Neuromodulation for the Acute and Preventive Therapy of Migraine and Cluster Headache

Remote electrical neuromodulation to treat children and adolescents with migraine in the emergency department: A randomized double-dummy pilot trial

OBJECTIVE

Using a double-dummy pilot randomized controlled trial design, we aimed to determine the feasibility and acceptability of comparing remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) to typical care intravenous pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of children and adolescents visiting the emergency department (ED) with migraine, and to compare parallel-group versus crossover trial designs.

BACKGROUND

There are limited data to guide the management of migraine in the ED. Children and adolescents are interested in neuromodulation, and specifically REN, for treatment in this setting, but there are no existing data on this approach.

METHODS

We employed a double-dummy, double-blind, pilot randomized controlled trial that tested two designs in two phases: a parallel-group design and a crossover design (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05102591). The intervention arms consisted of: (i) active REN stimulation with matched normal saline placebo intravenously, and (ii) matched sham REN stimulation, intravenous metoclopramide (0.15 mg/kg, maximum 10 mg), and intravenous ketorolac (0.5 mg/kg, maximum 30 mg). Youth aged 8.0-<18.0 years visiting a Canadian tertiary care pediatric ED with migraine attacks as per criteria B-E of the International Classification of Headache Disorders third edition were eligible. Primary outcomes were focused on trial feasibility and acceptability, and preliminary efficacy and safety data were also collected.

RESULTS

A total of 34% (22/65) of those who screened eligible were enrolled. Three participants (14%) withdrew prior to receiving any study interventions. In all, 10 participants were allocated to typical care, and nine to REN. All treated participants (19/19) completed all assessments. Recruitment was higher during the parallel-group phase: 1.1 participants/month versus 0.6 participants/month, and 36% (17/47) versus 28% (five of 18) of screened eligible were enrolled in the parallel-group and crossover phases, respectively. Participants reported positive impressions of REN use in the ED, e.g., higher mean (standard deviation [SD]) levels of interest in using REN only at 3.7 (1.0) versus 2.8 (1.0) in using intravenous interventions only for a future ED visit. Participants and clinical staff reported overall positive impressions regarding the study protocol. Employing an 11-point pain numerical rating scale, the mean (SD) reduction in pain severity score was 2.1 (1.3) and 2.9 (2.9) from baseline to 1 h, and 2.4 (1.6) and 4.0 (3.5) from baseline to 2 h for REN and intravenous interventions, respectively. One participant in the typical care group and none in the REN group experienced adverse events.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of our trial protocol and of using REN to treat youth presenting to the ED with migraine. The parallel-group design generated a higher recruitment rate than the crossover design. Our preliminary efficacy and safety data suggest that REN could be non-inferior to typical care, but we were not powered for these outcomes. Further research on REN's use in the ED setting is warranted.

Headache Management in Individuals with Brain Tumor

Headache occurs commonly in individuals diagnosed with cerebral neoplasm. Though the features of a brain tumor-associated headache may vary, a progressive nature of headache and a change in headache phenotype from a prior primary headache disorder often are identified. Pathophysiologic mechanisms proposed for headache associated with brain tumor include headache related to traction on pain-sensitive structures, activation of central and peripheral pain processes, and complications from surgical, chemotherapeutic and/or radiotherapy treatment(s). Optimization of headache management is important for an individual's quality of life. Treatments are based upon patient-specific goals of care and may include tumor-targeted medical and surgical interventions, as well as a multimodal headache treatment approach incorporating acute and preventive medications, nutraceuticals, neuromodulation devices, behavioral interventions, anesthetic nerve blocks, and lifestyles changes.

Revisiting Migraine: The Evolving Pathophysiology and the Expanding Management Armamentarium

Migraine affects about one billion people worldwide yearly and is one of the most common neurologic illnesses, with a high prevalence and morbidity, particularly among young adults and females. Migraine is associated with many comorbidities, including stress, sleep difficulties, and suicidal ideation. Migraine, despite its widespread occurrence, is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Because of the complicated and primarily unknown mechanisms of migraine formation, several social and biological risk factors, such as hormone imbalances, genetic and epigenetic impacts, and cardiovascular, neurological, and autoimmune illnesses, have been proposed. Through the mid-20th century diversion of the now-defunct vascular theory, the pathophysiology of migraine has developed from a historical study of the "humours" to a distinct entity as a neurological disorder. The range of therapeutic targets has broadened significantly, increasing the number of specialized clinical trials. Understanding the biology of migraine through careful research has resulted in the identification of major therapeutic classes: (i) triptans, serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists, (ii) gepants, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, (iii) ditans, 5-HT1F receptor agonists, (iv) CGRP monoclonal antibodies, and (v) glurants, mGlu5 modulators, with further targets being explored. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the most recent literature on epidemiology and risk factors and exposes knowledge gaps.

