Danish Headache Center Research Articles

Transition of cluster headache: Depicting side-changing attacks as a chronic trait in an interview-based follow-up study.

Cluster headache presents in an episodic and chronic form, between which patients can convert during the course of disease. We aimed to quantify the rate of cluster headache patients changing phenotype within one and fiveyears and investigate the earlier proposed association between chronification and having side-shifting attacks. In total, 430 cluster headache patients well-characterized according to current International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria, who were all participants in a prior transition-study, were re-interviewed in an observational, retrospective, cross-sectional follow-up study design at the Danish Headache Center. The transition rate for the whole cohort was 6.5% within one year and 19.8% within five years. The risk of becoming chronic if episodic was 4.0% within one year and 12.3% within five years. For conversion from chronic to episodic, the corresponding risk was 11.1% and 25.0%, respectively. Alterations in attack-side were reported in 32% of all chronic patients, generating an odds ratio of 2.24 of being chronic as opposed to episodic if experiencing side-shifting attacks. A higher transition rate since the original cross-sectional study demonstrates cluster headache as a non-static condition. Identifying a risk of transition within one and five years, based on current phenotype along with high odds of being chronic when experiencing a shift of attack-side, offers a valuable clinical compass in the dialogue with the patient.

Challenges in the management of new daily persistent headache at a tertiary headache center-A retrospective real-world evidence study.

In this retrospective cross-sectional real-world evidence study from the Danish Headache Center (DHC), a national tertiary headache center in Denmark, we sought to identify potential pharmacological agents for the treatment of new daily persistent headache (NDPH). NDPH is an enigmatic headache disorder with abrupt onset and chronic duration for which evidence-based treatments are lacking. NDPH is a diagnosis of exclusion, for which secondary headaches must be ruled out and the etiology remains idiopathic. The sparse investigations of this disorder have not yielded a pathophysiological basis and no effective treatment for NDPH has been found. All patients with an NDPH diagnosis at the DHC were enrolled (n = 64). First, we reviewed the records of all patients with an NDPH diagnosis to evaluate whether they fulfilled the diagnostic criteria. Next, we extracted all the trialled acute and prophylactic pharmacological interventions for the included patients. Then, pharmacological interventions that had been tried in ≥ 20 patients were analyzed post hoc with efficacy as the outcome, which was stratified in five effect categories ("no effect," "partial effect," "full effect," "partial effect and cessation due to adverse events," and "full effect and cessation due to adverse events"). Descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and the results were schematically presented (see Table2). Fifty-one patients out of 64 were found to fulfill NDPH criteria and were included in the study. The drugs tried by ≥ 20 patients were amitriptyline (n = 34), candesartan (n = 27), and mirtazapine (n = 20). No patients experienced a complete effect with these drugs while 9% (3/34), 26% (7/27), and 15% (3/20) experienced a partial effect with no adverse events that led to treatment discontinuation, respectively. The remaining patients experienced either no effect or a partial effect with adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. In this study we add real-world evidence to suggest that prophylactic drugs conventionally used for treating chronic migraine and chronic tension-type headache have limited utility for treating NDPH; however, a partial response in 26% of patients using candesartan and 15% of patients using mirtazapine warrants further investigation in randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trials.

