Effect of single dose Erenumab on cortical responses evoked by cutaneous a-delta fibers: A pilot study in migraine patients

EEG Changes in Migraine-Can EEG Help to Monitor Attack Susceptibility?

Migraine is a highly prevalent brain condition with paroxysmal changes in brain excitability believed to contribute to the initiation of an attack. The attacks and their unpredictability have a major impact on the lives of patients. Clinical management is hampered by a lack of reliable predictors for upcoming attacks, which may help in understanding pathophysiological mechanisms to identify new treatment targets that may be positioned between the acute and preventive possibilities that are currently available. So far, a large range of studies using conventional hospital-based EEG recordings have provided contradictory results, with indications of both cortical hyper- as well as hypo-excitability. These heterogeneous findings may largely be because most studies were cross-sectional in design, providing only a snapshot in time of a patient's brain state without capturing day-to-day fluctuations. The scope of this narrative review is to (i) reflect on current knowledge on EEG changes in the context of migraine, the attack cycle, and underlying pathophysiology; (ii) consider the effects of migraine treatment on EEG features; (iii) outline challenges and opportunities in using EEG for monitoring attack susceptibility; and (iv) discuss future applications of EEG in home-based settings.

Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study to evaluate erenumab-specific central effects: an fMRI study

OBJECTIVE

Given the findings of central effects of erenumab in the literature, we aimed to conduct a rigorous placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study to elucidate whether the observed changes are directly attributable to the drug.

METHODS

We recruited 44 patients with migraine, randomly assigning them to either the erenumab 70 mg or the placebo group. 40 patients underwent fMRI scanning using a trigeminal nociceptive paradigm both, pre- and four weeks post-treatment. Participants kept a headache diary throughout the whole study period of two months in total. A clinical response was defined as a ≥30% reduction in headache frequency at follow-up. Details of this study have been preregistered in the open science framework: https://osf.io/ygf3t .

RESULTS

Seven participants of the verum group (n=33.33%) and 4 of the placebo group (21.05%) experienced improvements in migraine activity, characterized by a minimum of 30% reduction in monthly headache frequency compared to baseline. The imaging data show an interaction between the verum medication and the response. Whilst numbers were too small for individual analyses (Verum vs. Placebo and Responder vs. Non-Responder), the variance-weighted analysis (Verum vs Placebo, scan before vs after weighted for response) revealed specific decrease in thalamic, opercular and putamen activity.

INTERPRETATION

The central effects of erenumab could be reproduced in a placebo randomized design, further confirming its central role in migraine modulation. The mechanism, whether direct or secondary to peripheral mode of action, needs further exploration. It is important to note that the response rate to erenumab 70mg in this study was not as substantial as anticipated in 2019, when this study was planned. This resulted in a too small sample size for a subgroup analysis based on the responder status was associated with both the verum drug and the relative reduction in headache days.

Management of cluster headache: Treatments and their mechanisms

BACKGROUND

The management of cluster headache is similar to that of other primary headache disorders and can be broadly divided into acute and preventive treatments. Acute treatments for cluster headache are primarily delivered via rapid, non-oral routes (such as inhalation, nasal, or subcutaneous) while preventives include a variety of unrelated treatments such as corticosteroids, verapamil, and galcanezumab. Neuromodulation is becoming an increasingly popular option, both non-invasively such as vagus nerve stimulation when medical treatment is contraindicated or side effects are intolerable, and invasively such as occipital nerve stimulation when medical treatment is ineffective. Clinically, this collection of treatment types provides a range of options for the informed clinician. Scientifically, this collection provides important insights into disease mechanisms.

METHODS

Two authors performed independent narrative reviews of the literature on guideline recommendations, clinical trials, real-world data, and mechanistic studies.

RESULTS

Cluster headache is treated with acute treatments, bridge treatments, and preventive treatments. Common first-line treatments include subcutaneous sumatriptan and high-flow oxygen as acute treatments, corticosteroids (oral or suboccipital injections) as bridge treatments, and verapamil as a preventive treatment. Some newer acute (non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation) and preventive (galcanezumab) treatments have excellent clinical trial data for episodic cluster headache, while other newer treatments (occipital nerve stimulation) have been specifically tested in treatment-refractory chronic cluster headache. Most treatments are suspected to act on the trigeminovascular system, the autonomic system, or the hypothalamus.

CONCLUSIONS

The first-line treatments have not changed in recent years, but new treatments have provided additional options for patients.

