Debate: Are cluster headache and migraine distinct headache disorders?

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

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

Induction of cluster headache after opening of adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium channels: a randomized clinical trial

ABSTRACT

Activation of adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium (K ATP ) channels has been implicated in triggering migraine attacks. However, whether the opening of these channels provoke cluster headache attacks remains undetermined. The hallmark of cluster headache is a distinct cyclical pattern of recurrent, severe headache episodes, succeeded by intervals of remission where no symptoms are present. In our study, we enrolled 41 participants: 10 with episodic cluster headaches during a bout, 15 in the attack-free remission period, and 17 diagnosed with chronic cluster headaches. Over 2 distinct experimental days, participants underwent a continuous 20-minute infusion of levcromakalim, a K ATP channel opener, or a placebo (isotonic saline), followed by a 90-minute observational period. The primary outcome was comparing the incidence of cluster headache attacks within the postinfusion observation period between the levcromakalim and placebo groups. Six of 10 participants (60%) with episodic cluster headaches in bout experienced attacks after levcromakalim infusion, vs just 1 of 10 (10%) with placebo ( P = 0.037). Among those in the remission phase, 1 of 15 participants (7%) reported attacks after levcromakalim, whereas none did postplacebo ( P = 0.50). In addition, 5 of 17 participants (29%) with chronic cluster headache had attacks after levcromakalim, in contrast to none after placebo ( P = 0.037). These findings demonstrate that K ATP channel activation can induce cluster headache attacks in participants with episodic cluster headaches in bout and chronic cluster headache, but not in those in the remission period. Our results underscore the potential utility of K ATP channel inhibitors as therapeutic agents for cluster headaches.

The role of voltage-gated calcium channel α2δ-1 in the occurrence and development in myofascial orofacial pain

Patients who suffer from myofascial orofacial pain could affect their quality of life deeply. The pathogenesis of pain is still unclear. Our objective was to assess Whether Voltage-gated calcium channel α2δ-1(Cavα2δ-1) is related to myofascial orofacial pain. Rats were divided into the masseter tendon ligation group and the sham group. Compared with the sham group, the mechanical pain threshold of the masseter tendon ligation group was reduced on the 4th, 7th, 10th and 14th day after operation(P < 0.05). On the 14th day after operation, Cavα2δ-1 mRNA expression levels in trigeminal ganglion (TG) and the trigeminal spinal subnucleus caudalis and C1-C2 spinal cervical dorsal horn (Vc/C2) of the masseter tendon ligation group were increased (PTG=0.021, PVc/C2=0.012). Rats were divided into three groups. On the 4th day after ligating the superficial tendon of the left masseter muscle of the rats, 10 ul Cavα2δ-1 antisense oligonucleotide, 10 ul Cavα2δ-1 mismatched oligonucleotides and 10 ul normal saline was separately injected into the left masseter muscle of rats in Cavα2δ-1 antisense oligonucleotide group, Cavα2δ-1 mismatched oligonucleotides group and normal saline control group twice a day for 4 days. The mechanical pain threshold of the Cavα2δ-1 antisense oligonucleotides group was higher than Cavα2δ-1 mismatched oligonucleotides group on the 7th and 10th day after operation (P < 0.01). After PC12 cells were treated with lipopolysaccharide, Cavα2δ-1 mRNA expression level increased (P < 0.001). Cavα2δ-1 may be involved in the occurrence and development in myofascial orofacial pain.

Reduced plasma calcitonin gene-related peptide level identified in cluster headache: A prospective and controlled study

BACKGROUND

The role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in the cyclic pattern of cluster headache is unclear. To acquire biological insight and to comprehend why only episodic cluster headache responds to CGRP monoclonal antibodies, we examined whether plasma CGRP changes between disease states (i.e. bout, remission and chronic) and controls.

METHODS

The present study is a prospective case-control study. Participants with episodic cluster headache were sampled twice (bout and remission). Participants with chronic cluster headache and controls were sampled once. CGRP concentrations were measured in plasma with a validated radioimmunoassay.