Erenumab for Treatment of Persistent Erythema and Flushing in Rosacea

Treatment of erythema and flushing in rosacea is challenging. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been associated with the pathogenesis of rosacea, raising the possibility that inhibition of the CGRP pathway might improve certain features of the disease. To examine the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of erenumab, an anti-CGRP-receptor monoclonal antibody, for the treatment of rosacea-associated erythema and flushing. This single-center, open-label, single-group, nonrandomized controlled trial was conducted between June 9, 2020, and May 11, 2021. Eligible participants included adults with rosacea with at least 15 days of either moderate to severe erythema and/or moderate to extreme flushing. No concomitant rosacea treatment was allowed throughout the study period. Visits took place at the Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, Denmark. Participants received 140 mg of erenumab subcutaneously every 4 weeks for 12 weeks. A safety follow-up visit was performed at week 20. Data analysis occurred from January 2023 to January 2024. 140 mg of erenumab every 4 weeks for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was mean change in the number of days with moderate to extreme flushing during weeks 9 through 12, compared with the 4-week run-in period (baseline). The mean change in number of days with moderate to severe erythema was a secondary outcome. Adverse events were recorded for participants who received at least 1 dose of erenumab. Differences in means were calculated with a paired t test. A total of 30 participants (mean [SD] age, 38.8 [13.1] years; 23 female [77%]; 7 male [23%]) were included, of whom 27 completed the 12-week study. The mean (SD) number of days with moderate to extreme flushing was reduced by -6.9 days (95% CI, -10.4 to -3.4 days; P < .001) from 23.6 (5.8) days at baseline. The mean (SD) number of days with moderate to severe erythema was reduced by -8.1 days (95% CI, -12.5 to -3.7 days; P < .001) from 15.2 (9.1) days at baseline. Adverse events included transient mild to moderate constipation (10 participants [33%]), transient worsening of flushing (4 participants [13%]), bloating (3 participants [10%]), and upper respiratory tract infections (3 participants [10%]), consistent with previous data. One participant discontinued the study due to a serious adverse event (hospital admission due to gallstones deemed unrelated to the study), and 2 participants withdrew consent due to lack of time. These findings suggest that erenumab might be effective in reducing rosacea-associated flushing and chronic erythema (participants generally tolerated the treatment well, which was consistent with previous data), and that CGRP-receptor inhibition holds potential in the treatment of erythema and flushing associated with rosacea. Larger randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm this finding. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04419259.

Evaluating Headache and Facial Pain in a Headache Diagnostic Laboratory: Experiences from the Danish Headache Center.

Diagnostic tests are not routinely used for the diagnosis of primary headaches. It is possible that laboratory tests could be developed and implemented at tertiary headache centers to be an integrated part of the diagnosis and management of headache patients, and laboratory tests that can be used on-site at headache centers could help in evaluating patients with secondary headache disorders. In this narrative review, we present some of the studies that have been made so far at the Headache Diagnostic Laboratory at the Danish Headache Center that aim to investigate and phenotype primary headaches and investigate secondary headaches as well as improve management. Semi-structured interviews and deep phenotyping, quantitative sensory testing, and provocation studies have been shown to be valuable in categorizing primary and secondary headache subtypes, possible pathophysiology, and defining needs for further research. In patients suspected of increased intracranial pressure, transorbital ultrasound with measurement of the optic sheath diameter may be useful in monitoring patients. The management of headache patients needs to be critically evaluated to optimize treatment continuously. A Headache Diagnostic Laboratory is very useful and should be an integrated part of headache care and management at tertiary headache centers.

The effect of Lu AG09222 on PACAP38- and VIP-induced vasodilation, heart rate increase, and headache in healthy subjects: an interventional, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study

BackgroundPituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP), structurally related to vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP), is one of the important mediators in the pathogenesis of migraine and is known to dilate cranial arteries and induce headache and migraine. Our objective was to determine whether Lu AG09222—an investigational humanized monoclonal antibody directed against PACAP ligand—would inhibit the PACAP-signaling cascade by abolishing its vasodilatory and headache-inducing abilities.MethodsIn a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, single-dose, placebo-controlled study of Lu AG09222, healthy volunteers aged 18–45 years without history of headache disorders were randomly allocated to three treatment sequences (1:2:2) on two experimental infusion visits with 9 ± 3 days’ interval: placebo + saline + saline (n = 5), placebo + PACAP38 + VIP (n = 10), and Lu AG09222 + PACAP38 + VIP (n = 10). The primary outcome measure was area under the curve (AUC) of the change in superficial temporal artery (STA) diameter from 0 to 120 min after start of infusion of PACAP38. The study was conducted at the Danish Headache Center in Copenhagen, Denmark.ResultsIn participants who received Lu AG09222 + PACAP38 infusion, there was a significantly lower STA diameter (mean (SE) [95% CI] AUC ‒35.4 (4.32) [‒44.6, ‒26.3] mm × min; P < 0.0001) compared to participants who received placebo + PACAP38 infusion. Secondary and explorative analysis revealed that PACAP38 infusion induced an increase in facial blood flow, heart rate and mild headache, and indicated that these PACAP38-induced responses were inhibited by Lu AG09222.ConclusionsThis proof-of-mechanism study demonstrated that Lu AG09222 inhibited PACAP38-induced cephalic vasodilation and increases in heart rate, and reduced concomitant headache. Lu AG09222 may be a potential therapy against migraine and other PACAP-mediated diseases.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04976309. Registration date: July 19, 2021.Graphical