Galcanezumab treatment changes visual related EEG connectivity patterns in migraine patients

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptides (CGRP) are innovative therapies for migraine treatment. Although they are clinically effective, how anti-CGRP treatment reduces migraine attacks still remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

In this observational case-control study, we aimed to apply graph theory to EEG data from 20 migraine patients and 10 controls to investigate the effects of 3 months of galcanezumab on brain connectivity.

METHODS

We analyzed EEG rhythms during black-white pattern reversal stimulation with 0.5 cycle per degree spatial frequency before (T0) galcanezumab injection, as well as after 3 months (T2). EEG recordings made 1 hour after galcanezumab administration served as the control session (T1). Patients' connectivity patterns obtained at T0, T1 and T2 were compared with normal controls.

RESULTS

We found that galcanezumab increased network integration (with a 5% significance level corrected with the false discovery rate), changing the intensity of connections between the occipital through the frontal areas. At 3 months follow up, patients with persistent high headache intensity had a minor effect on the strength of connections (evaluated using Kendall's rank correlation test and p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The potent anti-nociceptive action that galcanezumab exerts at a peripheral level could restore cortical connections and possibly factors predisposing to attack onset.

Habituation to Pain in Patients with Chronic Pain: Clinical Implications and Future Directions

In this review, the latest insights into habituation to pain in chronic pain are summarized. Using a systematic search, results of studies on the evidence of habituation to (experimental) pain in migraine, chronic low back pain, fibromyalgia, and a variety of chronic pain indications are presented. In migraine, reduced habituation based on self-report and the EEG-based N1 and N2-P2 amplitude is reported, but the presence of contradictory results demands further replication in larger, well-designed studies. Habituation to pain in chronic low back pain seems not to differ from controls, with the exception of EEG measures. In fibromyalgia patients, there is some evidence for reduced habituation of the N2-P2 amplitude. Our analysis shows that the variability between outcomes of studies on habituation to pain is high. As the mechanisms underlying habituation to pain are still not fully understood and likely involve several pathways, it is now too early to conclude that habituation to pain is related to clinical outcomes and can be used as a diagnostic marker. The review ends with a discussion on future directions for research including the use of standard outcome measures to improve comparisons of habituation to pain in patients and controls, as well as a focus on individual differences.

Sumatriptan prevents central sensitisation specifically in the trigeminal dermatome in humans

BACKGROUND

The exact mechanism and site of action of triptans in aborting migraine attacks remain under debate. We hypothesized that the clinical efficacy of triptans lies in aborting central sensitization and focused on the question of why triptans are headache-specific, i.e. highly effective in migraine and cluster headache and ineffective in extracephalic pain.

METHODS

Forty healthy participants were enrolled in this double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study. The effect of sumatriptan (n=20) vs placebo (n=20) was investigated in a cephalic (V1) vs an extracephalic dermatome (forearm) using a topical capsaicin sensitization model. Capsaicin-induced primary and secondary hyperalgesia were evaluated using quantitative sensory testing.

RESULTS

After capsaicin application, primary hyperalgesia developed in both sumatriptan and placebo groups in both dermatomes. However, sumatriptan exclusively prevented secondary hyperalgesia in the V1 dermatome but not on the forearm. Placebo exerted no effects on secondary hyperalgesia in both trigeminal and extracephalic dermatomes. Additionally, sumatriptan reduced the flare size exclusively in the V1 dermatome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that sumatriptan reduces central sensitization (secondary hyperalgesia) without modulating peripheral sensitization (primary hyperalgesia) in a human pain model of capsaicin-induced sensitization. Moreover, despite a systemic administration of sumatriptan, the modulatory effects are trigeminal-specific, echoing the clinical effect of triptans in aborting headaches, but not extracephalic pain.

Effectiveness of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies on central symptoms of migraine

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials and observational studies with anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide antibodies poorly investigated their impact on migraine prodromal and accompanying symptoms. This information might help deciphering the biologics' pharmacodynamic and provide hints on migraine pathogenesis. Herein, we report the effects of erenumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab on attack prodromal and accompanying symptoms and on neurological and psychiatric traits. .

METHODS

An explorative, prospective, questionnaire-based study was completed by a cohort (n = 80) of patients with chronic migraine patients presenting a sustained reduction of ≥50% of Migraine Disability Assessment Score and ≥30% of monthly migraine days three months after anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide antibodies treatment.

RESULTS

The majority of patients experienced a complete prevention of migraine symptoms without evidence of initial onset followed by attack abortion. Few patients reported the recurrence of prodromal (from 10% to 12.5%) or accompanying (from 1.3% to 8.8%) symptoms without headache. All patients with migraine with aura reported a decrease of aura incidence. Sleep changes (51.2%), increase in appetite (20.0%) and weight (18.8%) as well as a reduction in stress (45.0%), anxiety (26.3%), and panic attacks (15%) were also reported.

