Refractory chronic cluster headache: a consensus statement on clinical definition from the European Headache Federation

Clinical predictors of therapeutic failure of occipital nerve stimulation in refractory chronic cluster headache

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a treatment with evidence in refractory chronic cluster headache (CCH). However, the variable response rate and cost make it necessary to investigate predictors of response.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study conducted through the review of medical records of CCH patients from six hospitals in Madrid. Epidemiological and clinical variables were compared between patients with ONS failure and the rest. ONS failure was defined as the need for device withdrawal or switch off because of lack of response or adverse events.

RESULTS

From a series of 88 CCH, 26 (29.6%) underwent ONS surgery, of whom 13/26 (50.0%) failed because lack of response. ONS failure group had an earlier headache onset (mean ± SD) of 27.7 ± 6.9 vs. 36.7 ± 11.8 years, p = 0.026) and a higher smoking rate (100% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.006). Stational fluctuations (58.3% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.007) and nocturnal exacerbations (91.7% vs. 53.9%, p = 0.035) were more frequent in the ONS failure group as well. There was no difference between groups in diagnostic delay, years of evolution prior to surgery, mental illness, comorbidity with other headache disorders or chronic pain conditions or prior response to occipital nerves anesthetic blocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Some clinical features such as an early debut, smoking and seasonal or circadian fluctuations could be related to failure of ONS in refractory CCH.

Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab as chronic cluster headache preventive treatment under real world conditions: Observational prospective study

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide has shown to play a central role in cluster headache (CH) pathophysiology. A clinical trial with galcanezumab was carried out in chronic cluster headache (CCH) but did not meet its primay endpoint. However, its off-label use in patients with CCH refractory to other therapies could be considered. We aimed to asses the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab as CCH preventive treatment in a real-life setting.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted. Patients with CCH who received at least one dose of 240 mg of galcanezumab.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients who tried a mean of 6.3 ± 1.9 preventive therapies, including onabotulinumtoxinA in 90.5%. At baseline, the median of frequency was 60 (37.5-105) monthly attacks with 10 (8.3-10) points in pain intensity (Numerical Rating Scale). After one month, the frequency decreased to 31 (10.5-45) (p = 0.003) with 8.5 (8-9.5) intensity (p = 0.007); 10 (47.6%) patients were 50% responders of whom four (19%) were 75% responders. Of the 15 patients with 3 months of follow-up, seven (46.6%) reduced their frequency by 50% and four (26.6%) by 75%, with 40 (10-60) monthly attacks (p = 0.07) and pain intensity of 8 (5-10) (p = 0.026). Some 52% patients experienced adverse events, mostly mild.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of refractory CCH, galcanezumab was effective in almost 50% of patients. This finding supports individual off-label treatment attempts.

The Untold Story of Occipital Nerve Stimulation in Patients With Cluster Headache: Surgical Technique in Relation to Clinical Efficacy

OBJECTIVES

Approximately one in every 1000 adults experiences cluster headache (CH). Although occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) appears encouraging in treatment for most patients with refractory CH, some patients do not reach adequate pain relief with ONS. A reason for failure of ONS might be anatomical variations and different surgical approaches. Therefore, an extensive literature analysis was performed, and cadaveric experimentation was combined with our clinical experience to provide a standardized proposal for ONS and obtain optimal management of patients with refractory CH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 36 articles published between 1998 and 2023 were analyzed to retrieve information on the anatomical landmarks and surgical technique of ONS. For the cadaveric experimentation (N = 1), two electrodes were inserted from the region over the foramen magnum and projected toward the lower third of the mastoid process.

RESULTS

The existence of multiple approaches of ONS has been confirmed by the present analysis. Discrepancies have been found in the anatomical locations and corresponding landmarks of the greater and lesser occipital nerve. The surgical approaches differed in patient positioning, electrode placement, and imaging techniques, with an overall efficacy range of 35.7% to 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

Reports on the surgical approach of ONS remain contradictory, hence emphasizing the need for standardization. Only if all implanting physicians perform the ONS surgery using a standardized protocol, can future data be combined and outcomes compared and analyzed.

Health equity, care access and quality in headache - part 2

BACKGROUND

Headache disorders are a global public health concern affecting diverse populations. This review examines headache service organizations in low-, middle-, and high-income countries. It addresses global challenges in pharmacological headache treatment, with a focus on safety, tolerability, reproductive and child health, and outlines disparities in accessing innovative treatments worldwide.

MAIN BODY

Organized headache services are essential due to the wide prevalence and varying severity of headache disorders. The tiered headache service model is globally recognized, although its implementation varies based on financial and workforce considerations. Headache burden affects well-being, causing disability, economic challenges, and work limitations, irrespective of location or income. All nations still require improved diagnosis and treatment, and the majority of countries face obstacles including limited access, awareness, economic barriers, and inadequate health policies. Provided adequate internet availability, telemedicine could help improve health equity by expanding access to headache care, since it can offer patients access to services without lengthy waiting times or extensive travel and can provide healthcare unavailable in underserved areas due to staff shortages. Numerous health disparities restrict global access to many headache medications, especially impacting individuals historically excluded from randomized controlled trials, such as those with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular conditions, as well as pregnant women. Furthermore, despite advancements in researching migraine treatments for young patients, the options for treatment remain limited. Access to headache treatment relies on factors like medication availability, approval, financial coverage, and healthcare provider expertise. Inadequate public awareness leads to neglect by policymakers and undertreatment by patients and healthcare providers. Global access discrepancies are exacerbated by the introduction of novel disease-specific medications, particularly impacting Asian, African, and Latin American nations excluded from clinical trials. While North America and Europe experience broad availability of migraine treatments, the majority of countries worldwide lack access to these therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare disparities, treatment access, and medication availability are concerning issues in headache medicine. Variations in national healthcare systems impact headache management, and costly innovative drugs are widening these gaps. Healthcare practitioners and experts should acknowledge these challenges and work towards minimizing access barriers for equitable global headache care in the future.

Association of Clinical and Neuroanatomic Factors With Response to Ventral Tegmental Area DBS in Chronic Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the ventral tegmental area (VTA) is a surgical treatment option for selected patients with refractory chronic cluster headache (CCH). We aimed to identify clinical and structural neuroimaging factors associated with response to VTA DBS in CCH.

METHODS

This prospective observational cohort study examines consecutive patients with refractory CCH treated with VTA DBS by a multidisciplinary team in a single tertiary neuroscience center as part of usual care. Headache diaries and validated questionnaires were completed at baseline and regular follow-up intervals. All patients underwent T1-weighted structural MRI before surgery. We compared clinical features using multivariable logistic regression and neuroanatomic differences using voxel-based morphometry (VBM) between responders and nonresponders.

RESULTS

Over a 10-year period, 43 patients (mean age 53 years, SD 11.9), including 29 male patients, with a mean duration of CCH 12 years (SD 7.4), were treated and followed up for at least 1 year (mean follow-up duration 5.6 years). Overall, there was a statistically significant improvement in median attack frequency from 140 to 56 per month (Z = -4.95, p < 0.001), attack severity from 10/10 to 8/10 (Z = -4.83, p < 0.001), and duration from 110 to 60 minutes (Z = -3.48, p < 0.001). Twenty-nine (67.4%) patients experienced ≥50% improvement in attack frequency and were therefore classed as responders. There were no serious adverse events. The most common side effects were discomfort or pain around the battery site (7 patients) and transient diplopia and/or oscillopsia (6 patients). There were no differences in demographics, headache characteristics, or comorbidities between responders and nonresponders. VBM identified increased neural density in nonresponders in several brain regions, including the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula, and amygdala, which were statistically significant (p < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

VTA DBS showed no serious adverse events, and, although there was no placebo control, was effective in approximately two-thirds of patients at long-term follow-up. This study did not reveal any reliable clinical predictors of response. However, nonresponders had increased neural density in brain regions linked to processing of pain and autonomic function, both of which are prominent in the pathophysiology of CCH.