Effects on neuromodulation, acupuncture, and aerobic exercises on migraine and tension-type headache outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Headache disorders are common diseases that cause a social burden. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of various non-pharmacological treatments to address or prevent acute headaches, including neuromodulation, acupuncture, and aerobic exercises in patients with episodic migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WANFANG MEDICINE ONLINE, and Chinese Medical Journal database using Stata/SE 14.0 to obtain weighted mean differences (WMDs). The outcomes included monthly headache days, headache intensity, headache duration, days per month of acute medication use, and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey.

RESULTS

Of 872 identified articles, 27 were included in the meta-analysis. Neuromodulation was associated with reduced headache days (WMD: -1.274, 95% CI [-1.914, -0.634], P < .001), duration (WMD: -2.2, 95% CI [-3.32, -0.107], P < .001) and medication consumption (WMD: -1.808, 95% CI [-2.546, -1.071], P < .001) in cases of migraine. Acupuncture was associated with the alleviation of headache days (WMD: -0.677, 95% CI [-0.932, -0.422], P < .001) and intensity (WMD: -0.893, 95% CI [-1.573, -0.212], P = .01) in cases of migraine and acute medication use (WMD: -3.29, 95% CI [-4.86, -1.72], P < .001) in cases of TTH. Aerobic exercise was associated with reduced headache duration (WMD: -5.1, 95% CI [-8.97, -1.22], P = .01) in cases of TTH. The risk of bias for included articles was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

There is low- and moderate-quality evidence that neuromodulation, acupuncture, and aerobic exercises are associated with attenuated headache symptoms in patients with episodic migraine or TTH. However, high-quality studies are needed to draw more detailed conclusions.

Prevention of Migraine

Migraine, a primary headache disorder is a chronic and complex neurological disease that affects millions of people worldwide, impacting their quality of life. It is one of the most common reasons why individuals seek the advice of their physician, and is one of the most common referrals seen in the offices of general neurologists and headache specialists. In the past decade, there has been robust research on not only the pathophysiology of migraine but in the efforts to treat and, importantly, prevent. The introduction of calcitonin gene related peptide antagonists (CGRP-A) have opened new doors for preventive treatment options. OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) has remained a staple in the treatment of chronic migraine with data emerging with combination therapy. Neurostimulation has offered additional nonpharmacologic approaches to migraine treatment. In addition to lifestyle and behavioral modifications, these have changed the landscape of migraine prevention.

Vestibular migraine treatment: a comprehensive practical review

Vestibular migraine is an underdiagnosed but increasingly recognised neurological condition that causes episodic vertigo associated with other features of migraine. It is now thought to be the most common cause of spontaneous (non-positional) episodic vertigo, affecting up to 1% of the population. A meta-analysis of preventative treatments for vestibular migraine was published in 2021 but the authors were unable to establish a preferred treatment strategy due to low quality of evidence and heterogeneity of study design and outcome reporting. There remains therefore a clinical need for pragmatic management guidelines specific to vestibular migraine using the available evidence. Here we provide a practical review utilising a systematic qualitative assessment of the evidence for abortive and preventative interventions in adults. The overall evidence base for vestibular migraine treatment is of low quality. Nevertheless, we provide practical treatment recommendations based on the available evidence and our experience to help guide clinicians treating patients with vestibular migraine. We also discuss how future clinical trials could be designed to improve the quality of evidence in this condition.

Outcomes of transcutaneous nerve stimulation for migraine headaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Implanted and transcutaneous nerve stimulators have shown promise as novel non-pharmacologic treatment for episodic and chronic migraines. The purpose of this study was to summarize the reported efficacy of transcutaneous single nerve stimulators in management of migraine frequency and severity.

