from the past 10 years but commonly referenced and highly regarded older publications were not excluded.

RESULTS

Preclinical data suggest that anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and botulinum toxin type A have synergistic effects within the trigeminovascular system. Of note, findings indicate that fremanezumab - an antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide - mainly prevents the activation of Aδ-fibers, whereas botulinum toxin type A prevents the activation of C-fibers.

CONCLUSION

There is currently only indirect preclinical evidence to support a rationale for dual therapy with anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and botulinum toxin type A for chronic migraine prevention. Rigorous studies evaluating clinical efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness are needed.

Modifications to the PREEMPT Protocol for OnabotulinumtoxinA Injections for Chronic Migraine in Clinical Practice

OBJECTIVE

To assess the PREEMPT protocol modifications that have developed in clinical practice over time.

BACKGROUND

The United States Food and Drug Administration approved the 155-unit fixed-dose, fixed-site PREEMPT protocol of onabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) injections for migraine prevention 9 years ago.

METHODS

This is an anonymous survey with free text response options of Headache Medicine clinicians.

RESULTS

Out of the 878 contacted Headache Medicine clinicians, 182 (20.7%) completed the survey. Of the 182 respondents, 141 (77.5%) reported that they did not always follow the PREEMPT protocol. Of the 182 respondents, 128 (70%) changed the number of injections, 115 (63%) changed the total units of BoNT-A injected, 105 (57.7%) altered the location of injection sites (58%); 101 (55.5%) do not aspirate to ensure the absence of blood return; 22 (12.1%) changed the dilution; and 4 (2.2%) added lidocaine. The main reported reasons for changes in number, dose, and location of injections included adapting to the patients' pain, anatomy, and preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

The wide inter- and intra-personal variations in BoNT-A injections for chronic migraine prevention seen in this survey raise concerns about the standardization of the procedure and suggest that an advisory protocol containing more evidence and discussion of the reasoning behind the recommendations might be more helpful than the current prescriptive protocol.

The Use of Botulinum Toxin in the Management of Headache Disorders

Tremendous progress has been made in the past decades for the treatment of headache disorders. Chronic migraine is the most disabling type of headache and requires the use of acute and preventive medications, many of which are associated with adverse events that limit patient adherence. Botulinum toxin (BoNT) serotype A, a neurotoxin derived from certain strains of Clostridium, disrupts neuropeptide secretion and receptor translocation related to trigeminal nociception, thereby preventing pain sensitization through peripheral and possibly central mechanisms. Ever since the first randomized controlled trial on onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) for migraine was published two decades ago, onabotA has been the only BoNT formulation approved for use in the prevention of chronic migraine. Superior tolerability and efficacy have been demonstrated on multiple migraine endpoints in many controlled trials and real-life studies. OnabotA is a safe and efficacious treatment for chronic migraine and possibly high-frequency episodic migraine. Further research is still needed to understand its mechanism of action to fully develop its therapeutic potential.