A subjective cognitive impairments scale for migraine attacks: validation of the Italian version of the MIG-SCOG

Methodological challenges in using screening tools for depression in migraine: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Depression is frequently described to occur in migraine, and depression screening questionnaires are commonly used to evaluate depressive symptoms in patients with migraine. The present study aimed to investigate how the most common depression screening tools are used in migraine studies to determine whether they are applied and interpreted correctly.

METHODS

PubMed was systematically searched, and we included any study using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) or Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D). The study included adults diagnosed with migraine based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2 or ICHD-3).

RESULTS

The literature search generated 78 studies. Thirty-five (45%) of the included studies used a depression screening tool as evidence of depression. This applied to 53, 46, 47 and 13% of studies using PHQ, BDI, HADS and HAM-D, respectively. Only one study out of 35 confirmed the diagnosis with a diagnostic interview. The data presentation and interpretation across the studies was highly heterogeneous.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening tools as evidence of depression in patients with migraine may lead to inaccurate estimates of depression among migraine patients. There is a need for guidelines on and validation of depression screening tools in patients with migraine.

Psychometric properties and normative data of the Italian version of the Cognitive Function at Work Questionnaire: a screening tool for detecting subjective cognitive complaints at work

INTRODUCTION

Considering the extension of working life due to socioeconomic and political factors, many people may experience cognitive complaints (CC) at their workplace, with severe consequences on their quality of life. The identification of workers reporting significative SCC is crucial to eventually address them to an objective neuropsychological evaluation and implement cognitive interventions to guarantee workers' well-being. Since no Italian questionnaires for detecting CC were designed for occupational settings, the aim of the study was to validate the Italian version of the Cognitive Function at Work Questionnaire (CFWQ) and to provide its normative data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Internal consistency, convergent and divergent validity, and factorial structure of the CFWQ were evaluated. A regression-based procedure served to compute percentiles of CFWQ and its subscales.

RESULTS

Four hundred twenty-one participants without psychiatric and/or neurological disorders completed the survey. We found that the Italian CFWQ included 26 items, with a good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.897) and a six-factor structure (memory, language, processing speed, abstract thinking/behavioral control, behavioral inertia, planning ability). CFWQ score did not correlate with empathy but correlated strongly with memory scores and moderately with anxiety and depression scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The Italian CFWQ showed good psychometric properties, in analogy with the original English scale. Therefore, it can be successfully employed in organizational contexts to possibly identify workers with CC and therefore with possible co-occurrent psychological, behavioral, and cognitive consequences.

Psychometrics and diagnostics of Italian cognitive screening tests: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Cognitive screening tests (CSTs) are crucial to neuropsychological diagnostics, and thus need to be featured by robust psychometric and diagnostic properties. However, CSTs happen not to meet desirable statistical standards, negatively affecting their level of recommendations and applicability. This study aimed at (a) providing an up-to-date compendium of available CSTs in Italy, (b) report their psychometric and diagnostic properties, and (c) address related limitations.

METHODS

This review was implemented by consulting Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and pre-registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Standardization and usability studies focusing on norms, validity, reliability, or sensitivity/specificity (and derived metrics) in adults were considered for eligibility. Quality assessment was performed by means of an ad hoc checklist collecting information on sampling, psychometrics/diagnostics, norming, and feasibility.

RESULTS

Sixty studies were included out of an initial N = 683. Identified CSTs (N = 40) were classified into general, domain-, and disease-specific (N = 17, 7, and 16, respectively), the latter being less statistically robust than remaining categories. Validity and reliability evidence was provided for 29 and 26 CSTs, respectively, sensitivity/specificity for 20 and norms for 33. Prevalence- and post-test-based diagnostic metrics were seldomly represented; factorial structures, ceiling/floor effects, and acceptability rarely investigated; content, face, and ecological validity never assessed.