A prospective open label 2-8 year extension of the randomised controlled ICON trial on the long-term efficacy and safety of occipital nerve stimulation in medically intractable chronic cluster headache

BACKGROUND

We demonstrated in the randomised controlled ICON study that 48-week treatment of medically intractable chronic cluster headache (MICCH) with occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is safe and effective. In L-ICON we prospectively evaluate its long-term effectiveness and safety.

METHODS

ICON participants were enrolled in L-ICON immediately after completing ICON. Therefore, earlier ICON participants could be followed longer than later ones. L-ICON inclusion was stopped after the last ICON participant was enrolled in L-ICON and followed for ≥2 years by completing six-monthly questionnaires on attack frequency, side effects, subjective improvement and whether they would recommend ONS to others. Primary outcome was the change in mean weekly attack frequency 2 years after completion of the ICON study compared to baseline. Missing values for log-transformed attack-frequency were imputed for up to 5 years of follow-up. Descriptive analyses are presented as (pooled) geometric or arithmetic means and 95% confidence intervals.

FINDINGS

Of 103 eligible participants, 88 (85%) gave informed consent and 73 (83%) were followed for ≥2 year, 61 (69%) ≥ 3 year, 33 (38%) ≥ 5 years and 3 (3%) ≥ 8.5 years. Mean (±SD) follow-up was 4.2 ± 2.2 years for a total of 370 person years (84% of potentially 442 years). The pooled geometric mean (95% CI) weekly attack frequency remained considerably lower after one (4.2; 2.8-6.3), two (5.1; 3.5-7.6) and five years (4.1; 3.0-5.5) compared to baseline (16.2; 14.4-18.3). Of the 49/88 (56%) ICON ≥50% responders, 35/49 (71%) retained this response and 15/39 (38%) ICON non-responders still became a ≥50% responder for at least half the follow-up period. Most participants (69/88; 78% [0.68-0.86]) reported a subjective improvement from baseline at last follow-up and 70/88 (81% [0.70-0.87]) would recommend ONS to others. Hardware-related surgery was required in 44/88 (50%) participants in 112/122 (92%) events (0.35 person-year-1 [0.28-0.41]). We didn't find predictive factors for effectiveness.

INTERPRETATION

ONS is a safe, well-tolerated and long-term effective treatment for MICCH.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, the Dutch Ministry of Health, the NutsOhra Foundation from the Dutch Health Insurance Companies, and Medtronic.

The HortONS study. Treatment of chronic cluster headache with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and occipital nerve stimulation: study protocol for a prospective, investigator-initiated, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a debilitating primary headache disorder. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has shown the potential to reduce attack frequency, but the occipital paresthesia evoked by conventional (tonic) stimulation challenges a blinded comparison of active stimulation and placebo. Burst ONS offers paresthesia-free stimulation, enabling a blinded, placebo-controlled study. Identification of a feasible preoperative test would help select the best candidates for implantation. This study aims to explore ONS as a preventive treatment for CCH, comparing burst stimulation to tonic stimulation and placebo, and possibly identifying a potential preoperative predictor.

METHODS

An investigator-initiated, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial is conducted, including 40 patients with CCH. Eligible patients complete a trial with the following elements: I) four weeks of baseline observation, II) 12 weeks of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) of the occipital nerves, III) implantation of a full ONS system followed by 2 week grace period, IV) 12 weeks of blinded trial with 1:1 randomization to either placebo (deactivated ONS system) or burst (paresthesia-free) stimulation, and V) 12 weeks of tonic stimulation. The primary outcomes are the reduction in headache attack frequency with TENS and ONS and treatment safety. Secondary outcomes are treatment efficacy of burst versus tonic ONS, the feasibility of TENS as a predictor for ONS outcome, reduction in headache pain intensity (numeric rating scale), reduction in background headache, the patient's impression of change (PGIC), health-related quality of life (EuroQoL-5D), self-reported sleep quality, and symptoms of anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS). Data on headache attack characteristics are registered weekly. Data on patient-reported outcomes are assessed after each trial phase.

DISCUSSION

The study design allows a comparison between burst ONS and placebo in refractory CCH and enables a comparison of the efficacy of burst and tonic ONS. It will provide information about the effect of burst ONS and explore whether the addition of this stimulation paradigm may improve stimulation protocols. TENS is evaluated as a feasible preoperative screening tool for ONS outcomes by comparing the effect of attack prevention of TENS and tonic ONS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (trial registration number NCT05023460, registration date 07-27-2023).

Efficacy of Occipital Nerve Stimulation in Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are a group of highly disabling primary headache disorders. Although pharmacological treatments exist, they are not always effective or well tolerated. Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a potentially effective surgical treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of the efficacy of ONS in treating TACs.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Primary outcomes were reduction in headache intensity, duration, and frequency. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rate and reduction in medication use. Because of large differences in outcome measures, data for patients suffering from short-lasting, unilateral, and neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing (SUNCT) and cranial autonomic symptoms (SUNA) were reported separately. Risk of bias was assessed using the NIH Quality Assessment Tools.

RESULTS

A total of 417 patients from 14 published papers were included in the analysis, of which 15 patients were in the SUNCT/SUNA cohort. The mean reduction in headache intensity and duration was 26.2% and 31.4%, respectively. There was a mean reduction in headache frequency of 50%, as well as a 61.2% reduction in the use of abortive medications and a 31.1% reduction in the use of prophylactic medications. In the SUNCT/SUNA cohort, the mean decrease in headache intensity and duration was 56.8% and 42.8%. The overall responder rate, defined as a >50% reduction in attack frequency, was 60.8% for the non-SUNCT/non-SUNA cohort and 66.7% for the SUNCT/SUNA cohort. Adverse events requiring repeat surgery were reported in 33% of cases. Risk of bias assessment suggests that articles included in this review had reasonable internal validity.

CONCLUSION

ONS may be an effective surgical treatment for approximately two thirds of patients with medically refractory TACs.

European Academy of Neurology guidelines on the treatment of cluster headache

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cluster headache is a relatively rare, disabling primary headache disorder with a major impact on patients' quality of life. This work presents evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of cluster headache derived from a systematic review of the literature and consensus among a panel of experts.

METHODS

The databases PubMed (Medline), Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Library were screened for studies on the efficacy of interventions (last access July 2022). The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the European Academy of Neurology, and the level of evidence was established using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation).

RECOMMENDATIONS

For the acute treatment of cluster headache attacks, there is a strong recommendation for oxygen (100%) with a flow of at least 12 L/min over 15 min and 6 mg subcutaneous sumatriptan. Prophylaxis of cluster headache attacks with verapamil at a daily dose of at least 240 mg (maximum dose depends on efficacy and tolerability) is recommended. Corticosteroids are efficacious in cluster headache. To reach an effect, the use of at least 100 mg prednisone (or equivalent corticosteroid) given orally or at up to 500 mg iv per day over 5 days is recommended. Lithium, topiramate, and galcanezumab (only for episodic cluster headache) are recommended as alternative treatments. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation is efficacious in episodic but not chronic cluster headache. Greater occipital nerve block is recommended, but electrical stimulation of the greater occipital nerve is not recommended due to the side effect profile.

Current treatment options for cluster headache: limitations and the unmet need for better and specific treatments-a consensus article

AIM

Treatment for cluster headache is currently based on a trial-and-error approach. The available preventive treatment is unspecific and based on few and small studies not adhering to modern standards. Therefore, the authors collaborated to discuss acute and preventive treatment in cluster headache, addressing the unmet need of safe and tolerable preventive medication from the perspectives of people with cluster headache and society, headache specialist and cardiologist.

