Stephanie J. Nahas

Al years. A notable proportion of cranial neuralgia presentations are due to secondary causes and require targeted treatment. The purpose of this article is to review the diagnosis and management of cranial neuralgias encountered in clinical practice. Latest Developments In 2020, the International Classification of Orofacial Pain was released for the first time. Modeled after the International Classification of Headache Disorders, it includes updated terminology for cranial neuralgias. The underlying pathophysiology of the cranial neuralgias is currently believed to be rooted in both peripheral and central nociceptive systems. In addition, a growing number of familial cases are being identified. Recent therapeutic advancements include a better understanding of how to utilize older therapies and procedures more effectively as well as the development of newer approaches. Essential Points Cranial neuralgia syndromes are rare but important to recognize due to their debilitating nature and greater likelihood of having potentially treatable underlying causes. While management options have remained somewhat limited, scientific inquiry is continually advancing the understanding of these syndromes and how best to address them....

Background: To date, real-world evidence on persistence to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or onabotulinumtoxinA have excluded eptinezumab. This retrospective cohort study was performed to compare treatment persistency among patients with migraine on anti-CGRP mAbs (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, or eptinezumab) or onabotulinumtoxinA.Methods: This retrospective study used IQVIA PharmMetrics data. Adult patients with migraine treated with an anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA who had 12 months of continuous insurance enrollment before starting treatment were included. A “most recent treatment episode” analysis was used in which the most recent episode was defined as the latest treatment period with the same drug (anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA) without a ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply on/after June 25, 2020, to December 31, 2021. Patients were indexed at the start of their most recent episode. Patients were considered non-persistent and discontinued the therapy associated with their most recent episode if there was ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply. A Cox proportional-hazards model estimated the discontinuation hazard between treatments. The gap periods and cohort definition were varied in sensitivity analyses.Results: The study included 66,576 patients (median age 46 years, 88.6% female). More eptinezumab-treated patients had chronic migraine (727/1074), ≥ 3 previous acute (323/1074) or preventive (333/1074) therapies, and more prior treatment episodes (3) than other treatment groups. Based on a 15-day treatment gap, patients on subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs had a 32% (95% CI: 1.19, 1.49; erenumab), 42% (95% CI: 1.27, 1.61; galcanezumab), and 58% (95% CI: 1.42, 1.80; fremanezumab) higher discontinuation hazard than those receiving eptinezumab, with this relationship attenuated, but still statistically significant based on 30-day and 60-day treatment gaps. There was no significant difference in the discontinuation hazard between eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA. Based on a 15-day treatment gap among patients who newly initiated therapy, the discontinuation hazard of subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs remained significantly higher compared to eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA.Conclusion: Patients treated with eptinezumab demonstrated persistency that was higher than subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs and similar to onabotulinumtoxinA.Graphical

Objective: This study aimed to ascertain whether level of optimization of acute treatment of migraine is related to work productivity across the spectrum of migraine. Methods: Data were from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study, an internet-based longitudinal survey. Respondents with migraine who reported full-time employment and use of ≥1 acute prescription medication for migraine were included. We determined relationships among lost productive time (LPT; measured with the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale), acute treatment optimization (Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire- ), and monthly headache days (MHDs). Results: There was a direct relationship between LPT and MHD category. Greater acute treatment optimization was associated with lower total LPT, less absenteeism, and less presenteeism within each MHD category. Conclusions: Optimizing acute treatment for migraine may reduce LPT in people with migraine and reduce indirect costs.

Purpose of Review The purpose of this review is to discuss the available evidence and therapeutic considerations for intravenous drug therapy for refractory chronic migraine. Recent Findings In carefully monitored settings, the inpatient administration of intravenous lidocaine and ketamine can be successful in treating refractory chronic migraine. Summary Many patients with refractory chronic migraine have experienced treatment failure with the Raskin protocol. The use of aggressive inpatient infusion therapy consisting of intravenous lidocaine or ketamine, along with other adjunctive medications, has become increasingly common for these patients when all other treatments have failed. There is a clear need for prospective studies in this population comprised of patients who have largely been excluded from other studies.