METHODS

A systematic review of five databases identified studies treating migraines with transcutaneous stimulation of a single nerve. Random effects model meta-analyses were conducted to establish the effect of preventive transcutaneous nerve stimulation on headache days per month and 0-10 numeric rating scale pain severity of headaches for both individuals with episodic and chronic migraines.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies, which treated 995 patients, met inclusion criteria, including 7 randomized controlled trials and 7 uncontrolled clinical trials. Transcutaneous nerve stimulators reduced headache frequency in episodic migraines (2.81 fewer headache days per month, 95% CI 2.18-3.43, I² = 21%) and chronic migraines (2.97 fewer headache days per month, 95% CI 1.66-4.28, I² = 0%). Transcutaneous nerve stimulators reduced headache severity in episodic headaches (2.23 fewer pain scale points, 95% CI 1.64-2.81, I² = 88%).

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive use of transcutaneous nerve stimulators provided clinically significant reductions in headache frequency in individuals with chronic or episodic migraines. Individuals with episodic migraines also experienced a reduction in headache pain severity following preventive transcutaneous nerve stimulation.

Prescribing for pregnancy: managing chronic headache and migraine

Globally, headache disorders are an important cause of disability in adults. As many types of headache (eg, migraine, tension-type and medication-overuse) are more common in women and have peak incidence in reproductive years, chronic headache disorders are highly prevalent in pregnant women. Some women with a history of migraine may find that it improves during pregnancy while others may find that their migraines become more unpredictable. Ideally, women with migraine and problematic headache disorder should be offered preconception counselling to address pregnancy-related concerns and advice on the use of medicines, which should be supported by high-quality information. For women with history of headache, the use of effective non-pharmacological options should be maximised, and the smallest number of the safest medicines at the lowest effective doses should be used while preparing for pregnancy and during pregnancy. This article forms part of the series of prescribing for pregnancy and discusses the impact of headache and migraine on pregnancy, the impact of pregnancy on headache and migraine and options for prophylaxis and treatment.

Acute Migraine Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Migraine is a disabling disease of attacks of moderate to severe pain with associated symptoms. Every person with migraine requires treatment for acute attacks. Treatments can range from behavioral management and nonspecific medications to migraine-specific medications and neuromodulation. For many with migraine, having a combination of tools allows for effective treatment of all types of attacks.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the past several years, four neuromodulation devices have been cleared by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for treatment of acute migraine, and three medications with novel mechanisms of action have been FDA approved. They add to the arsenal available to people with migraine and focus on migraine-specific pathways to allow for precise care with fewer side effects.

SUMMARY

This article discusses acute migraine therapy, focusing on best-level evidence.

The bottom-up approach: Non-invasive peripheral neurostimulation methods to treat migraine: A scoping review from the child neurologist's perspective

Migraine is a common and invalidating disorder worldwide. Patients of all ages experience the disorder as very impairing regarding their personal and occupational lives. The current approach in migraine therapy is multimodal including lifestyle management, psychoeducation and, if available, psychotherapeutic interventions, and pharmacotherapy. The lack of non-pharmacological and non-invasive treatment options call for new and innovative therapeutic approaches. Peripheral neurostimulation is a relatively new method in migraine management offering a painless and non-pharmacological way of targeting specific mechanisms involved in migraine. This review summarizes 15 recent randomized clinical trials to provide an overview of non-invasive peripheral neurostimulation methods currently available for the treatment of migraine. Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of the different interventions and their feasibility in the pediatric setting are evaluated. Vagal nerve stimulation (VNS), remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SNS) are considered effective in treating acute migraine attacks, the latter being more pronounced in migraine without aura. Regarding migraine prevention, occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) and supraorbital nerve stimulation (SNS) demonstrated efficacy, whereas repetitive neuromuscular magnetic stimulation (rNMS) may represent a further effective option in episodic migraine. REN and rNMS were found to be well-accepted with fewer patients discontinuing treatment than those receiving direct cranial nerve stimulation. In summary, peripheral neurostimulation represents a promising option to complement the multimodal therapy concept for pediatric migraine. In particular, rNMS opens a new field for research and treatment fitting the requirements of "non-invasiveness" for children. Given the reported efficacy, safety, and feasibility, the therapy decision should be made on an individual level.

Is Noninvasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation a Safe and Effective Alternative to Medication for Acute Migraine Control?

BACKGROUND

Noninvasive neuromodulation devices have been used for a variety of headache disorders, including cluster and migraine, since recently being cleared by the Federal Drug Administration. Although these devices have been touted as low-risk options for improved headache control, the data behind actual efficacy endpoints remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To critically assess current evidence regarding the efficacy of the noninvasive vagus nerve stimulator (nVNS) device for acute migraine management.