FINDINGS

The impact of cluster headache on personal life is substantial. Mean annual direct and indirect costs of cluster headache are more than 11,000 Euros per patient. For acute treatment, the main problems are treatment response, availability, costs and, for triptans, contraindications and the maximum use allowed. Intermediate treatment with steroids and greater occipital nerve blocks are effective but cannot be used continuously. Preventive treatment is sparsely studied and overall limited by relatively low efficacy and side effects. Neurostimulation is a relevant option for treatment-refractory chronic patients. From a cardiologist's perspective use of verapamil and triptans may be worrisome and regular follow-up is essential when using verapamil and lithium.

CONCLUSION

We find that there is a great and unmet need to pursue novel and targeted preventive modalities to suppress the horrific pain attacks for people with cluster headache.

Treatment of chronic cluster headache with burst and tonic occipital nerve stimulation: A case series

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND

Chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a rare but severely debilitating primary headache condition. A growing amount of evidence suggests that occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) can offer effective treatment in patients with severe CCH for whom conventional medical therapy does not have a sufficient effect. The paresthesia evoked by conventional (tonic) stimulation can be bothersome and may thus limit therapy. Burst ONS produces paresthesia-free stimulation, but the amount of evidence on the efficacy of burst ONS as a treatment for intractable CCH is scarce.

METHODS

In this case series, we report 15 patients with CCH treated with ONS at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark, from 2013 to 2020. Nine of these received burst stimulation either as primary treatment or as a supplement to tonic stimulation. The results were assessed in terms of the frequency of headache attacks per week and their intensity on the Numeric Rating Scale, as well as the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) with ONS treatment.

RESULTS

At a median (range) follow-up of 38 (16-96) months, 12 of the 15 patients (80%) reported a reduction in attack frequency of ≥50% (a reduction from a median of 35 to 1 attack/week, p < 0.001). Seven of these patients were treated with burst ONS. A significant reduction was also seen in maximum pain intensity. Overall, 10 patients stated a clinically important improvement in their headache condition following ONS treatment, rated on the PGIC scale. A total of 16 adverse events (nine of which were in the same patient) were registered.

CONCLUSION

Occipital nerve stimulation significantly reduced the number of weekly headache attacks and their intensity. Burst ONS seems to function well alone or as a supplement to conventional tonic ONS as a preventive treatment for CCH; however, larger prospective studies are needed to determine whether the effect can be confirmed and whether the efficacy of the two stimulation paradigms is even.

An open-label observational study and meta-analysis of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation in medically refractory chronic cluster headache

Background

Many patients with cluster headache (CH) are inadequately controlled by current treatment options. Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) is reported to be effective in the management of CH though some studies suggest that it is ineffective.

Objective

To assess the safety and efficacy of nVNS in chronic cluster headache (CCH) patients.

Method

We prospectively analysed data from 40 patients with refractory CCH in this open-label, observational study. Patients were seen in tertiary headache clinics at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery and trained to use nVNS as preventative therapy. Patients were reivewed at one month and then three-monthly from onset. The primary endpoint was number of patients achieving ≥50% reduction in attack frequency at 3  months. A meta-analysis of all published studies evaluating the efficacy of nVNS in CCH was also conducted. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for all studies investigating the use of nVNS as a preventive or adjunctive treatment for CCH with five or more participants. Combined mean difference and responder proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated from the included studies.

Results

17/40 patients (43%) achieved ≥50% reduction in attack frequency at 3  months. There was a significant reduction in monthly attack frequency from a baseline of 124 (±67) attacks to 79 (±63) attacks in month 3 (mean difference 44.7; 95% CI 25.1 to 64.3; p &lt; 0.001). In month 3, there was also a 1.2-point reduction in average severity from a baseline Verbal Rating Scale of 8/10 (95% CI 0.5 to 1.9; p = 0.001). Four studies, along with the present study, were deemed eligible for meta-analysis, which showed a responder proportion of 0.35 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.69, n = 137) and a mean reduction in headache frequency of 35.3 attacks per month (95% CI 11.0 to 59.6, n = 108), from a baseline of 105 (±22.7) attacks per month.

Conclusion

This study highlights the potential benefit of nVNS in CCH, with significant reductions in headache frequency and severity. To better characterise the effect, randomised sham-controlled trials are needed to confirm the beneficial response of VNS reported in some, but not all, open-label studies.

Intra- and interindividual attack frequency variability of chronic cluster headache

BACKGROUND

The lack of knowledge about the intra- and interindividual attack frequency variability in chronic cluster headache complicates power and sample size calculations for baseline periods of trials, and consensus on their most optimal duration.

METHODS

We analyzed the 12-week baseline of the ICON trial (occipital nerve stimulation in medically intractable chronic cluster headache) for: (i) weekly vs. instantaneous recording of attack frequency; (ii) intra-individual and seasonal variability of attack frequency; and (iii) the smallest number of weeks to obtain a reliable estimate of baseline attack frequency.

RESULTS

Weekly median (14.4 [8.2-24.0]) and instantaneous (14.2 [8.0-24.5]) attack frequency recordings were similar (p = 0.20; Bland-Altman plot). Median weekly attack frequency was 15.3 (range 4.2-140) and highest during spring (p = 0.001) compared to the other seasons. Relative attack frequency variability decreased with increasing attack frequency (p = 0.010). We tabulated the weekly attack frequency estimation accuracies compared to, and the associated deviations from, the 12-week gold standard for different lengths of the observation period.

CONCLUSION

Weekly retrospective attack frequency recording is as good as instantaneous recording and more convenient. Attack frequency is highest in spring. Participants with ≥3 daily attacks show less attack frequency variability than those with <3 daily attacks. An optimal balance between 90% accuracy and feasibility is achieved at a baseline period of seven weeks.The ICON trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under number NCT01151631.

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.

Intermediate cervical plexus block in the management of treatment resistant chronic cluster headache following whiplash trauma in three patients: a case series

OBJECTIVES

Cluster headaches are an intensely painful and debilitating headache disorder. Conventional management includes abortive and preventative agents. A fifth of patients with chronic cluster headaches can be refractory to conventional treatment. Cluster headache can develop following whiplash trauma to the head and neck.

CASE PRESENTATION

Three patients were referred to a tertiary pain medicine unit in a university teaching hospital with treatment-resistant chronic cluster headache. They were treated with a novel intervention namely, ultrasound-guided intermediate cervical plexus block with depot methylprednisolone. Patient one reported chronic cluster headache for three years. Patient two reported episodic cluster headache that appeared to be evolving into chronic cluster headache. Patient three reported bilateral cluster headache following a motor vehicle accident. Intermediate cervical plexus block provided significant and durable relief in three patients with treatment resistant chronic cluster headache.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel intervention may have played a role in aborting and preventing chronic cluster headaches.

Testing the Decision Support Tool for Responsible Pain Management for Headache and Facial Pain Diagnosis with Opioid-Risk-Stratified Treatment

In primary and urgent care, headache and facial pain are common and challenging to diagnose and manage, especially with using opioids appropriately. We therefore developed the Decision Support Tool for Responsible Pain Management (DS-RPM) to assist healthcare providers in diagnosis (including multiple simultaneous diagnoses), workup (including triage), and opioid-risk-informed treatment. A primary goal was to supply sufficient explanations of DS-RPM's functions allowing critique. We describe the process of iteratively designing DS-RPM adding clinical content and testing/defect discovery. We tested DS-RPM remotely with 21 clinician-participants using three vignettes-cluster headache, migraine, and temporal arteritis-after first training to use DS-RPM with a trigeminal-neuralgia vignette. Their evaluation was both quantitative (usability/acceptability) and qualitative using semi-structured interviews. The quantitative evaluation used 12 Likert-type questions on a 1-5 scale, where 5 represented the highest rating. The mean ratings ranged from 4.48 to 4.95 (SDs ranging 0.22-1.03). Participants initially found structured data entry intimidating but adapted and appreciated its comprehensiveness and speed of data capture. They perceived DS-RPM as useful for teaching and clinical practice, making several enhancement suggestions. The DS-RPM was designed, created, and tested to facilitate best practice in management of patients with headaches and facial pain. Testing the DS-RPM with vignettes showed strong functionality and high usability/acceptability ratings from healthcare providers. Risk stratifying for opioid use disorder to develop a treatment plan for headache and facial pain is possible using vignettes. During testing, we considered the need to adapt usability/acceptability evaluation tools for clinical decision support, and future directions.