Safety and efficacy of erenumab in patients with trigeminal neuralgia in Denmark: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept study

Trigeminal neuralgia is a severe facial pain disorder that is difficult to treat. Erenumab, a monoclonal antibody against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor, has proven efficacy in migraine. Erenumab modulates sensory processing in peripheral trigeminal pain pathways in mice and was reported to be effective for patients with trigeminal neuralgia in open-label studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of erenumab in patients with trigeminal neuralgia. We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults (aged 18-85 years) with idiopathic or classic trigeminal neuralgia as defined by the 3rd edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders. The trial was based at the Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital. Eligible participants had no clinically significant cerebrovascular or cardiovascular disease, had self-reported pain intensity of at least 4 on the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (0=no pain, 10=worst pain imaginable), and had at least three daily pain paroxysms. After a 1-week pre-screening period, patients entered a 4-week baseline period. Participants who met pain inclusion criteria at the end of the baseline period were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous injections of either erenumab 140 mg or placebo and entered the 4-week follow-up period. Randomisation was done in blocks of 10 using a computer-generated schedule by a third-party company. Participants and assessors were masked to treatment allocation, and erenumab and placebo were packed in identical prefilled syringes. The primary outcome was the number of responders, defined as patients who had a reduction of at least 30% in mean average daily pain intensity during the follow-up period compared with during the baseline period, analysed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT number 2019-000848-95. We assessed 860 patients for suitability and excluded 741 between Oct 28, 2019, and Sept 13, 2021. 119 participants entered a 1-week pre-screening period and 26 were excluded, 93 participants entered a 4-week baseline period with 13 excluded before randomisation, and 80 participants were randomly assigned to erenumab 140 mg (n=40) or placebo (n=40). There was no difference between groups in the number of responders at 4 weeks in the intention-to-treat population (14 [35%] of 40 with erenumab vs 18 [45%] of 40 with placebo; estimated effect size -10% [95% CI -31 to 11]; p=0·36). 20 (50%) of 40 participants reported adverse events in each group. The most common adverse events were constipation (28%) and headache (10%) in the erenumab group, and headache (13%), constipation (10%), and abdominal pain (10%) in the placebo group. Erenumab did not reduce pain intensity compared with placebo in patients with trigeminal neuralgia and CGRP probably does not have an important role in paroxysmal pain. Well tolerated, effective treatments in trigeminal neuralgia are still needed. Novartis.

Treatment experiences and clinical characteristics in migraine and tension-type headache patients before the first visit to a tertiary headache center.

To investigate previous treatment and clinical characteristics in migraine and tension-type headache patients at their first visit to a tertiary headache center. This was a cross-sectional study using data obtained from electronic questionnaires and medical charts. Migraine and tension-type headache patients were investigated at their first visit to the Danish Headache Center. Out of 382 patients the main diagnoses of primary headaches were: 36% with episodic migraine, 43% with chronic migraine, 3% with episodic tension-type headache and 17% with chronic tension-type headache. The majority had attempted non-pharmacological treatment options such as physiotherapy (episodic migraine: 53%, chronic migraine: 68%, episodic tension-type headache: 50%, chronic tension-type headache: 65%) and acupuncture: (episodic migraine: 45%, chronic migraine: 62%, episodic tension-type headache: 17%, chronic tension-type headache: 51%). The majority of migraine patients had tried no more than one triptan (episodic migraine: 71%, chronic migraine: 66%). In total, 35% of episodic migraine and 19% of chronic migraine patients as well as 50% of episodic tension-type headache and 41% of chronic tension-type headache patients had never tried preventive medication. The headache under-response to treatment (HURT) questionnaire score was higher in chronic migraine (score 15) and chronic tension-type headache (score 16) patients than the episodic forms (P < 0.004). Headache patients had attempted several non-pharmacological treatments prior to their first visit at a tertiary headache center in Denmark. The limited use of acute and preventive treatment before the first visit demonstrates a need for better treatment at the primary and secondary care level.

