Chronic Migraine Preventive Treatment by Prefrontal-Occipital Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS): A Proof-of-Concept Study on the Effect of Psychiatric Comorbidities

Effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as adjunctive treatment for chronic headache in adults with clinically stable systemic lupus erythematosus (SHADE): a randomised double-blind multiarm sham controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic headache is a 'silent' neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus symptom with heterogeneous prevalence, potentially reaching 54.4%. It may reduce quality of life by increasing the likelihood of depression and sleep disturbance. While pharmacotherapy remains the first-line treatment, the current management is still challenging and needs other non-invasive modalities. An effective, tolerable and disease-specific treatment modality including transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is considered to reduce the frequency of chronic headaches, including in SLE. Until recently, there was no standard protocol for tDCS in treating headaches.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

SHADE is a single-centre randomised double-blind multiarm sham-controlled trial for adults with clinically stable SLE, chronic headaches and without history of traumatic brain injury, brain infection, stroke or brain tumour. Random allocation is conducted to 88 subjects into 3 treatment groups (administration at primary motor, primary sensory and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex) and control group in 1:1:1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint is reduced number of headache days after adjunctive tDCS. The secondary endpoints are reduced headache intensity, increased quality of life, increased sleep quality, decreased depression and reduced analgesics use. The outcome is measured monthly until 3-month postintervention using headache diary, 36-Item Short Form Survey, Chronic Headache Quality of Life Questionnaire, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Mini International Neuropsychiatry Interview version 10 (MINI ICD 10). Intention-to-treat analysis will be performed to determine the best tDCS electrode placement.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval had been obtained from the local Institutional Review Board of Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia. Results will be published through scientific relevant peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05613582.

Non-Pharmacological Treatment for Chronic Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic migraine (CM) affects a large proportion of the population and is a significant source of disability and lost productivity. Numerous non-pharmacological approaches have been attempted during the past decades. This review discusses the most recent and evidence-based advances in acute and preventive non-pharmacological therapeutic approaches for CM, offering alternatives to drug treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

A growing number of non-pharmacological treatment options, including non-invasive or invasive neuromodulation, acupuncture, psychotherapy, and physiotherapy, have shown promising efficacy in CM. There is strong evidence for the effectiveness of non-invasive neuromodulation such as transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in CM, but less evidence for approaches such as invasive neuromodulation, physical therapy, or dietary approaches. Acupuncture for migraine remains controversial, with the main point of contention still being the placebo effect. Non-pharmacological approaches can be offered as a reliable alternative for patients with CM, and more research is being done to evaluate the efficacy of non-invasive neuromodulation with different parameters and the combination of different treatments in CM.

Update of Neuromodulation in Chronic Migraine

Purpose of Review

Neuromodulation devices have become an attractive alternative to traditional pharmacotherapy for migraine, especially for patients intolerant to medication or who prefer non-pharmacological options. In the past decades, many studies demonstrated the efficacy of neuromodulation devices in patients with episodic migraine (EM). However, the benefit of these devices on chronic migraine (CM), which is typically more debilitating and refractory than EM, remains not well studied.

Recent Findings

We reviewed the literature within the last five years on using FDA-cleared and investigational devices for CM. There were eight randomized controlled trials and 15 open-label observational studies on ten neuromodulation devices.

Summary

Neuromodulation is promising for use in CM, although efficacy varies among devices or individuals. Noninvasive devices are usually considered safe with minimal adverse events. However, stimulation protocol and methodology differ between studies. More well-designed studies adhering to the guideline may facilitate FDA clearance and better insurance coverage.

Psychological predictors of negative treatment outcome with Erenumab in chronic migraine: data from an open label long-term prospective study

Background

Monoclonal antibodies (mABs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway represent the first disease-specific preventive migraine therapy. Growing evidence suggests that they are effective in the preventive treatment of difficult-to-treat patients. In this study, we evaluated the psychological predictors of the outcome of treatment with the anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody erenumab in patients with chronic migraine (CM).

Methods

Seventy-five patients with CM who had already failed at least 3 preventive therapies received erenumab every 28 days for a period of 12 months. Before the first administration, patients received a full psychological evaluation using The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Clinician Version (SCID-5-CV) to assess personality disturbances (primary outcome), mood and anxiety disorders, and as well specific questionnaires to evaluate alexithymia traits, childhood traumas, and current stressors (secondary outcomes).

Results

After 12 months of treatment, 53 patients reported a reduction of at least 50% in headache days/per month (Responders), whereas 22 did not (Non Responders). When compared to Responders, Non Responders were characterized by a higher prevalence of personality disorders belonging to Cluster C (avoidant, dependent, and obsessive-compulsive) (77% vs 37%, p = .001). Non Responders were also characterized by a higher prevalence of anxiety disorders (90% vs 60%, p = 0.007), showed more alexithymic traits (51.7 ± 13.7 vs 42.9 ± 14.3, p = 0.017), and reported a higher number of 'at least serious' current stressors (3.2 ± 4.0 vs 0.8 ± 1.4, p < .0001) than Responders. At the multivariate analysis, higher prevalence of Cluster C personality disorders (OR 3.697; p = 0.05) and higher number of ‘at least serious’ life events (OR 1.382; p = 0.017) arose as prognostic factors of erenumab failure.

Conclusions

Erenumab confirmed its effectiveness in a population of difficult-to-treat migraine. The presence of “anxious-fearful” personality together with current stressors and anxiety represent negative predictors of treatment outcome.

Trial registration

The study protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04361721).