CGRP-Targeted Therapy for Episodic and Chronic Cluster Headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic cluster headache (CH) substantially affects patients' quality of life, and treatment remains challenging. The current article reviewed controlled studies for new treatment options targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptors in CH and discussed the current gaps and future directions for the treatment of chronic CH.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (i.e., galcanezumab and fremanezumab) completed randomized-control trials for efficacy for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic CH. Galcanezumab was effective for preventing episodic CH but not chronic CH. Fremanezumab was ineffective in preventing episodic and chronic CH. Studies for other anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies and CGRP antagonists are still pending for results. There are no randomized controlled trials for CGRP-targeted therapies that showed efficacy for chronic CH prevention. The different responses to galcanezumab between episodic and chronic CH may be due to the study design, i.e., the allowance of concomitant preventive therapies in the chronic CH study but not in the episodic CH study. Another reason for the discrepancies is the different roles and sensitivity of CGRP in chronic 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.

The clinical characteristics of familial cluster headache

Background

A positive family history predisposes to the development of cluster headache. The distinct characteristics of familial cluster headache have yet to be confirmed, however, evidence suggests a younger age of onset and higher proportion of females in this subgroup.

Objectives

To assess the rate and mode of inheritance of familial cluster headache in a tertiary referral centre for headache. To describe the clinical features of familial cluster headache.

Methods

A retrospective study conducted between 2007 and 2017. Cluster headache was confirmed in probands and affected relatives. Differences in demographics, clinical characteristics, and response-to-treatment in familial cluster headache were delineated through multivariate analysis using a control cohort of 597 patients with sporadic cluster headache.

Results

Familial cluster headache was confirmed in 48 (7.44%) patients and predominantly reflected an autosomal dominant mode of inheritance with reduced penetrance. Familial cases were more likely to report nasal blockage (OR 4.06, 95% CI; 2.600–6.494, p < 0.001) during an attack and a higher rate of concurrent short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing (OR 3.76, 95% CI; 1.572–9.953, p = 0.004).

Conclusion

These findings add to evidence suggesting a genetic component to cluster headache. Here, we demonstrated prominent nasal blockage, and a higher occurrence of concomitant short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache with conjunctival injection and tearing in this subgroup, further delineating the phenotype.

Cluster Headache is Still Lurking in the Shadows

Cluster headache, apart from its legendary reputation as the most violent headache that can exist, suffers from an average 60-month delay in diagnosis. The simplicity of the clinical manifestations, although dramatic, makes this delay inexplicable. The education of emergency department physicians and various specialists not specifically dedicated to headaches allows cluster headache to remain in a lurking position with flourishing periods of disease that are often unpredictable in both onset and disappearance. Older drugs have always shown high efficacy but also an equally high rate of adverse events, often discouraging their appropriate use. The availability of a new drug class such as monoclonal antibodies for calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor (CGRP_(r)), which have already been efficient for migraine, shows a jeopardized geography of access in the world, and this favors the progression of the episodic form into chronic and of the chronic into refractory.

Intranasal ketamine for acute cluster headache attacks-Results from a proof-of-concept open-label trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and efficacy of intranasal ketamine for the treatment of a single cluster headache (CH) attack.

BACKGROUND

Acute treatment options for patients with CH who have an insufficient response to oxygen and triptans are limited. Intranasal ketamine has anecdotally been successful in treating a CH attack.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label pilot study enrolling 23 patients with chronic CH (International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition), and of these, 20 patients treated a single CH attack with intranasal ketamine. Under in-hospital observation, patients received 15 mg of intranasal ketamine every 6 min a maximum of five times. The primary endpoint was a 50% reduction in pain intensity within 15 min after initiating treatment.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint was not met; 15 min after the first ketamine administration, the mean reduction in pain intensity was 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.6 to 2.7, p = 0.188) on the numeric rating scale (NRS), equivalent to a 15% reduction in pain intensity. However, 30 min after the first application, the pain intensity was reduced by 59% on an 11-point NRS (mean difference: 4.3, 95% CI: 2.4-6.2, p < 0.001, N = 16) and 11 out of 16 (69%) scored 4 or below on the NRS. Four patients received rescue medication 15 min after the first ketamine application and were therefore excluded from the analysis at 30 min. Half of the patients preferred ketamine to oxygen and/or sumatriptan injection. No serious adverse events were identified during the trial.

CONCLUSION

Intranasal ketamine may be an effective acute treatment for CH at 30 min but should be tested in a larger controlled design. Patients and physicians should be conscious of the abuse potential of ketamine.

A Case Report of Pulsed Radiofrequency Plus Suboccipital Injection of the Greater Occipital Nerve: An Easier Target for Treatment of Cluster Headache

Introduction: In cluster headache, the efficacy of suboccipital steroid injection is notable within a few days, although few data are available about the duration of efficacy. A combination treatment, consisting of suboccipital steroid injection plus pulsed radiofrequency, could potentially lead to long-term benefit. Evidence about pulsed radiofrequency of the greater occipital nerve is lacking. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively describe a series of four cluster headache patients treated with suboccipital steroid injection plus pulsed radiofrequency of the greater occipital nerve. Results: All patients achieved a 50% reduction in attack frequency in the 7 days after the first treatment. Moreover, a long pain-free remission period up to 15 months was noted. Conclusion: Suboccipital steroid injection plus pulsed radiofrequency of the greater occipital nerve might have both acute and prophylactic effects in cluster headache. The greater occipital nerve is more accessible to pulsed radiofrequency than other targets.

Safety and efficacy of occipital nerve stimulation for attack prevention in medically intractable chronic cluster headache (ICON): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3, electrical dose-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has shown promising results in small uncontrolled trials in patients with medically intractable chronic cluster headache (MICCH). We aimed to establish whether ONS could serve as an effective treatment for patients with MICCH.

METHODS

The ONS in MICCH (ICON) study is an investigator-initiated, international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3, electrical dose-controlled clinical trial. The study took place at four hospitals in the Netherlands, one hospital in Belgium, one in Germany, and one in Hungary. After 12 weeks' baseline observation, patients with MICCH, at least four attacks per week, and history of being non-responsive to at least three standard preventive drugs, were randomly allocated (at a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated permuted block) to 24 weeks of occipital nerve stimulation at either 100% or 30% of the individually determined range between paraesthesia threshold and near-discomfort (double-blind study phase). Because ONS causes paraesthesia, preventing masked comparison versus placebo, we compared high-intensity versus low-intensity ONS, which are hypothesised to cause similar paraesthesia, but with different efficacy. In weeks 25-48, participants received individually optimised open-label ONS. The primary outcome was the weekly mean attack frequency in weeks 21-24 compared with baseline across all patients and, if a decrease was shown, to show a group-wise difference. The trial is closed to recruitment (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01151631).