Effect of Vasoactive Intestinal Polypeptide on Development of Migraine Headaches

Vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP) and pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptides (PACAPs) are structurally and functionally related, yet different in their migraine-inducing properties. It remains unclear whether the lack of migraine induction can be attributed to the only transient vasodilatory response after a 20-minute infusion of VIP. To determine whether a 2-hour infusion of VIP would provoke migraine attacks. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study was conducted between May and September 2020 at the Danish Headache Center in Copenhagen, Denmark. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were ages 18 to 40 years, weighed between 50 and 90 kg, had a diagnosis of migraine without aura as defined by the International Classification of Headache Disorders, and had a migraine frequency of 1 to 6 attacks per month. Patients were randomly allocated to receive a 2-hour infusion of VIP or placebo on 2 different days. The primary end point was the difference in incidence of experimentally induced migraine attacks during the observational period (0-12 hours) between VIP and placebo. Twenty-one patients (17 [81%] women and 4 [19%] men; mean [range] age, 25.9 [19-40] years) were recruited in the study. Fifteen patients (71%; 95% CI, 48%-89%) developed migraine attacks after VIP compared with 1 patient (5%; 95% CI, 0%-24%) who developed a migraine attack after placebo (P < .001). The VIP-induced migraine attacks mimicked patients' spontaneous attacks. The area under the curve (AUC) of headache intensity scores (0-12 hours), as well as the AUC of the superficial temporal artery diameter (0-180 minute) were significantly greater after VIP compared with placebo (AUC0-12h, P = .003; AUC0-180min, P < .001). A 2-hour infusion of VIP caused migraine attacks, suggesting an important role of VIP in migraine pathophysiology. VIP and its receptors could be potential targets for novel migraine drugs. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04260035.

Validation of the Temporomandibular Disorder Pain Screener in a Specialized Headache Center.

To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of the TMD pain screener in a headache population. A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Danish Headache Center (DHC). Patients were included if they had primary or secondary headache, trigeminal neuralgia, or facial pain. The pain screener was compared to the outcome of a full Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) examination. A total of 62 headache patients were included (77% women). The sensitivity of the pain screener short version (three questions) was 85% (95% CI: 70% to 94%), and the specificity was 64% (95% CI: 41% to 83%). In the full version (six questions), the sensitivity was 83% (95% CI: 67% to 93%), and the specificity was 82% (95% CI: 60% to 95%). The TMD pain screener seems to be a valid tool to accurately screen for the presence of TMD to provide the most optimal treatment for headache patients. These findings should however be confirmed in a larger sample with migraine, tension-type headache, and trigeminal neuralgia.

Neurovascular contact plays no role in trigeminal neuralgia secondary to multiple sclerosis.

A demyelinating plaque and neurovascular contact with morphological changes have both been suggested to contribute to the etiology of trigeminal neuralgia secondary to multiple sclerosis (TN-MS). The aim of this study was to confirm or refute whether neurovascular contact with morphological changes is involved in the etiology of TN-MS. We prospectively enrolled consecutive TN-MS patients from the Danish Headache Center. Clinical characteristics were collected systematically. MRI scans were done using a 3.0 Tesla imager and were evaluated by the same experienced blinded neuroradiologist. Sixty-three patients were included. Fifty-four patients were included in the MRI analysis. There was a low prevalence of neurovascular contact with morphological changes on both the symptomatic side (6 (14%)) and the asymptomatic side (4 (9%)), p = 0.157. Demyelinating brainstem plaques along the trigeminal afferents were more prevalent on the symptomatic side compared to the asymptomatic side (31 (58%) vs. 12 (22%), p < 0.001). A demyelinating plaque was highly associated with the symptomatic side (odds ratio = 10.6, p = 0.002). The primary cause of TN-MS is demyelination along the intrapontine trigeminal afferents. As opposed to classical trigeminal neuralgia, neurovascular contact does not play a role in the etiology of TN-MS. Microvascular decompression should generally not be offered to patients with TN-MS.The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT04371575).

Nocebo response in human models of migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover trials in migraine without aura and healthy volunteers.

