Lanfranco Pellesi

Increased efficacy of regularly repeated cycles with OnabotulinumtoxinA in MOH patients beyond the first year of treatment

BackgroundChronic migraine is one of the most common diseases in the world and it is often associated with medication overuse that can worsen the headache itself. Thus, it is important to adopt effective therapies to relieve pain and improve patients’ quality of life. The PREEMT studies have already demonstrated the effectiveness of OnabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of chronic migraine. With this in mind, the aim of this real life observation has been to assess the clinical improvements as well as the impact on the quality of life of patients being regularly (every three months) administered this therapy.MethodsData from 66 chronic-migraineurs treated with OnabotulinumtoxinA after failing previous therapies were collected. Only 57 of them were analysed since 9 discontinued the therapy due to administrative reasons. For every patient enrolled, headache frequency, analgesic consumption, pain severity, headache-related disability, health-related quality of life as well as anxiety and depression symptoms were collected through the Headache Index (HI), analgesic consumption rate in one day (AC), VAS score, Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and the Short Form (36) Health Survey questionnaire Version 2 (SF-36®), Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (ZUNG-A) and Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (ZUNG-D), respectively.All the changes vs baseline (Tx vs T0) were expressed as mean ± SD and analysed with a one-way ANOVA plus non-parametric Wilcoxon test, that was used for paired data for each subject.ResultsAs the number of injection increased, those patients injected regularly observed a statistically significant reduction in the headache frequency, pain intensity, headache disability score and an overall marked improvement in patients’ quality of life. There was also a significant reduction in anxiety and depressive symptoms as for the ZUNG-A and ZUNG-D scales scores. At any time point, those patients who stopped the therapy worsened their overall conditions as confirmed by quality of life parameters.ConclusionsThis study outpoints that OnabotulinumtoxinA treatment is an effective treatment to reduce the headache-related disability and improve patients’ quality of life when patients are treated regularly every three months and consistently overtime. Therapy discontinuation leads to a general worsening of health-related quality of life. Long term treatment over one year confirms a consistently positive and sustained trend of improvement with a high safety profile.

Spotlight on Anti‐CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine: The Clinical Evidence to Date

Migraine, a common neurovascular brain disorder, represents a severe and widespread health problem; along with medication‐induced (medication‐overuse) headache, it is the third‐leading cause of disability worldwide. Currently, its therapeutic management remains unsatisfactory for several reasons; up to 40% of migraineurs are eligible for prophylactic treatment, but there are issues of efficacy, safety, and adherence. In recent years the evidence on the role of calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) in migraine pathophysiology has been consolidated, so new and promising treatments for migraine pain and its possible prevention have been developed. The following review reports the results of the clinical trials conducted so far with each of the new monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor, with particular reference to safety, tolerance, and efficacy in migraine prevention. Moreover, the pharmacological characterization and further developments of each monoclonal antibody are reported, based on current knowledge.

Triptans and CGRP blockade – impact on the cranial vasculature

The trigeminovascular system plays a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine. The activation of the trigeminovascular system causes release of various neurotransmitters and neuropeptides, including serotonin and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which modulate pain transmission and vascular tone. Thirty years after discovery of agonists for serotonin 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D receptors (triptans) and less than fifteen after the proof of concept of the gepant class of CGRP receptor antagonists, we are still a long way from understanding their precise site and mode of action in migraine. The effect on cranial vasculature is relevant, because all specific anti-migraine drugs and migraine pharmacological triggers may act in perivascular space. This review reports the effects of triptans and CGRP blocking molecules on cranial vasculature in humans, focusing on their specific relevance to migraine treatment.

Drug-drug interactions in the treatment for alcohol use disorders: A comprehensive review

&NA; Drug interactions are one of the most common causes of side effects in polypharmacy. Alcoholics are a category of patients at high risk of pharmacological interactions, due to the presence of comorbidities, the concomitant intake of several medications and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interferences of ethanol. However, the data available on this issue are limited. These reasons often frighten clinicians when prescribing appropriate pharmacological therapies for alcohol use disorder (AUD), where less than 15% of patients receive an appropriate treatment in the most severe forms. The data available in literature regarding the relevant drug–drug interactions of the medications currently approved in United States and in some European countries for the treatment of AUD (benzodiazepines, acamprosate, baclofen, disulfiram, nalmefene, naltrexone and sodium oxybate) are reviewed here. The class of benzodiazepines and disulfiram are involved in numerous pharmacological interactions, while they are not conspicuous for acamprosate. The other drugs are relatively safe for pharmacological interactions, excluding the opioid withdrawal syndrome caused by the combination of nalmefene or naltrexone with an opiate medication. The information obtained is designed to help clinicians in understanding and managing the pharmacological interactions in AUDs, especially in patients under multi‐drug treatment, in order to reduce the risk of a negative interaction and to improve the treatment outcomes.