Background: Although migraine is less common in older people, preventive treatment of migraine in these individuals may be more challenging due to the presence of multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy. Additionally, evidence for migraine treatment efficacy, safety, and tolerability is limited in this population. We evaluated efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP), in clinical trial participants aged ≥60 years with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM).Methods: This analysis included data from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 studies: the HALO EM study, HALO CM study, and FOCUS study in participants with EM or CM and prior inadequate response to 2–4 migraine preventive medication classes. Participants in all studies were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 12 weeks of subcutaneous treatment with quarterly fremanezumab (Months 1/2/3: EM/CM, 675 mg/placebo/placebo), monthly fremanezumab (Months 1/2/3: EM, 225 mg/225 mg/225 mg; CM, 675 mg/225 mg/225 mg), or matched monthly placebo.Results: These pooled analyses included 246 participants aged ≥60 years. Reductions in monthly migraine days from baseline over 12 weeks were significantly greater with fremanezumab (least-squares mean change from baseline [standard error]: quarterly fremanezumab, − 4.3 [0.59]; monthly fremanezumab, − 4.6 [0.54]) versus placebo (placebo, − 2.3 [0.57]; bothP < 0.01 vs placebo). As early as Week 1, significant reductions from baseline in weekly migraine days were observed with fremanezumab versus placebo (bothP < 0.01). With fremanezumab treatment versus placebo, a significantly higher proportion of participants achieved ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days, and significant improvements in disability and quality-of-life outcomes were observed (P < 0.05). Proportions of participants experiencing serious adverse events and adverse events leading to discontinuation were low and similar in the fremanezumab and placebo groups. Efficacy and safety results were comparable to the overall pooled population (N = 2843).Conclusions: This pooled subgroup analysis demonstrates that fremanezumab treatment is efficacious and well-tolerated over 12 weeks in participants aged ≥60 years with EM or CM. These data may help healthcare providers with clinical decision making and preventive treatment selection for older patients with migraine.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.govidentifiers: HALO CM:NCT02621931; HALO EM:NCT02629861; FOCUS:NCT03308968.

Ing. A significant proportion of TAC presentations may have secondary causes. RECENT FINDINGS The underlying pathophysiology of TACs is likely rooted in hypothalamic dysfunction and derangements in the interplay of circuitry involving trigeminovascular, trigeminocervical, trigeminoautonomic, circadian, and nociceptive systems. Recent therapeutic advancements include a better understanding of how to use older therapies more effectively and the identification of new approaches. SUMMARY TAC syndromes are rare but important to recognize because of their debilitating nature and greater likelihood for having potentially serious underlying causes. Although treatment options have remained somewhat limited, scientific inquiry is continually advancing our understanding of these syndromes and how best to manage them....

Objective: To determine the long-term safety and tolerability profile of M207 in the acute treatment of migraine. Background: M207 is an investigational microneedle-based system for intracutaneous delivery of zolmitriptan for the treatment of migraine attacks. Following on the positive results of a Phase 2/3 placebo-controlled efficacy study (ZOTRIP), this study was designed to evaluate the safety of this novel product during repeated use for the treatment of migraine attacks. Methods: In this 6–12 month open-label, multicenter observational study, participants used an eDiary to record headache symptoms and adverse events at specified intervals up to 48 h following treatment of a qualifying attack with M207 3.8 mg (intracutaneous zolmitriptan). Participants underwent clinical evaluations at specified intervals up to 12 months. Results: Among 335 participants who treated ≥1 migraine attack, 257 completed 6 months and 127 completed 1 year of treatment. The most common reason for withdrawal from the study was a low frequency of reported attacks post randomization. Overall, 5963 migraine attacks were treated. Most participants (96%) experienced at least 1 adverse event, the vast majority of which concerned the application site, and > 95% of which were mild. Fifteen participants (4%) withdrew due to adverse events; 4 withdrew due to 7 application site reactions, 6 of which were mild. Participants achieved pain freedom in 2477/5617 (44%) of attacks, most bothersome symptom freedom in 3315/5330 (62%) of attacks, and pain relief 2 h post-dose in 4552/5617 (81%) of attacks. Sustained pain freedom 2–24 h was seen in 1761/4698 (38%) of attacks, and 2–48 h in 1534/4429 (35%) of attacks. Conclusions: The majority of participants experienced cutaneous adverse reactions such as application site erythema, swelling, and bleeding, and most reactions were scored as mild. These results are consistent with what was observed in the single migraine attack treatment ZOTRIP trial indicating that M207 is well tolerated in the setting of longer-term repeated use. Efficacy findings were also similar to those in the ZOTRIP trial. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov on September 13, 2017 (NCT03282227).

Migraine is a neurologic disease characterized by recurrent attacks of head pain and symptoms such as nausea, photophobia and phonophobia, which last hours to

Purpose of Review We describe a series of cases with unusual brain MRI findings in patients who present with headache disorders. Recent Findings Incidental findings in patients imaged for headache include the following: aneurysm, arachnoid cyst, cerebral vascular malformations, Arnold-Chiari malformations, empty sella turcica, gray matter heterotopias, mastoiditis, mega cisterna magna, meningioma, normal variants of cerebral circulation, paranasal sinus disease, pineal cyst, pituitary tumor, Rathke’s cleft cyst, skull hyperostosis, and vestibular schwannoma. The most common abnormal MRI findings encountered in migraine are nonspecific white matter lesions. Summary The current 2019 guidelines from the American College of Radiology and American Headache Society recommend against ordering neuroimaging in patients with a high probability of a primary headache disorder not typically associated with diagnostic imaging findings and who have normal neurologic exam in addition to no red flags in history. Often, unnecessary neuroimaging yields incidental findings, and this typically results in patient anxiety and further unnecessary testing. Detailed below are a series of cases in which unusual findings were found in patients presenting to our clinic for further evaluation of headache disorders. Imaging may have been done prior to presentation to us or by us due to concern for secondary causes.