Human models of migraine have been used for the past 30 years to test putative 'trigger' molecules and ascertain whether they induce migraine attacks in humans. However, nocebo effects using this model have never been systematically explored. To assess the nocebo response rate in randomised clinical trials conducted at the Danish Headache Center, and in which human models of migraine were used. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed for studies of human models of migraine with a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover design that included data on the incidence of migraine attacks or headache after infusion of placebo. A total of 943 articles were screened by title and abstract. Of these, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria (published between 1994 and 2020) and were included in the qualitative and quantitative analysis. We performed a random effects meta-analysis for the incidence of migraine attacks or delayed headache after placebo infusion. Twenty-seven studies were eligible for inclusion: 12 studies reported data for adults with migraine (n = 182), whereas 16 studies reported data on healthy volunteers (n = 210). For adults with migraine, the incidence of migraine attacks after placebo was 8.1% (95% CI = 2.5-15.5%, I2 = 50.8%). The incidence of delayed headache was 25.9% (95% CI = 18.5-34.1%, I2 = 18.9%). For healthy volunteers, the incidence of migraine attacks after placebo was 0.5% (95% CI = 0.0-3.6%, I2 = 0.0%) while the incidence of delayed headache was 10.5% (95% CI = 4.8-17.6%, I2 = 45.2%). The nocebo response in randomised, placebo-controlled two-way crossover trials with intravenous infusions of placebo in migraine is negligible. Future studies using human models of migraine can be conducted by assuming a nocebo response rate of 15.5%.

S100B and NSE in Cluster Headache - Evidence for Glial Cell Activation?

Neuronal-specific enolase (NSE) and protein S100B have gained considerable interest as the markers of CNS injury, glial cell activation, and/or blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption. No studies have investigated NSE and S100B in cluster headache (CH), but these biomarkers could contribute to the understanding of CH. Patients with episodic CH in bout (eCHa), in remission (eCHr), and chronic CH (cCH) were included in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-way cross-over provocation study carried out at the Danish Headache Center. The primary endpoints included (1) differences of NSE and S100B in between groups (eCHa, eCHr, and cCH) at baseline; (2) differences over time in plasma concentrations of NSE and S100B between patient developing an attack and those who did not; (3) differences in plasma concentrations over time of NSE and S100B between active day and placebo day. Baseline findings were compared to the historical data on migraine patients and healthy controls and presented with means±SD. Nine eCHa, 9 eCHr, and 13 cCH patients completed the study and blood samples from 11 CGRP-induced CH attacks were obtained. There were no differences in NSE levels between CH groups at baseline, but CH patients in active disease phase had higher levels compared with 32 migraine patients (9.1±2.2µg/L vs 6.0±2.2µg/L, P<.0001) and 6 healthy controls (9.1±2.2µg/L vs 7.3±2.0µg/L, P=.007). CGRP-infusion caused no NSE changes and, but a slight, non-significant, increase in NSE was seen in patients who reported a CGRP-induced CH attack (2.39µg/L, 95% Cl [-0.26, 3.85], P=.061). At baseline S100B levels in eCHa patients were higher compared to cCH patients (0.06±0.02µg/L vs 0.04±0.02µg/L, P=.018). Infusion of CGRP and CGRP-induced attacks did not change S100B levels. Apart from induced CH-attacks no other adverse events were noted. At baseline eCHa patients had higher S100B plasma levels than cCH patients and there was a slight, however not significant, NSE increase in response to CGRP-induced CH attack. Our findings suggest a possible role of an ictal activation of glial cells in CH pathophysiology, but further studies are warranted.