FINDINGS

Patients were enrolled between Oct 12, 2010, and Dec 3, 2017. We enrolled 150 patients and randomly assigned 131 (87%) to treatment; 65 (50%) patients to 100% ONS and 66 (50%) to 30% ONS. One of the 66 patients assigned to 30% ONS was not implanted and was therefore excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. Because the weekly mean attack frequencies at baseline were skewed (median 15·75; IQR 9·44 to 24·75) we used log transformation to analyse the data and medians to present the results. Median weekly mean attack frequencies in the total population decreased from baseline to 7·38 (2·50 to 18·50; p<0·0001) in weeks 21-24, a median change of -5·21 (-11·18 to -0·19; p<0·0001) attacks per week. In the 100% ONS stimulation group, mean attack frequency decreased from 17·58 (9·83 to 29·33) at baseline to 9·50 (3·00 to 21·25) at 21-24 weeks (median change from baseline -4·08, -11·92 to -0·25), and for the 30% ONS stimulation group, mean attack frequency decreased from 15·00 (9·25 to 22·33) to 6·75 (1·50 to 16·50; -6·50, -10·83 to -0·08). The difference in median weekly mean attack frequency between groups at the end of the masked phase in weeks 21-24 was -2·42 (95% CI -5·17 to 3·33). In the masked study phase, 129 adverse events occurred with 100% ONS and 95 occurred with 30% ONS. None of the adverse events was unexpected but 17 with 100% ONS and eight with 30% ONS were labelled as serious, given they required brief hospital admission for minor hardware-related issues. The most common adverse events were local pain, impaired wound healing, neck stiffness, and hardware damage.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with MICCH, both 100% ONS intensity and 30% ONS intensity substantially reduced attack frequency and were safe and well tolerated. Future research should focus on optimising stimulation protocols and disentangling the underlying mechanism of action.

FUNDING

The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research, the Dutch Ministry of Health, the NutsOhra Foundation from the Dutch Health Insurance Companies, and Medtronic.

Repeated greater occipital nerve injections with corticosteroids in medically intractable chronic cluster headache: a retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Current prophylactic drugs for cluster headache are associated with limited efficacy, serious side effects and poor tolerability. Greater occipital nerve injection (GON-injection) has been proven effective and safe as a single, one-time injection in episodic (ECH), and to a lesser extent, chronic cluster headache (CCH). We aim to analyse the effectiveness and safety of repeated GON-injections in medically intractable chronic cluster headache (MICCH).

METHODS

Clinical data of all cluster headache patients who had received at least one GON-injection between 2014 and 2018 in our tertiary headache centre were retrieved from patients' medical records. Clinical history was taken as part of routine care shortly before and 6 weeks after GON-injection.

RESULTS

We identified 47 MICCH patients (79 injections), and compared results with 22 non-MI CCH patients (30 injections) and 50 ECH patients (63 injections). Nineteen MICCH patients received repeated injections (32 in total, range 2-8). Rates of clinical relevant improvement to a first injection were similar in all groups (MICCH: 60%, non-MICCH 73%, ECH 76%; attack freedom: MICCH: 30%, non-MICCH 32%, ECH 43%). Furthermore, no difference in response to the first and second injection was shown between groups (all p > 0.29). Median effect duration in MICCH was 6 weeks (IQR 2.8-12 weeks). Side effects were only mild and local.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective analysis, first and repeated GON-injections were well-tolerated and equally effective in MICCH as in non-MICCH, and ECH.

Machine phenotyping of cluster headache and its response to verapamil

Cluster headache is characterized by recurrent, unilateral attacks of excruciating pain associated with ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms. Although a wide array of clinical, anatomical, physiological, and genetic data have informed multiple theories about the underlying pathophysiology, the lack of a comprehensive mechanistic understanding has inhibited, on the one hand, the development of new treatments and, on the other, the identification of features predictive of response to established ones. The first-line drug, verapamil, is found to be effective in only half of all patients, and after several weeks of dose escalation, rendering therapeutic selection both uncertain and slow. Here we use high-dimensional modelling of routinely acquired phenotypic and MRI data to quantify the predictability of verapamil responsiveness and to illuminate its neural dependants, across a cohort of 708 patients evaluated for cluster headache at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery between 2007 and 2017. We derive a succinct latent representation of cluster headache from non-linear dimensionality reduction of structured clinical features, revealing novel phenotypic clusters. In a subset of patients, we show that individually predictive models based on gradient boosting machines can predict verapamil responsiveness from clinical (410 patients) and imaging (194 patients) features. Models combining clinical and imaging data establish the first benchmark for predicting verapamil responsiveness, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.689 on cross-validation (95% confidence interval: 0.651 to 0.710) and 0.621 on held-out data. In the imaged patients, voxel-based morphometry revealed a grey matter cluster in lobule VI of the cerebellum (-4, -66, -20) exhibiting enhanced grey matter concentrations in verapamil non-responders compared with responders (familywise error-corrected P = 0.008, 29 voxels). We propose a mechanism for the therapeutic effect of verapamil that draws on the neuroanatomy and neurochemistry of the identified region. Our results reveal previously unrecognized high-dimensional structure within the phenotypic landscape of cluster headache that enables prediction of treatment response with modest fidelity. An analogous approach applied to larger, globally representative datasets could facilitate data-driven redefinition of diagnostic criteria and stronger, more generalizable predictive models of treatment responsiveness.

Long-Term Efficacy of Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Medically Intractable Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) has been proposed to treat refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH) but its efficacy has only been showed in small short-term series.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate ONS long-term efficacy in rCCH.

METHODS

We studied 105 patients with rCCH, treated by ONS within a multicenter ONS prospective registry. Efficacy was evaluated by frequency, intensity of pain attacks, quality of life (QoL) EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ5D), functional (Headache Impact Test-6, Migraine Disability Assessment) and emotional (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale [HAD]) impacts, and medication consumption.

RESULTS

At last follow-up (mean 43.8 mo), attack frequency was reduced >50% in 69% of the patients. Mean weekly attack frequency decreased from 22.5 at baseline to 9.9 (P < .001) after ONS. Preventive and abortive medications were significantly decreased. Functional impact, anxiety, and QoL significantly improved after ONS. In excellent responders (59% of the patients), attack frequency decreased by 80% and QoL (EQ5D visual analog scale) dramatically improved from 37.8/100 to 73.2/100. When comparing baseline and 1-yr and last follow-up outcomes, efficacy was sustained over time. In multivariable analysis, low preoperative HAD-depression score was correlated to a higher risk of ONS failure. During the follow-up, 67 patients experienced at least one complication, 29 requiring an additional surgery: infection (6%), lead migration (12%) or fracture (4.5%), hardware dysfunction (8.2%), and local pain (20%).

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that long-term efficacy of ONS in CCH was maintained over time. In responders, ONS induced a major reduction of functional and emotional headache-related impacts and a dramatic improvement of QoL. These results obtained in real-life conditions support its use and dissemination in rCCH patients.

Occipital Nerve Stimulation for Pain Modulation in Drug-Resistant Chronic Cluster Headache

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) is a surgical treatment proposed for drug-resistant chronic cluster headache (drCCH). Long-term series assessing its efficacy are scarce. We designed a retrospective observational study with consecutive sampling, evaluating the follow-up of 17 drCCH patients who underwent ONS. Our main endpoint was the reduction the rate of attacks per week. We also evaluated the pain intensity through the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), patient overall perceived improvement and decrease in oral medication intake. After a median follow-up of 6.0 years (4.5–9.0), patients decreased from a median of 30 weekly attacks to 22.5 (5.6–37.5, p = 0.012), 7.5 at 1 year (p = 0.006) and 15.0 at the end of follow-up (p = 0.041). The VAS decreased from a median of 10.0 to 8.0 (p = 0.011) at three months, to 7.0 (p = 0.008) at twelve months and 7.0 (p = 0.003) at the end of the follow-up. A total of 23.5% had an overall perceived improvement of ≥70% at 3 months, 41.2% at 1 year and 27.8% at the end of follow-up. Reducing prophylactic oral medication was possible in 76.5% and it was stopped in 17.7%. Triptan use decreased in all the responder patients and 17.7% stopped its intake. A total of 41.2% presented mild adverse events. In conclusion, our long-term experience suggests that ONS could be an interesting option for drCCH-selected patients, as it is a beneficial and minimally invasive procedure with no serious adverse events.

Is pituitary MRI screening necessary in cluster headache?