Long-term Treatment Benefits and Prolonged Efficacy of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Patients Affected by Chronic Migraine and Medication Overuse Headache over 3 Years of Therapy

Background Chronic migraine (CM) affects about the 2% of the general population and it has been recognized as one of the most-disabling conditions worldwide by the World Health Organization. CM is often associated with the overuse of abortive medication, which determines the worsening of headache itself and the development of a secondary headache called medication overuse headache. The management of these associated conditions is difficult, but a growing amount of evidence is pointing out the effectiveness and the good safety profile of OnabotulinumtoxinA (OnabotA). Despite this, data on OnabotA effects and safety in long-term use lack. The purpose of the present article is to retrospectively assess the efficacy and safety of OnabotA in a cohort of chronic migraineurs with drug overuse from the 18th month of treatment until the third year. Materials and methods 90 chronic migraineurs with medication overuse were enrolled between January 2013 and February 2017. All patients were treated with OnabotA according to PREEMPT dictates. Before every injection session the headache index, the analgesic consumption, the visual analog scale for pain score, the 36-items short form health survey questionnaire score, the 6-items headache impact test (HIT-6) score and the Zung self-rating anxiety and depression scale scores were collected. Adverse events were carefully registered. A simple linear regression was performed to explore the mean changes in the abovementioned parameters for a single injection session and mean comparison tests were performed using the one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey–Kramer post-hoc test. Results A significantly improvement for a single injection was registered for all the above-mentioned parameters. Headache index, analgesic consumption, visual analog pain scale, and 6-items HIT-6 scores were significantly lower than baseline from the 18th month of treatment onwards. The 36-items short form health survey questionnaire scores were significantly higher than baseline at every injections session from the 18th months onwards. Zung scales did not change. No serious adverse events were assessed and no adverse events-related drop-outs were seen. Conclusion OnabotA effectiveness and safety last until 3 years of therapy, raising the possibility of the use of this therapy even for many years in CM prevention.

Migraine and cluster headache – the common link

Although clinically distinguishable, migraine and cluster headache share prominent features such as unilateral pain, common pharmacological triggers such glyceryl trinitrate, histamine, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and response to triptans and neuromodulation. Recent data also suggest efficacy of anti CGRP monoclonal antibodies in both migraine and cluster headache. While exact mechanisms behind both disorders remain to be fully understood, the trigeminovascular system represents one possible common pathophysiological pathway and network of both disorders. Here, we review past and current literature shedding light on similarities and differences in phenotype, heritability, pathophysiology, imaging findings and treatment options of migraine and cluster headache. A continued focus on their shared pathophysiological pathways may be important in paving future treatment avenues that could benefit both migraine and cluster headache patients.

Rare primary headaches in Italian tertiary Headache Centres: Three year nationwide retrospective data from the RegistRare Network:

Background Rare primary headaches are mainly included in Chapters 3, Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, and 4, Other primary headache disorders, Part One of the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd edition. Epidemiological data are scarce, mostly emerging from case series or small studies, with the exception of cluster headache. In order to overcome the knowledge gap about rare primary headaches, the RegistRare Network was launched in 2017 to promote research in the field. Methods A retrospective cohort study including patients who, from April 30, 2014 to May 1, 2017, visited seven Italian tertiary Headache Centres, was undertaken to estimate in that clinical setting prevalence and incidence of headaches included in Chapters 3 and 4, Part One of the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3rd edition. Prevalent headache is defined as a headache recorded within the study timeframe, regardless of when the diagnosis was made. Incident headache is defined as a headache diagnosed for the first time in the patient during the study period. Results Twenty thousand and eighty-three patients visited the participating centres, and 822 (4.1%) prevalent cases, of which 461 (2.3%) were incident cases, were registered. Headaches listed in Chapter 3 affected 668 patients, representing 81.3% of the total number of prevalent cases. Headaches listed in Chapter 4 affected 154 patients and represent 18.7% of the total number of prevalent cases. Cluster headaches represent the most frequently diagnosed rare headaches (70.4%). For 13 entities out of 20, no cases were registered in more than 50% (n ≥ 4) of the centres, and for 14 entities more than 50% of diagnoses were incident. Conclusions This large, multicentre study gives the first wide-ranging snapshot of the burden in clinical practice of rare headaches and confirms that cooperative networks are necessary to study rare headaches, as their prevalence is often very low. The launch of a disease registry by the RegistRare Network will favour research in this neglected population of headache patients. Trial registration NCT03416114.

Quality indicators in headache care: an implementation study in six Italian specialist-care centres

BackgroundHeadache disorders are highly prevalent, and have a substantial and negative impact on health worldwide. They are largely treatable, but differences in structure, objectives, organization and delivery affect the quality of headache care. In order to recognize and remedy deficiencies in care, the Global Campaign against Headache, in collaboration with the European Headache Federation, recently developed a set of quality indicators for headache services. These require further assessment to demonstrate fitness for purpose. This is their first implementation to evaluate quality in headache care as a multicentre national study.MethodsBetween September and December 2016, we applied the quality indicators in six Italian specialist headache centres (Bologna, Firenze, Modena, Padova, Roma Campus Bio-Medico and Roma Sapienza). We used five previously developed assessment instruments, translated into Italian according to Lifting The Burden’s translation protocol for hybrid documents. We took data from 360 consecutive patients (60 per centre) by questionnaire and from their medical records, and by different questionnaires from their health-care providers (HCPs), including physicians, nurses, psychologists and nursing assistants.ResultsThe findings, comparable between centres, confirmed the feasibility and practicability of using the quality indicators in Italian specialist headache centres. The questionnaires were easily understood by HCPs and patients, and were not unduly time-consuming. Diagnoses were almost all (> 97%) according to ICHD criteria, and routinely (100%) reviewed during follow-up. Diagnostic diaries were regularly used by 96% of physicians. Referral pathways from primary to specialist care existed in five of the six clinics, as did urgent referral pathways. Instruments to assess disability and quality of life were not used regularly, a deficiency that needs to be addressed.ConclusionThis Italy-wide survey confirmed in six specialist centres that the headache service quality indicators are fit for purpose. By establishing majority practice, identifying commonalities and detecting deficits as a guide to quality improvement, the quality indicators may be used to set benchmarks for quality assessment. The next step is extend use and evaluation of the indicators into non-specialist care.