Comparison of 3 Treatment Strategies for Medication Overuse Headache

Medication overuse headache (MOH) is a disabling, globally prevalent disorder representing a well-known and debated clinical problem. Evidence for the most effective treatment strategy is needed. To compare 3 treatment strategies for MOH. This open-label, randomized clinical trial with 6 months of follow-up was conducted in the tertiary sector at the Danish Headache Center, Glostrup, from October 25, 2016, to June 28, 2019. Of 483 patients with MOH referred during the inclusion period, 195 met the criteria consisting of migraine and/or tension-type headache, 18 years or older, eligibility for outpatient treatment, no severe physical or psychiatric disorder, no other addiction, and not pregnant or breastfeeding. Of these, 75 refused participation and 120 were included. Data were analyzed from July 3 to September 6, 2019. Random assignment (1:1:1 allocation) to 1 of the 3 outpatient treatments consisting of (1) withdrawal plus preventive treatment, (2) preventive treatment without withdrawal, or (3) withdrawal with optional preventive treatment 2 months after withdrawal. The primary outcome was change in headache days per month after 6 months. Predefined secondary outcomes were change in monthly migraine days, use of short-term medication, pain intensity, number of responders, patients with remission to episodic headache, and cured MOH. Of 120 patients, 102 (mean [SD] age, 43.9 [11.8] years; 81 women [79.4%]) completed the 6-month follow-up. Headache days per month were reduced by 12.3 (95% CI, 9.3-15.3) in the withdrawal plus preventive group, by 9.9 (95% CI, 7.2-12.6) in the preventive group, and by 8.5 (95% CI, 5.6-11.5) in the withdrawal group (P = .20). No difference was found in reduction of migraine days per month, use of short-term medication, or headache intensity. In the withdrawal plus preventive group, 23 of 31 patients (74.2%) reverted to episodic headache, compared with 21 of 35 (60.0%) in the preventive group and 15 of 36 (41.7%) in the withdrawal group (P = .03). Moreover, 30 of 31 patients (96.8%) in the withdrawal plus preventive group were cured of MOH, compared with 26 of 35 (74.3%) in the preventive group and 32 of 36 (88.9%) in the withdrawal group (P = .03). These findings corresponded to a 30% (relative risk, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6) increased chance of MOH cure in the withdrawal plus preventive group compared with the preventive group (P = .03). All 3 treatment strategies were effective, but based on these findings, withdrawal therapy combined with preventive medication from the start of withdrawal is recommended as treatment for MOH. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02993289.

Two-Hour CGRP Infusion Causes Gastrointestinal Hyperactivity: Possible Relevance for CGRP Antibody Treatment.

The monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor are new antimigraine drugs from which many patients already benefit. Very few side effects have been reported from the antibody trials, including very few gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. The current data derive from a double-blind cross-over study of CGRP infusion for 2hours. We present the GI side effects of the infusion and raise the question if underreporting of GI symptoms in CGRP antibody trials has occurred. We also discuss why constipation may be more likely with CGRP receptor blockade than with CGRP neutralizing antibodies. Thirty healthy volunteers were recruited to receive a 2-hour infusion of CGRP 1.5µg/minutes on 2 different days. The participants were pretreated with sumatriptan tablets (2×50mg) 1day and with placebo the other day. During the infusion, the participants were asked about side effects including a detailed description about their GI symptoms. Clinical observations like flatulence, rumbling, and use of bedpan were also noted. After the infusion, the participants filled out a questionnaire about side effects at home until 12-hour after the infusion start. The study was conducted at the Danish Headache Center at Rigshospitalet Glostrup in the period February 2018 to July 2018. On both study days 93% (27/29 participants) experienced symptoms from the GI system during the infusion. Rumbling, stomach pain, nausea, diarrhea, and an urge to defecate were the most commonly experienced GI side effects. There was no difference in symptoms between placebo and sumatriptan pretreatment. We conclude that a 2-hour infusion of CGRP causes frequent and sometimes severe symptoms from the GI system. The symptoms are not antagonized by sumatriptan. More attention should be paid to constipation as a possible side effect of CGRP receptor antagonists.

Intravenous Endothelin-1 Infusion Does Not Induce Aura or Headache in Migraine Patients With Aura.