Objective

To determine the prevalence and clinical predictors of pituitary adenomas in cluster headache patients, in order to determine the necessity of performing dedicated pituitary magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cluster headache.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted of all consecutive patients diagnosed with cluster headache and with available brain magnetic resonance imaging between 2007 and 2017 in a tertiary headache center. Data including demographics, attack characteristics, response to treatments, results of neuroimaging, and routine pituitary function tests were recorded.

Results

Seven hundred and eighteen cluster headache patients attended the headache clinic; 643 underwent a standard magnetic resonance imaging scan, of whom 376 also underwent dedicated pituitary magnetic resonance imaging. Pituitary adenomas occurred in 17 of 376 patients (4.52%). Non-functioning microadenomas (n = 14) were the most common abnormality reported. Two patients, one of whom lacked the symptoms of pituitary disease, required treatment for their pituitary lesion. No clinical predictors of those adenomas were identified after multivariate analysis using random forests. Systematic pituitary magnetic resonance imaging scanning did not benefit even a single patient in the entire cohort.

Conclusion

The prevalence of pituitary adenomas in cluster headache is similar to that reported in the general population, thereby precluding an over-representation of pituitary lesions in cluster headache. We conclude that the diagnostic assessment of cluster headache patients should not include specific pituitary screening. Only patients with standard brain magnetic resonance imaging findings or symptoms suggestive of a pituitary disorder require brain magnetic resonance imaging with dedicated pituitary views.

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.

Real-life treatment of cluster headache in a tertiary headache center - results from the Danish Cluster Headache Survey

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological treatment of cluster headache constitutes the core of clinical management, but evidence is sparse. We aimed to generate insight in the existing treatment and identify associations between clinical features and treatment response.

METHODS

Patients aged 18-65 diagnosed with cluster headache according to the ICHD-2 completed a questionnaire followed by a structured interview. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify associations.

RESULTS

The population consisted of 400 patients with an episodic: chronic ratio of 1.7:1. Episodic patients were more likely to respond to triptans (odds ratio = 1.77, confidence interval: 1.08-2.91, p = 0.023) and oxygen (odds ratio = 1.64, confidence interval: 1.05-2.57, p = 0.031) than chronic. Oxygen response was less likely if pain intensity was very severe (odds ratio = 0.53, confidence interval: 0.33-2.57, p = 0.006) and the risk of a poor response increased with disease duration (odds ratio = 0.79, confidence interval: 0.65-0.96, p = 0.016). Among current users of sumatriptan injection and oxygen, the proportion achieving 100% relief was higher with sumatriptan injection (p > 0.001) than with oxygen. No associations were identified regarding verapamil. Only 57% of current users of preventive medication responded at a 50% level.

CONCLUSION

Episodic cluster headache is more responsive to acute therapy than chronic. Further, sumatriptan injection was more effective than oxygen and the responder-rate was limited with verapamil. More effective acute and preventive therapies are needed for cluster headache patients.

Ketamine-Magnesium for Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache: A Case Series

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ketamine-magnesium combination to reduce attacks in a series of patients with refractory chronic cluster headache (rCCH).

BACKGROUND

Refractory chronic cluster headache (CCH) is a rare but highly debilitating condition that needs new treatment options. A previous publication reported that a single infusion of ketamine-magnesium combination was effective in 2 patients with rCCH.

METHODS

The treatment was proposed to consecutive patients with rCCH seen in 2 French hospitals between November 2015 and February 2020 and who were resistant to at least 3 preventive treatments. They received a single ketamine infusion (0.5 mg/kg over 2 hours) combined with magnesium sulfate (3000 mg). The main outcome was a comparison of the number of daily attacks 2 weeks prior to the ketamine-magnesium infusion and 1 week after (on days 7 and 8). The second outcome was the percentage of responders (patients with ≥50% reduction in the frequency of daily attacks). Safety was assessed by the recording of adverse events during infusion. Descriptive statistics are presented as mean ± standard deviation.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients (14 men), with an age of 35.2 ± 8.1 years, were included. They presented with CCH for 6.6 ± 4.3 years. The number of daily attacks decreased from 4.3 ± 2.4 before treatment to 1.3 ± 1.0 after treatment (difference: -3.1 (95% CI: -4.5 to -1.6), P < .001). Seventy six percent (13/17) were responders. Transient and mild sedation was reported by 7/17 patients (41.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

The ketamine-magnesium combination seems an effective and well-tolerated therapy for rCCH. Placebo-controlled studies should be conducted to further confirm these findings.

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.

Reducing Episodic Cluster Headaches: Focus on Galcanezumab

The involvement of calcitonin gene-related peptide in migraine and cluster headache has led to the recent development of new therapies. Galcanezumab, a novel monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide, is approved for the migraine prevention and has recently been tested for the prevention of cluster headache. Two clinical trials have been conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in episodic cluster headache and chronic cluster headache. While efficacy endpoints were not met in the chronic subtype, galcanezumab reduced the weekly frequency of attacks in patients with episodic cluster headaches. In both studies, the antibody was well tolerated. This review summarizes and critically reviews the available data regarding the rationale behind targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide with galcanezumab for the prevention of cluster headache.

Neuromodulation in headache and craniofacial neuralgia: guidelines from the Spanish Society of Neurology and the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery

INTRODUCTION

Numerous invasive and non-invasive neuromodulation devices have been developed and applied to patients with headache and neuralgia in recent years. However, no updated review addresses their safety and efficacy, and no healthcare institution has issued specific recommendations on their use for these 2 conditions.

METHODS

Neurologists from the Spanish Society of Neurology's (SEN) Headache Study Group and neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, selected by the Spanish Society of Neurosurgery (SENEC), performed a comprehensive review of articles on the MEDLINE database addressing the use of the technique in patients with headache and neuralgia.

RESULTS

We present an updated review and establish the first set of consensus recommendations of the SEN and SENC on the use of neuromodulation to treat headache and neuralgia, analysing the current levels of evidence on its effectiveness for each specific condition.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the indication of neuromodulation techniques for patients with refractory headache and neuralgia (especially migraine, cluster headache, and trigeminal neuralgia) selected by neurologists and headache specialists, after pharmacological treatment options are exhausted. Furthermore, we recommend that invasive neuromodulation be debated by multidisciplinary committees, and that the procedure be performed by teams of neurosurgeons specialising in functional neurosurgery, with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality.

The role of oxygen in cluster headache

High-flow oxygen inhalation is one of the most effective acute treatments for cluster headache. The therapy was first described for the treatment of cluster headache in 1952 by Horton, and has exhibited some advantages and efficacy compared to other acute medicines. The mechanism is not very clear, but some evidence has demonstrated its relationship to the trigeminovascular system and neuroinflammation. High-flow oxygen inhalation via a non-rebreather mask during cluster headache attacks has been widely recommended. Patients with frequent attacks and/or intolerance to drugs may prefer the oxygen treatment.

New insights in post-traumatic headache with cluster headache phenotype: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To define the characteristics of post-traumatic headache with cluster headache phenotype (PTH-CH) and to compare these characteristics with primary CH.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of patients seen between 2007 and 2017 in a headache centre and diagnosed with PTH-CH that developed within 7 days of head trauma. A control cohort included 553 patients with primary CH without any history of trauma who attended the headache clinic during the same period. Data including demographics, attack characteristics and response to treatments were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients with PTH-CH were identified. Multivariate analysis revealed significant associations between PTH-CH and family history of CH (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.31 to 8.63), chronic form (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.70 to 6.49), parietal (OR 14.82, 95% CI 6.32 to 37.39) or temporal (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.84) location of pain, and presence of prominent cranial autonomic features during attacks (miosis OR 11.24, 95% CI 3.21 to 41.34; eyelid oedema OR 5.79, 95% CI 2.57 to 13.82; rhinorrhoea OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.86; facial sweating OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.33 to 4.93). Patients with PTH-CH were at a higher risk of being intractable to acute (OR 12.34, 95% CI 2.51 to 64.73) and preventive (OR 16.98, 95% CI 6.88 to 45.52) treatments and of suffering from associated chronic migraine (OR 10.35, 95% CI 3.96 to 28.82).