METHODS

The objective was addressed through the development of a structured critically appraised topic. This included a clinical scenario with a clinical question, literature search strategy, critical appraisal, results, evidence summary, commentary, and bottom line conclusions.Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and a content expert in the field of headache.

RESULTS

A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial was selected for critical appraisal. In this trial, the primary endpoint (pain freedom at 120 min after use of nVNS for first acute migraine attack) was not met when compared with sham device (30.4% for nVNS vs. 19.7% for sham; P=0.067). However, there were statistically significant differences found for various secondary endpoints favoring nVNS, such as pain freedom rates at 30 and 60 minutes, pain relief at 120 minutes, and mean percentage pain score reduction rates at 60 and 120 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

When comparing nVNS with sham, no statistically significant differences were found with regards to the primary endpoint of pain freedom at 120 minutes, although differences were found with various secondary endpoints and post hoc analysis. nVNS is likely a safe alternative to medications.

MRI Evaluation of the Relationship Between Abnormalities in Vision-Related Brain Networks and Quality of Life in Patients with Migraine without Aura

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether migraine without aura (MwoA) can be partly attributed to abnormalities of vision-related brain networks (VBN) and whether these specific regional abnormalities affect the patients' quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

A total of 40 participants, including 20 MwoA patients and 20 healthy control volunteers, were enrolled. There were no significant differences in sex, age, educational qualifications and dominant hand between the two groups. Headache intensity and QoL were assessed by the Pain Number Evaluation Scale (NRS) and the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ 2.1), respectively. Resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) and independent component analysis (ICA) were performed to determine and evaluate the VBN.

RESULTS

Three components were identified as consistent with the VBN in the template and recorded as N1, N2 and N3, respectively. The functional activity of the left primary visual cortex (N1), left culmen of cerebellum (N1), left lingual gyrus (N2), superior frontal gyrus (N2) and left posterior lateral prefrontal cortex (N3) in the MwoA group enhanced compared with the healthy control group. However, the functional activity of right middle occipital gyrus, left fusiform gyrus, right lingual gyrus, and right primary motor cortex in the N3 network weakened. Pearson correlation analysis showed that decline of attention to work and life (MSQ5) was positively associated with the functional activity of left primary visual cortex and left lingual gyrus. Canceling from work and daily life (MSQ8) was inversely associated with the functional activity of right primary motor cortex. The burden of feeling like others (MSQ13) and the overall decrease in QoL were both positively associated with the functional activity of right lingual gyrus.

CONCLUSION

MwoA patients showed abnormal VBN function, which was moderately correlated with decreased QoL. This study provides evidence for the precise prevention and treatment of migraine by neural regulation.

Noninvasive Neuromodulation in Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The past two decades has seen an influx of noninvasive neuromodulation devices aimed at treatment of various primary headache disorders, including cluster headache and migraine. This narrative review is to summarize the current options in noninvasive neuromodulation in migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

A variety of noninvasive neuromodulation devices have been FDA cleared and marketed for use in migraine, including single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (sTMS), noninvasive vagal nerve stimulators (nVNS), and external trigeminal nerve stimulators (eTNS). Newer devices include peripheral electrical stimulation devices (PES), caloric stimulation, and others. Each has varying levels of evidence supporting its use in migraine, tolerability profiles, and access issues. Noninvasive neuromodulation devices can be beneficial when used in patients with migraine, with minimal side effects. As more devices are developed, approved, and marketed in the future, rigorous research on efficacy and safety remain a top priority.

The current state of acute treatment for migraine in adults in the United States

Migraine is a common and disabling disorder with substantial personal, social, and economic burden that affects 37 million people in the United States. Risk factors for migraine include age, sex, and genetics. The goal of acute treatment of migraine attacks is to stop the pain and associated symptoms of the migraine attack and return the patient to normal function. The acute treatment landscape for migraine has recently expanded beyond the standard nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, analgesics, triptans, ergotamines, and combination therapies, to include neuromodulation devices, and recently approved calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists and a serotonin (5-HT_1F) receptor agonist. Unmet acute treatment needs still exist due to lack of efficacy, unwanted side effects, or contraindication to treatment. Effective treatment of migraine requires the clinician to assess the patient, make an accurate diagnosis, and then offer appropriate therapy based on the patient's medical history, comorbidities, and preferences, as well as published clinical evidence. The objective of this narrative review is to familiarize primary care clinicians with the variety of acute treatment options available in the United States today based on clinical trial findings, meta-analyses, evidence-based guidelines, and professional society consensus statements.