CONCLUSION

Anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide antibodies seems to significantly impact brain functions of migraineurs, preventing not only migraine headache but also its anticipatory and accompanying symptoms.

The monoclonal CGRP-receptor blocking antibody erenumab has different effects on brainstem and cortical sensory-evoked responses

Objectives

It is unclear whether the electrophysiological effects of erenumab, a monoclonal antibody against the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, occur only at the periphery of the trigeminal system or centrally and at the cortical level.

Methods

We prospectively enrolled 20 patients with migraine who had failed at least two preventative treatments. We measured the nociceptive blink reflex and non-noxious somatosensory evoked potentials in all participants. The area under the curve and habituation of the second polysynaptic nociceptive blink reflex component (R2) as well as the amplitude and habituation of somatosensory evoked potentials N20-P25 were measured. Electrophysiological data were collected at baseline (T0), 28 days (T1), and 56 days (T2) before each injection of erenumab (70 mg).

Results

Erenumab reduced the patients’ mean monthly headache days, headache intensity, and acute medication intake considerably at T1 and T2 (all p < 0.05). The nociceptive blink reflex area under the curve was considerably lower at T1 and T2 than at baseline without changing the habituation slope. At T2, there was a significant increase in the delayed somatosensory evoked potentials amplitude reduction (habituation) but not in the initial cortical activation.

Conclusion

Our findings showed that erenumab, in addition to its well-known peripheral effects, can induce central effects earlier in the brainstem and later in the cortex. We cannot rule out whether these results are due to a direct effect of erenumab on the central nervous system or an indirect effect secondary to peripheral drug modulation.

Central effects of galcanezumab in migraine: a pilot study on Steady State Visual Evoked Potentials and occipital hemodynamic response in migraine patients

BACKGROUND

The discovery of the prominent action of Calcitonin Gene Related Peptide -CGRP- on trigeminal afferents and meningeal vessels, opened a new era in migraine treatment. However, how the block of nociceptive afferents could act on central mechanisms of migraine is still not clear. In this pilot study we aimed to test the effect of 3 months Galcanezumab (CGA) therapy on occipital visual reactivity in migraine patients, using the Steady State Visual Evoked Potentials-SSVEPs and Functional Near Infrared Spectroscopy -fNIRS.

METHOD

Thirteen migraine patients underwent clinical and neurophysiological examination in basal condition (T0), 1 h after GCA injection (T1) and after 3 months of GCA treatment (T2). Ten healthy volunteers were also evaluated.

RESULTS

At T2, there was a reduction of headache frequency and disability. At T2, the EEG power significantly diminished as compared to T0 and T1 at occipital sites, and the topographical analysis confirmed a restoration of SSVEPs within normal values. The Oxyhemoglobin levels in occipital cortex, which were basically increased during visual stimulation in migraine patients, reverted to normal values at T2.

CONCLUSIONS

The present pilot study indicates that Galcanezumab could act on cortical targets located beyond the pain network, restoring the abnormal occipital reactivity. This effect could indicate the possible disease modifying properties of CGRP related monoclonal antibodies.

Trigeminal sensory modulatory effects of galcanezumab and clinical response prediction

ABSTRACT

Galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody against calcitonin gene-related peptide, is an emerging migraine preventative. We hypothesized that the preventive effects are conveyed via modulation of somatosensory processing and that certain sensory profiles may hence be associated with different clinical responses. We recruited migraine patients (n=26), who underwent quantitative sensory tests (QST) over the right V1 dermatome and forearm at baseline (T0), 2-3 weeks (T1), and one year (T12) after monthly galcanezumab treatment. The clinical response was defined as a reduction of ≥30% in headache frequency based on the headache diary. Predictors for clinical response were calculated using binary logistical regression models. After galcanezumab (T1 vs. T0), the heat pain threshold (HPT) (°C, 44.9 ± 3.4 vs. 43.0 ± 3.3, p=0.013) and mechanical pain threshold (MPT) (log mN, 1.60 ± 0.31 vs. 1.45 ± 0.26, p=0.042) were increased exclusively in the V1 dermatome, but not the forearm. These changes were immediate, did not differ between responders and non-responders, and did not last in one year of follow-up (T12 vs. T0). However, baseline HPT (OR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.08-4.19, p = 0.029) on the forearm was a robust predictor for a clinical response three months later. In summary, our data demonstrated that galcanezumab modulates pain thresholds specifically in the V1 dermatome, but this modulation is short-lasting and irrelevant to clinical response. Instead, the clinical response may be determined by individual sensibility even before the administration of medication.