CONCLUSION

This largest series of PTH-CH defines it as a unique entity with specific evolutive profile. Patients with PTH-CH are more likely to suffer from the chronic variant, have marked autonomic features, be intractable to treatment and have associated chronic migraine compared with primary CH.

Direct and indirect costs of cluster headache: a prospective analysis in a tertiary level headache centre

Background

Cluster headache (CH) is the most frequent trigemino-autonomic cephalgia. CH can manifest as episodic (ECH) or chronic cluster headache (CCH) causing significant burden of disease and requiring attack therapy and prophylactic treatment. The few data available on the economic burden of CH come from retrospective studies based on questionnaires, population surveys and medical insurance claims database. Although all these studies showed an important economic burden, they provided different estimates depending on variability of CH awareness and management, healthcare systems, available therapies and use of treatments according to different guidelines.

Methods

This prospective study aimed to quantify the total direct and indirect cost of ECH and CCH over a cluster period, both for the patient and for the National Health System (NHS), using data from subjects who consecutively attended an Italian tertiary headache centre between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018.

Results

A total 108 patients (89 ECH, 19 CCH) were included. Mean attack frequency was 2.3 ± 1.4 per day. Mean total cost of a CH bout was €4398 per patient and total cost of CCH was 5.4 times higher than ECH (€13,350 vs. €2487, p <  0.001). Direct costs represented the 72.1% of total cost and were covered for the 94.8% by the NHS. The costs for any item of expense were higher for CCH than for ECH (p <  0.001). Mean indirect costs for a CH bout were €1226 per patient and were higher for CCH compared to ECH (€3.538 vs. €732), but the difference was not significant. Days with reduced productive capacity impacted for the 64.6% of the total indirect costs. The analysis of the impact CH on work showed that 27%% of patients felt that CH had limited their career, 40% had changed their work pattern, 20% had changed their place of employment and 10% had lost a job due to the disease.

Conclusion

Our results provide a valuable estimate of the direct and indirect costs of ECH and CCH in the specific setting of a tertiary headache centre and confirm the high economic impact of CH on both the NHS and patients.

A prospective case series of sphenopalatine ganglion pulsed radiofrequency therapy for refractory chronic cluster headache

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The management options for chronic cluster headache (CCH) are limited and a significant proportion of patients become refractory to pharmacological treatments. Pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) may present an efficacious, minimally invasive treatment modality for patients with refractory CCH. We describe the clinical outcomes of 14 patients with refractory CCH treated with PRF of the SPG.

METHODS

Patients with medically refractory CCH who underwent percutaneous SPG-PRF treatment between January 2016 and April 2019 were included in this report. Patients obtaining at least 30% reduction in weekly cluster attacks for at least 3 months were defined as responders. Treatment-related side effects were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 14 patients were included in this report (nine males). At a median follow-up of 6.5 (range 6-13) months post-procedure, eight patients (57.1%) were defined as responders to the treatment. Six patients were non-responders and reported either a reduction in frequency and severity of attacks for <3 months (2/6), no improvement (2/6) or temporary worsening of symptoms (1/6). The majority of patients (63.6%, n = 7/11) treated with >45 V were responders compared with responders treated with 45 V (33.3%, n = 1/3). Five patients (35.7%) experienced post-procedural side effects.

CONCLUSION

This case series suggests that PRF targeting the SPG might offer a safe, minimally invasive and effective treatment for medically refractory CCH. Given the small number of cases and the short follow-up, larger and more robust studies will be needed to confirm our findings.

Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache: Results from 3-month double-blind treatment

Objective

To report efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in adults with chronic cluster headache.

Background

Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its biological activity.

Methods

This study comprised a prospective baseline period, a 12-week double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period, and a 52-week open-label period. Up to six protocol-specified concomitant preventive medications were allowed if patients were on a stable dose for 2 months prior to the prospective baseline period. Patients were randomized 1:1 to monthly subcutaneous galcanezumab (300 mg) or placebo. The primary endpoint was overall mean change from baseline in weekly attack frequency with galcanezumab compared to placebo. Key secondary endpoints were ≥50% response rate and percentage of patients meeting sustained response. Results from the double-blind treatment period are reported.

Results

A total of 237 patients were randomized and treated (120 placebo; 117 galcanezumab). At baseline, the mean age was 45 years and 63% were using ≥1 preventive drug. The primary endpoint was not met; mean change in weekly attack frequency was −4.6 placebo versus −5.4 galcanezumab (p = 0.334). Key secondary endpoints also were not met. Injection site-related treatment-emergent adverse events were more common in the galcanezumab than the placebo group, with significantly more injection site erythema.

Conclusion

Treatment with galcanezumab 300 mg did not achieve its primary and key secondary endpoints. This study underscores the potential distinct biology of cCH as well as the significant unmet need for safe, effective, and well-tolerated preventive treatment. The safety profile of galcanezumab in cCH is consistent with that observed in trials of episodic CH and migraine.

Trial registration

NCT02438826; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02438826.

Occipital nerve stimulation and deep brain stimulation for refractory cluster headache: a prospective analysis of efficacy over time

OBJECTIVE

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) are widely used surgical treatments for chronic refractory cluster headache (CH). However, there is little literature regarding long-term follow-up of these treatments.

METHODS

The authors describe two prospective cohorts of patients with refractory CH treated with ONS and DBS and compare preoperative to postoperative status at 6 and 12 months after the surgery and at final follow-up. Efficacy analysis using objective and subjective variables is reported, as well as medication reduction and complications.

RESULTS

The ONS group consisted of 13 men and 4 women, with a median age of 44 years (range 31-61 years). The median number of attacks per week (NAw) before surgery was 28 (range 7-70), and the median follow-up duration was 48 months. The DBS group comprised 5 men and 2 women, with a median age of 50 years (range 29-64 years). The median NAw before surgery was 56 (range 14-140), and the median follow-up was 36 months. The NAw and visual analog scale score were significantly reduced for the ONS and DBS groups after surgery. However, while all the patients from the DBS group were considered responders at final follow-up, with more than 85% being satisfied with the treatment, approximately 29% of initial responders to ONS became resistant by the final follow-up (p = 0.0253).

CONCLUSIONS

ONS is initially effective as a treatment for refractory CH, although a trend toward loss of efficacy was observed. No clear predictors of good clinical response were found in the present study. Conversely, DBS appears to be effective and provide a more stable clinical response over time with an acceptable rate of surgical complications.

Pharmacotherapy for Cluster Headache

Cluster headache is characterised by attacks of excruciating unilateral headache or facial pain lasting 15 min to 3 h and is seen as one of the most intense forms of pain. Cluster headache attacks are accompanied by ipsilateral autonomic symptoms such as ptosis, miosis, redness or flushing of the face, nasal congestion, rhinorrhoea, peri-orbital swelling and/or restlessness or agitation. Cluster headache treatment entails fast-acting abortive treatment, transitional treatment and preventive treatment. The primary goal of prophylactic and transitional treatment is to achieve attack freedom, although this is not always possible. Subcutaneous sumatriptan and high-flow oxygen are the most proven abortive treatments for cluster headache attacks, but other treatment options such as intranasal triptans may be effective. Verapamil and lithium are the preventive drugs of first choice and the most widely used in first-line preventive treatment. Given its possible cardiac side effects, electrocardiogram (ECG) is recommended before treating with verapamil. Liver and kidney functioning should be evaluated before and during treatment with lithium. If verapamil and lithium are ineffective, contraindicated or discontinued because of side effects, the second choice is topiramate. If all these drugs fail, other options with lower levels of evidence are available (e.g. melatonin, clomiphene, dihydroergotamine, pizotifen). However, since the evidence level is low, we also recommend considering one of several neuromodulatory options in patients with refractory chronic cluster headache. A new addition to the preventive treatment options in episodic cluster headache is galcanezumab, although the long-term effects remain unknown. Since effective preventive treatment can take several weeks to titrate, transitional treatment can be of great importance in the treatment of cluster headache. At present, greater occipital nerve injection is the most proven transitional treatment. Other options are high-dose prednisone or frovatriptan.