RESULTS

Plasma was collected from 201 participants diagnosed with cluster headache according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, and from 100 age- and sex-matched controls. Overall, plasma CGRP levels were significantly lower in participants with cluster headache compared to controls (p < 0.05). In episodic cluster headache, CGRP levels were higher in bout than in remission (mean difference: 17.1 pmol/L, 95% confidence interval = 9.8-24.3, p < 0.0001). CGRP levels in bout were not different from chronic cluster headache (p = 0.266).

CONCLUSIONS

Plasma CGRP is unsuitable as a diagnostic biomarker of cluster headache or its disease states. The identified reduced CGRP levels suggest that CGRPs role in cluster headache is highly complex and future investigations are needed into the modulation of CGRP and its receptors.

Cluster Headache Presenting As Sinonasal Pathology in a Young Adult: A Diagnostic Odyssey

Cluster headache is a debilitating primary headache disorder marked by severe, unilateral pain often accompanied by autonomic symptoms. We describe the case of a 20-year-old student who presented with excruciating peri-orbital pain localized to the right side, accompanied by ipsilateral nasal obstruction, a nasal spur, and a deviated nasal septum (DNS). The initial clinical picture strongly suggested sinonasal pathology, leading to investigations and treatments aimed at this presumed diagnosis. However, as the patient's symptoms persisted and evolved over time, with episodes of recurrent and intense pain associated with ipsilateral tearing, rhinorrhea, and ptosis, further evaluation was pursued. A comprehensive assessment, including detailed headache characteristics, neurological examination, and neuroimaging, ultimately revealed the diagnosis of cluster headache. This case emphasizes the diagnostic challenges associated with atypical presentations of cluster headaches, the importance of a meticulous clinical evaluation, and the need for early recognition to provide timely and effective interventions for these severely affected individuals.

Pediatric Cluster Headache Case Series: Symptomatic Cases and the Migraine Relationship

BACKGROUND

Current criteria help differentiate cluster headache from migraine. However, children may have overlapping features making it difficult to distinguish the 2 conditions, which may delay diagnosis. Differentiating cluster headache from migraine is important regarding treatment as well as diagnostic workup of secondary headache etiologies.

METHODS

Cases at a single pediatric children's hospital from 2015 to 2023 diagnosed with cluster headache before the age of 18 years were reviewed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five cases were identified of which 22 cases met criteria for either chronic, episodic, or probable cluster headache. Three cases were diagnosed with cluster headache by their provider, but documentation was insufficient to meet criteria for cluster headache. There were 16 females and 9 males between ages 6 and 17 years. Five cases were identified as symptomatic, 2 cases as chronic, 7 cases as episodic, and 13 cases as probable cluster headache. Symptomatic etiologies include Graves disease, optic neuritis, prolactinoma, hypothalamic pilocytic astrocytoma with carotid stenosis, and congenital right eye blindness. Migrainous features were common, including 76% with nausea, 36% with vomiting, 68% with photophobia, and 56% with phonophobia. Patients with cluster headache also had an independent diagnosis of migraine in 64%.

CONCLUSION

Children with cluster headache have a high frequency of migrainous symptoms and co-occurrent diagnosis of migraine. A careful history may differentiate cluster headache from migraine and treated accordingly. Children with cluster headache features should undergo screening for secondary causes with appropriate imaging and other studies. Except for prolactinoma, the symptomatic associations noted in this case series have not been reported before.