Percutaneous Bioelectric Current Stimulation for Chronic Cluster Headache - A Possible Transformative Approach to Cluster Headache

Background

Cluster headache (CH) is considered to be a catastrophic disease presenting the most severe human pain condition. Available pharmacological treatments are hampered by unwanted side effects, and there is an urgent need for non-pharmacological treatment alternatives. We present a novel therapeutic approach for chronic CH, having evolved from an episodic CH, using a non-invasive percutaneous bioelectric current stimulation (PBCS), which generates static electric fields in the range of the naturally occurring electric potentials.

Patients and Methods

This study employed a retrospective data analysis of 20 cases of chronic cluster headache (CCH) patients, four of those having had cluster-related surgery (SPG, ONS). All patients were treated with PBCS between 2014 and 2018. Data of these patients were analyzed with respect to frequency of CH attacks and triptan application and followed up for one (20 cases) or two (12 cases) years.

Results

Four weeks after the first PBCS treatment, cluster headache attacks were reduced from 2.8 to 1.7 per day and triptan application decreased from 2.5 to 1.5 times/day. Six non-responders, 4 of which had pre-CH surgery, did not show any reaction to PBCS, while 14 responders improved within 4 weeks from 2.2 to 0.7 attacks/day and 2.0 to 0.4 triptan applications/day. A 50% or greater reduction of attack frequency was observed in 10 patients after 4 weeks and in 11 patients after 12 weeks. One year after the first treatment, 13/20 patients experienced a reduction of attack frequency of 50% or more, while remarkably 10 patients were completely free of attack. After 2 years, 8 of 12 patients experienced a reduction of attack frequency of 50% or more and 7 of those were completely symptom-free. No serious adverse effects were observed.

Conclusion

PBCS is a promising transformative treatment approach for CCH patients. Drug consumption was reduced significantly, and the CCH may revert back to an episodic cluster headache with increasingly long times of remission. Responders can be clearly differentiated from non-responders. The data support the need for randomized controlled trials.

Migraine Care in the Era of COVID-19: Clinical Pearls and Plea to Insurers

Objective

To outline strategies for the treatment of migraine which do not require in‐person visits to clinic or the emergency department, and to describe ways that health insurance companies can remove barriers to quality care for migraine.

Background

COVID‐19 is a global pandemic causing widespread infections and death. To control the spread of infection we are called to observe “social distancing” and we have been asked to postpone any procedures which are not essential. Since procedural therapies are a mainstay of headache care, the inability to do procedures could negatively affect our patients with migraine. In this manuscript we review alternative therapies, with particular attention to those which may be contra‐indicated in the setting of COVID‐19 infection.

Design/Results

The manuscript reviews the use of telemedicine visits and acute, bridge, and preventive therapies for migraine. We focus on evidence‐based treatment where possible, but also describe “real world” strategies which may be tried. In each section we call out areas where changes to rules from commercial health insurance companies would facilitate better migraine care.

Conclusions

Our common goal as health care providers is to maximize the health and safety of our patients. Successful management of migraine with avoidance of in‐person clinic and emergency department visits further benefits the current urgent societal goal of maintaining social distance to contain the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Peripheral neuromodulation for the treatment of migraine and headache: recent advances

Noninvasive neuromodulation is a rapidly developing field that offers an attractive nonpharmacologic treatment option for headache patients. Devices that stimulate peripheral nerves (e.g., vagus nerve, trigeminal sensory nerve, somatic sensory nerve) or brain parenchyma (e.g., occipital cortex) have been developed for this purpose, with promising results in clinical trials. There are currently four US FDA-cleared devices for the treatment of migraine and/or cluster headache: Cefaly®, a trigeminal nerve stimulator; gammaCore™, a vagus nerve stimulator; sTMS mini™, a transcranial magnetic stimulator and Nerivio™, a remote electrical neurostimulator. This narrative review will provide an overview of FDA-cleared neuromodulatory devices, including their proposed mechanisms of action as well as device safety and efficacy as demonstrated in clinical trials.