To investigate whether intravenously infused provokes migraine aura and migraine headache in migraine patients with aura. Migraine with aura has been associated with endothelial dysfunction and increased stroke risk. The initiating mechanism of migraine aura symptoms is not known. Experimental provocation of migraine headache using vasoactive peptides has provided tremendous advances in the understanding of migraine pathophysiology but substances that can induce migraine aura have not been identified. Endothelin-1 (ET-1), an endogenous, potent vasoconstrictor peptide released from the vascular endothelium, has been proposed to trigger migraine aura. This hypothesis is based on reports of increased plasma ET-1 levels early during the migraine attacks and the observation that ET-1 applied to the cortical surface potently induces the cortical spreading depolarization, the underlying electrophysiological phenomenon of migraine aura, in animals. Further, endothelial damage due to, for example, carotid puncture and vascular pathology is known to trigger aura episodes. We investigated whether intravascular ET-1 would provoke migraine aura in patients. Using a two-way crossover, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind design, we infused high-dose (8ng/kg/minutes for 20minutes) intravenous ET-1 in patients with migraine with typical aura. The primary end-point was the difference in incidence of migraine aura between ET-1 and placebo. Experiments were carried out at a public tertiary headache center (Danish Headache Center, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, Denmark). Fourteen patients received intravenous ET-1. No patients reported migraine aura symptoms or migraine headache during or up to 24hours following the ET-1 infusion. Four patients reported mild to moderate headache only on the ET-1 day, 3 patients reported moderate headache on the placebo day, and 1 patient reported mild headache on both days. No serious adverse events occurred during or after infusion. Provocation of migraine aura by procedures or conditions involving vascular irritation is unlikely to be mediated by ET-1.

Higher burden of rare frameshift indels in genes related to synaptic transmission separate familial hemiplegic migraine from common types of migraine

BackgroundFamilial hemiplegic migraine (FHM) is a rare form of migraine with aura that often has an autosomal dominant mode of inheritance. Rare mutations in the CACNA1A, ATP1A2 and SCN1A genes...

Sumatriptan Does Not Antagonize CGRP‐Induced Symptoms in Healthy Volunteers

Previous attempts to develop a pragmatic human model for testing new anti-migraine drugs, have failed. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) induces a mild headache in healthy volunteers and migraine-like headache in migraine patients. The induced headache must respond to already established migraine treatment for validation. Thus, the objective of the study was to test the effect of sumatriptan against CGRP-induced symptoms in an attempt to validate CGRP-induced headache as a model for drug testing. Thirty healthy volunteers were recruited to receive a 2-hour infusion of CGRP on 2 separate days. The participants were pretreated with sumatriptan 1 day and with placebo the other day in a randomized double-blind cross-over fashion. During the infusion, a questionnaire about headache and side effects was administered. Electrocardiography, heart rate, blood pressure, dermal blood flow, and diameter of peripheral arteries were monitored during the infusion. Participants were carefully instructed to fill out a headache questionnaire at home until 12hours after the infusion start. Primary endpoints are difference between the sumatriptan day and the placebo day in area under the headache score curve (AUC) 0-2hours after infusion start and in headache intensity 2hours after infusion start. The study was conducted at the Danish Headache Center in Glostrup, Denmark. CGRP-induced headache in 86% (25/29) of the participants on the sumatriptan day and in 96% (28/29) of the participants on the placebo day. There was no difference in AUCheadache, 0-2hours between the days (P=.794). There was a statistically significant decrease in mean atrial pressure (MAP) over time on both days with a16.2% reduction on the sumatriptan day and a 14.8% reduction on the placebo day (P<.001) and a statistically significant increase in heart rate (HR) over time on both days (from mean 57.5 at baseline to mean 105.4 at 120minutes on the sumatriptan day and from mean 60.2 at baseline to 105.8 at 120minutes on the placebo day, P<.001). The diameter of peripheral arteries increased statistically significant on both days (P<.001). Sumatriptan does not influence headache score, accompanying symptoms or other symptoms induced by CGRP. Furthermore, a 2-hour CGRP infusion causes a wide range of side effects and does not induce more headache than the usual 20-minute infusion. Thus, the prolonged infusion of CGRP in healthy volunteers is not a valid and pragmatic model for testing new anti-migraine drugs.

Migraine polygenic risk score associates with efficacy of migraine-specific drugs.