DISCUSSION

Although available Italian CSTs overall met basic psychometric/diagnostic requirements, their statistical profile often proved to be poor on several properties that are desirable for clinical applications, with a few exceptions among general and domain-specific ones.

Refractory migraine profile in CGRP-monoclonal antibodies scenario

Objective

Refractory migraine (Ref‐M) represents a conundrum that headache experts have to face with. We aim to investigate whether a peculiar profile may characterize patients with Ref‐M according to 2020 European Headache Federation criteria. Furthermore, to substantiate a dysfunctional dopaminergic pathway involvement in these patients, we explored the effectiveness of olanzapine.

Materials & Methods

Eighty‐four patients (fitting previous Ref‐M criteria of the 2014) were treated with erenumab for six months. Differences between clinical and demographic features of responder (Ref‐M according to 2014 criteria) and not‐responder (Ref‐M according to 2020 criteria) patients to CGRP‐mAbs were investigated and their predictive values assessed. In fifteen patients with Ref‐M not responders to CGRP‐mAbs, olanzapine was administered (5 mg/die) for 3 months and frequency and pain intensity of migraine attacks were estimated.

Results

Patients with Ref‐M not responsive to CGRP‐mAbs (29/84) when compared with Ref‐M responsive to CGRP‐mAbs showed higher baseline frequency of migraine attacks, medication overuse and pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) scores. Logistic regression analyses showed that frequency of attacks, medication overuse and PCS score represent independent negative predictors of CGRP‐mAbs response. A ≥50% reduction of headache days/month was observed after olanzapine treatment in 67% of patients with Ref‐M not responsive to CGRP‐mAbs.

Conclusions

We outline that higher frequency of migraine attacks, medication overuse and pain catastrophizing characterize patients with Ref‐M not responsive to CGRP‐mAbs. In this frame, olanzapine effectiveness on frequency and pain intensity of migraine attacks supports the hypothesis that migraine refractoriness may be subtended by a prominent involvement of the dopaminergic pathway.

Multidimensional assessment of the effects of erenumab in chronic migraine patients with previous unsuccessful preventive treatments: a comprehensive real-world experience

BACKGROUND

erenumab was safe and effective in clinical trials for the prevention of migraine. However, real-life data are still lacking. Here we report the clinical experience from an Italian real-world setting using erenumab in patients with chronic migraine experiencing previous unsuccessful preventive treatments.

METHODS

Seventy patients with chronic migraine and failure to ≥4 migraine preventive medication classes initially received monthly erenumab 70 mg s.c. Patients without a clinically meaningful improvement, considered as a > 30% reduction in headache days per month, after ≥3 months of therapy switched to monthly erenumab 140 mg. At the first administration and after 3 and 6 months, patients underwent extensive interviews to assess clinical parameters of disease severity and migraine-related disability and impact, and validated questionnaires to explore depression/anxiety, sleep, and quality of life (QoL). Finally, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Allodynia Symptom Checklist-12 and MIGraine attacks-Subjective COGnitive impairments scale (MIG-SCOG) were administered.

RESULTS

70% of patients were "responders" after the third administration of erenumab 70 mg, whereas 30% switched to erenumab 140 mg; 29% (6 pts) responded after the sixth administration. The headache-day frequency was reduced from 21.1 ± 0.7 to 11.4 ± 0.9 days after the third administration (p < 0.001) and to 8.9 ± 0.7 days after the sixth administration (p < 0.001). 53% and 70% of patients, respectively, showed a reduction of ≥50% of headache days/month after the third and the sixth administrations. Also improved were headache pain severity, migraine-related disability, and impact on daily living, QoL, pain catastrophizing and allodynia (all p < 0.001), quality of sleep, symptoms of depression or anxiety (p < 0.05) but not MIG-SCOG. There were no new adverse event signals.

CONCLUSION

These real-world data support monthly erenumab 70 or 140 mg s.c. as a safe and effective preventive treatment to reduce headache frequency and severity in chronic migraine patients experiencing previous unsuccessful preventive treatments.