Neurovascular Compression-Induced Intracranial Allodynia May Be the True Nature of Migraine Headache: an Interpretative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Surgical deactivation of migraine trigger sites by extracranial neurovascular decompression has produced encouraging results and challenged previous understanding of primary headaches. However, there is a lack of in-depth discussions on the pathophysiological basis of migraine surgery. This narrative review provides interpretation of relevant literature from the perspective of compressive neuropathic etiology, pathogenesis, and pathophysiology of migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Vasodilation, which can be asymptomatic in healthy subjects, may produce compression of cranial nerves in migraineurs at both extracranial and intracranial entrapment-prone sites. This may be predetermined by inherited and acquired anatomical factors and may include double crush-type lesions. Neurovascular compression can lead to sensitization of the trigeminal pathways and resultant cephalic hypersensitivity. While descending (central) trigeminal activation is possible, symptomatic intracranial sensitization can probably only occur in subjects who develop neurovascular entrapment of cranial nerves, which can explain why migraine does not invariably afflict everyone. Nerve compression-induced focal neuroinflammation and sensitization of any cranial nerve may neurogenically spread to other cranial nerves, which can explain the clinical complexity of migraine. Trigger dose-dependent alternating intensity of sensitization and its synchrony with cyclic central neural activities, including asymmetric nasal vasomotor oscillations, may explain the laterality and phasic nature of migraine pain. Intracranial allodynia, i.e., pain sensation upon non-painful stimulation, may better explain migraine pain than merely nociceptive mechanisms, because migraine cannot be associated with considerable intracranial structural changes and consequent painful stimuli. Understanding migraine as an intracranial allodynia could stimulate research aimed at elucidating the possible neuropathic compressive etiology of migraine and other primary headaches.

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.

Relationship between alcohol and primary headaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Headache is one of the most common neurological symptoms. Many previous studies have indicated a relationship between primary headaches and alcohol. Drinking has been associated with increased risk of tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine. However, recently published studies have not confirmed this relationship. The existing literature is inconclusive; however, migraine patients avoid alcohol. Therefore, the primary objective was to provide a reliable assessment of alcohol intake in people with primary headaches; the secondary objective was to identify any potential relationship between alcohol consumption and headache risk.

METHODS

This study was based on PubMed, Embase and Web of Science database searches performed on 11 July 2023. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023412926). Risk of bias for the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Meta-analyses were performed using Statistica software. The Risk Ratio (RR) was adopted as the measure of the final effect. Analyses were based on a dichotomous division of the respondents into "non-drinkers" and "drinkers" for headache patients and matched non-headache groups.

RESULTS

From a total of 1892 articles, 22 were included in the meta-analysis. The majority demonstrated a moderate or high risk of bias. The first part of the meta-analysis was performed on data obtained from 19 migraine studies with 126 173 participants. The risk of migraine in alcohol drinkers is approximately 1.5 times lower than in the group of non-drinkers (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57-0.89). The second part involved 9 TTH studies with 28 715 participants. No relationship was found between TTH diagnosis and alcohol consumption (RR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.93-1.27). Two of the included cluster-headache articles had inconclusive results.

CONCLUSIONS

Alcohol consumption and migraine are inversely correlated. The exact mechanism behind this observation may indicate that migraine leads to alcohol-avoidance, rather than alcohol having any protective role against migraine. There was no relationship between TTH and drinking. However, further studies related to primary headaches and alcohol consumption with low risk of bias are required. Additionally, patients and physicians should consider the latest medical data, in order to avoid the myths about alcohol consumption and primary headaches.

Fremanezumab and Non-High-Dose Galcanezumab for Comorbid Cluster Headache in Patients with Migraine: Three Cases

A new treatment option for cluster headache (CH) prevention is needed. Monoclonal antibodies (mABs) against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) ligands are used as a preventative treatment for migraine. Considering the CGRP’s role in the CH attack’s ignition and upkeep, fremanezumab and galcanezumab have been evaluated for CH preventative treatment. However, only high-dose (300 mg) galcanezumab has been approved for episodic CH prevention. We herein report three cases of migraine and comorbid CH with previous failures of preventive treatments. Two cases were treated with fremanezumab and one with non-high-dose galcanezumab. All three cases showed good results, not only for migraine, but also for CH attacks. This report suggests the efficacy of CGRP-mABs for CH prevention. Our cases differed from cases in the phase 3 trials of CGRP-mABs for CH prevention in two ways: first, our patients had both migraine and comorbid CH, and second, we used a combination of CGRP-mABs with preventative drugs, such as verapamil and/or prednisolone, to treat CH. Future accumulation of real-world data may prove the efficacy of CGRP-mABs for CH prevention.