ObjectiveTo assess whether the polygenic risk score (PRS) for migraine is associated with acute and/or prophylactic migraine treatment response.MethodsWe interviewed 2,219 unrelated patients at the Danish Headache Center using a semistructured interview to diagnose migraine and assess acute and prophylactic drug response. All patients were genotyped. A PRS was calculated with the linkage disequilibrium pred algorithm using summary statistics from the most recent migraine genome-wide association study comprising ∼375,000 cases and controls. The PRS was scaled to a unit corresponding to a twofold increase in migraine risk, using 929 unrelated Danish controls as reference. The association of the PRS with treatment response was assessed by logistic regression, and the predictive power of the model by area under the curve using a case-control design with treatment response as outcome.ResultsA twofold increase in migraine risk associates with positive response to migraine-specific acute treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05–1.49]). The association between migraine risk and migraine-specific acute treatment was replicated in an independent cohort consisting of 5,616 triptan users with prescription history (OR = 3.20 [95% CI = 1.26–8.14]). No association was found for acute treatment with non–migraine-specific weak analgesics and prophylactic treatment response.ConclusionsThe migraine PRS can significantly identify subgroups of patients with a higher-than-average likelihood of a positive response to triptans, which provides a first step toward genetics-based precision medicine in migraine.

Characterization of Familial and Sporadic Migraine.

BackgroundIt is unknown whether clinical parameters differ between migraineurs with and without first‐degree family members with migraine.ObjectivesThe present cross‐sectional study describes differences between familial and sporadic migraine with a focus on migraine characteristics, migraine severity, comorbidities, and treatment.MethodFrom the Danish Headache Center we recruited 358 patients with familial migraine and 1727 patients with sporadic migraine. Each participant was assessed using a validated semi‐structured interview.ResultsNo differences in age (Mean = 44 and 44 [SD = 12.28 and 12.58] for familial and sporadic migraineurs, respectively; P = .900) or sex (295/358 (82.4%) and 1413/1727 (81.8%) women in familial and sporadic migraineurs, respectively; P = .853) were found. Familial migraineurs had more aphasic aura than sporadic migraineurs (41% vs 27%, P = .001). Sporadic migraineurs had more lifetime attacks ie, >100 attacks (45% vs 70%, P < .001) and prolonged attacks ie, lasting >72 hours (5% vs 12%, P < .001) than familial migraineurs. Further, sporadic migraineurs had a higher incidence of concussions (37% vs 41%, P = .001) compared to familial migraineurs. In agreement with a previous study, there was no difference between familial and sporadic migraine regarding triptan response (84% vs 81%, P = .440).ConclusionHeadache characteristics, triptan response, and comorbidities where similar in individulas with and without inherited migraine, suggesting that migraine are to be considered a hmogenoues disease. The difference in the clinical presentation of migraine with aura symptoms among patients with familial migraine should be considered in future studies. Further, more severe migraine among patients with sporadic migraine with aura could suggest that sporadic migraineurs have been exposed to stronger or multiple environmental factors and indicate that an early intervention in migraine treatment could lessen the severity of migraine.

Proposed new diagnostic criteria for chronic migraine.

ICHD-3 criteria for chronic migraine (CM) include a mixture of migraine and tension-type-like headaches and do not account for patients who have a high frequency of migraine but no other headaches. Patients from the Danish Headache Center and their relatives with ICHD-3 defined CM were compared with patients with high frequency episodic migraine (HFEM). Danish registries were used to compare the socioeconomic impact in these two groups. A Russian student population was used to determine the generalizability of the number of patients fulfilling CM and the proposed diagnostic criteria for CM. There was no difference in the demographic profile between the two groups in the Danish cohort. The number of lifelong or annual attacks (p > 0.3), comorbid diseases, or self-reported effect of triptans (p = 1) did not differ. HFEM patients purchased more triptans than CM patients (p = 0.01). CM patients received more early pension (p = 0.00135) but did not differ from HFEM patients with regard to sickness benefit (p = 0.207), cash assistance (p = 0.139), or rehabilitation benefit (p = 1). Patients with HFEM are comparable to CM patients with regard to chronicity and disability. We therefore suggest classifying CM as ≥ 8 migraine days per month (proposed CM), disregarding the need for ≥ 15 headache days per month. The proposed diagnostic criteria for CM approximately doubled the number of patients with CM in both the Danish and the Russian materials. Extending the definition of CM to include patients with HFEM will ensure that patients with significant disease burden and unmet treatment needs are identified and provided appropriate access to the range of treatment options and resources available to those with CM. Patients with migraine on eight or more days but not 15 days with headache a month are as disabled as patients with ICHD-3 defined CM. They should be included in revised diagnostic criteria for chronic migraine.