Efficacy and safety of surgical treatment of cluster headache

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Cluster headache (CR) is the most severe human headache and is chronic in 10%-20% of patients, and 10% can become refractory to all effective drugs. In this scenario, surgical procedures are indicated: radiofrequencies of the sphenopalatine ganglion ipsilateral to pain (RF-SPG), bilateral stimulation of the occipital nerves (NOM-S) and deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the ipsilateral posterior hypothalamus. The efficacy and safety of each of these procedures has been specifically analyzed, but the progress of a series of patients following this surgical route in order of aggressiveness has not been described.

PATIENTS

Patients with chronic and refractory CR according to the criteria of the European Headache Federation. The patients underwent RF-SPG, NOM-S sequentially if the previous procedure had been ineffective, and DBS if the previous procedure had been ineffective.

RESULTS

We prospectively included 44 patients between November 2003 and June 2018 with an average age of 38.3 years; 70% were men. The mean follow-up was 87.4 months. Nineteen patients responded to 74 procedures of RF-SPG (33.3%). Of the remaining 25 patients, a NOM-S device was implanted in 22, showing an efficacy of 50%. Finally, 9 patients underwent ECP of the ipsilateral lower-posterior hypothalamus with an efficacy of 88.8%. No serious complications were found following any of these 3 procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

The sequential application of these three surgical procedures succeeded in reversing the serious situation of chronic CR refractory to an episodic CR in 93% of patients with acceptable surgical morbidity.

Greater Occipital Nerve Block for the Treatment of Chronic Migraine Headaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Few treatment options exist for chronic migraine headaches, with peripheral nerve blocks having long been used to reduce the frequency and severity of migraines. Although the therapeutic effects have been observed in clinical practice, the efficacy has never been fully studied. In the past decade, however, several randomized controlled clinical trials have been conducted to assess the efficacy of greater occipital nerve block in the treatment of chronic migraine headaches.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed in the citation databases PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. The initial search of databases yielded 259 citations, of which 33 were selected as candidates for full-text review. Of these, nine studies were selected for inclusion in this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Studies were analyzed that reported mean number of headache days per month in both intervention and control groups. A total of 417 patients were studied, with a pooled mean difference of -3.6 headache days (95 percent CI, -1.39 to -5.81 days). This demonstrates that greater occipital nerve block intervention significantly reduced the frequency of migraine headaches compared with controls (p < 0.00001). Pooled mean difference in pain scores of -2.2 (95 percent CI, -1.56 to -2.84) also demonstrated a significant decrease in headache severity compared with controls (p < 0.0121).

CONCLUSIONS

Greater occipital nerve blocking should be recommended for use in migraine patients, particularly those that may require future surgical intervention. The block may act as an important stepping stone for patients experiencing migraine headache because of its usefulness for potentially assessing surgical candidates for nerve decompression.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, II.

Differential efficacy of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for the acute treatment of episodic and chronic cluster headache: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Two randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trials (ACT1, ACT2) evaluated non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) as acute treatment for cluster headache. We analyzed pooled ACT1/ACT2 data to increase statistical power and gain insight into the differential efficacy of nVNS in episodic and chronic cluster headache.

METHODS

Data extracted from ACT1 and ACT2 were pooled using a fixed-effects model. Main outcome measures were the primary endpoints of each study. This was the proportion of participants whose first treated attack improved from moderate (2), severe (3), or very severe (4) pain intensity to mild (1) or nil (0) for ACT1 and the proportion of treated attacks whose pain intensity improved from 2-4 to 0 for ACT2.

RESULTS

The pooled population included 225 participants (episodic: n = 112; chronic: n = 113) from ACT1 (n = 133) and ACT2 (n = 92) in the nVNS (n = 108) and sham (n = 117) groups. Interaction was shown between treatment group and cluster headache subtype (p < 0.05). nVNS was superior to sham in episodic but not chronic cluster headache (both endpoints p < 0.01). Only four patients discontinued the studies due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

nVNS is a well-tolerated and effective acute treatment for episodic cluster headache.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The studies were registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ACT1: NCT01792817; ACT2: NCT01958125).

Emerging treatments for cluster headache: hopes and disappointments

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cluster headache stands among the worst debilitating pain conditions. Available treatments for cluster headache have often disabling side effects, are not tolerated, or are ineffective. The management of drug-refractory chronic forms is challenging. New treatments are warranted and reported here.

RECENT FINDINGS

In cluster headache acute treatment, delivery systems like Demand Valve Oxygen or nonrebreather-type masks could enhance the effectiveness of inhaled oxygen therapy. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation relieves cluster headache pain at short-term in episodic patients. Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation combines acute and preventive properties in subsets of patients and is of interest in selected refractory chronic forms. In cluster headache prevention, 'hypothalamic' deep brain stimulation is being refined using slightly different stereotactic coordinates or lower risk methods like endoventricular stimulation. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies provide interesting results in episodic cluster headache, have a good safety profile, but do not appear effective in chronic cluster headache.

SUMMARY

These novel approaches provide additional alternatives to conventional cluster headache management, but results obtained in chronic forms are often disappointing. Research on cluster headache is often hampered by the lack of awareness in the medical world and by the relatively low prevalence of cluster headache compared with migraine. However, common features shared by these two primary headaches could help developing disease-specific therapies.

Neurostimulation for the treatment of chronic migraine and cluster headache

Small subsets of patients who fail to respond to pharmacological treatment may benefit from alternative treatment methods. In the last decade, neurostimulation is being explored as a potential treatment option for the patients with chronic, severely disabling refractory primary headaches. To alleviate pain, specific nerves and brain areas have been stimulated, and various methods have been explored: deep brain stimulation, occipital nerve stimulation, and sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation are among the more invasive ones, whereas transcranial magnetic stimulation and supraorbital nerve stimulation are noninvasive. Vagal nerve stimulation can be invasive or noninvasive, though this review included only data for noninvasive VNS. Most of these methods have been tested in small open-label patient series; recently, more data from randomized, controlled, and blinded studies are available. Although neurostimulation treatments have demonstrated good efficacy in many studies, it still has not been established as a standard treatment in refractory patients. This review analyzes the available evidence regarding efficacy and safety of different neurostimulation modalities for the treatment of chronic migraine and cluster headache.

Efficacy of Sphenopalatine Ganglion Radiofrequency in Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache

BACKGROUND

In the literature, there are only short series of radiofrequency of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) to treat chronic refractory cluster headache (CCHr) with variable results. Furthermore, there is no consensus on which methodology to use: radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or pulsed radiofrequency (PRF).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective analysis of 37 patients with CCHr who underwent RFA or PRF of the SPG in our center between 2004 and 2015.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 40 years (range, 26-59 years). PRF was performed in 24 patients, and RFA was performed in 13 patients. A total of 5 patients (13.5%) experienced complete clinical relief of both pain and parasympathetic symptoms, 21 patients (56.8%) had partial and transient relief, and 11 patients (29.7%) did not improve. There was no evidence of significant superiority of one radiofrequency modality over the other (P = 0.48). There were no complications associated with the technique. The passage of time tended to decrease the efficacy of both techniques (P < 0.001). The mean follow-up was 68.1 months (range, 15-148 months). To our knowledge, this is the series with the largest number of patients and the longest follow-up period published in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiofrequency of the SPG is a safe, fast, and partially effective method for the treatment of CCHr. Given its low rate of complications and its low economic cost, we think it should be one of the first invasive treatment options, prior to techniques with greater morbidity and mortality, such as neuromodulation.