OnabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache

Research hotspots and frontiers of cluster headaches: a bibliometric analysis

Background

Extensive research on cluster headaches (CHs) has been conducted worldwide; however, there is currently no bibliometric research on CHs. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the current research hotspots and frontiers of CHs over the past decade.

Methods

Raw data on CHs was obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection database from 2014 to 2023. CiteSpace V6.2 R7 (64 bit) and Microsoft Excel were used to assess the annual publication volume, authors, countries, and references. VOSviewer 1.6.19 software was used to assess the institutions, cited authors, and keywords, and co-occurrence and clustering functions were applied to draw a visual knowledge map.

Results

In the past decade, the overall annual publication volume of articles related to CHs has increased year by year, showing promising development prospects. The total 1909 articles contained six types of literature, among which the proportion of original research articles was the highest (1,270 articles, 66.53%), published in 201 journals. Cephalalgia (439 articles, 23.00%) had the highest publication volume, and the Lancet was the journal with the highest impact factor (IF = 168.9). Furthermore, the United States of America was the country with the most published papers (584 articles, 30.60%), University of London was the research institution with the most published papers (142 articles, 7.44%), and Goodsby, Peter J was found to be the most prolific author (38 articles, 1.99%).

Conclusion

This study may provide some direction for subsequent researcher on CHs. The hotspots and frontiers of future research on CHs are suggested as follows: in basic medicine, more attention should be paid to pathophysiology, especially on increasing research on the pathogenesis mediated by CGRP; in clinical medicine, more attention should be paid to the design of evidence-based medicine methodology, especially the strict design, including double-blind, questionnaire, and follow-up, in randomized controlled trials, using high-quality articles for meta-analyses, and recommending high-level evidence; therapeutic techniques need to be further explored, suggesting the implementation of transcranial magnetic stimulation of the cortex, and stimulation of the sphinopalatine ganglia and occipital nerve to achieve peripheral neuromodulation. Furthermore, chronic migraine and insomnia are inextricably linked to CHs.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for Pediatric Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a painful, prevalent, and problematic condition among children. Children need access to safe and effective treatment options to alleviate the impact of this chronic condition on their wellbeing.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Nurses have a crucial role in supporting patient access to BTX-A. Given the results of this and other studies demonstrating the safety and efficacy of BTX-A in children, nurses can support policy change for health plans to fund this intervention for pediatric migraineurs. Allowing children to receive the safe and effective BTX-A injections will lessen the already significant impact of chronic migraine on their physical, emotional and mental health. Nurses can also play a key role in providing education to patients regarding safe administration of BTX-A for migraine.

AIM

The objective of this study was to define the experiences, effects, and clinical response of children to onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX-A) for migraine prevention.

METHODS

Clinical documentation for patients aged 13-17 years presenting for BTX-A treatment for chronic migraine between 2016-2022 in a community-based specialty clinic within a large, urban, pediatric academic medical center were included. A series of one-way repeated measures (analysis of variance [ANOVA]) were conducted to compare headache frequency, severity, and duration at baseline, and following first and second injections of BTX-A.

RESULTS

Of 32 eligible participants, administration of BTX-A demonstrated a decrease in headache frequency and severity. Participants reported nearly seven fewer headache days per month. Participants reported neck stiffness, fever or flu-like symptoms, fatigue, and worsening pain following BTX-A administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric migraineurs need therapies that are safe, effective, and accessible. BTX-A was a safe and effective treatment for migraine among the children included in this study.

European Academy of Neurology guidelines on the treatment of cluster headache

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cluster headache is a relatively rare, disabling primary headache disorder with a major impact on patients' quality of life. This work presents evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of cluster headache derived from a systematic review of the literature and consensus among a panel of experts.

METHODS

The databases PubMed (Medline), Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Library were screened for studies on the efficacy of interventions (last access July 2022). The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the European Academy of Neurology, and the level of evidence was established using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation).

RECOMMENDATIONS

For the acute treatment of cluster headache attacks, there is a strong recommendation for oxygen (100%) with a flow of at least 12 L/min over 15 min and 6 mg subcutaneous sumatriptan. Prophylaxis of cluster headache attacks with verapamil at a daily dose of at least 240 mg (maximum dose depends on efficacy and tolerability) is recommended. Corticosteroids are efficacious in cluster headache. To reach an effect, the use of at least 100 mg prednisone (or equivalent corticosteroid) given orally or at up to 500 mg iv per day over 5 days is recommended. Lithium, topiramate, and galcanezumab (only for episodic cluster headache) are recommended as alternative treatments. Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation is efficacious in episodic but not chronic cluster headache. Greater occipital nerve block is recommended, but electrical stimulation of the greater occipital nerve is not recommended due to the side effect profile.

Epidemiology, burden and clinical spectrum of cluster headache: a global update

BACKGROUND

This narrative review aims to broaden our understanding of the epidemiology, burden and clinical spectrum of cluster headache based on updated findings with a global perspective.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on the following topics: (a) epidemiology; (b) burden: quality of life, disability, economic burden, job-related burden and suicidality; and (c) clinical spectrum: male predominance and its changes, age, pre-cluster and pre-attack symptoms, aura, post-drome, attack characteristics (location, severity, duration and associated symptoms), bout characteristics (attack frequency, bout duration and bout frequency), circadian and seasonal rhythmicity and disease course.

RESULTS

New large-scale population-based reports have suggested a lower prevalence than previous estimations. The impact of cluster headache creates a significant burden in terms of the quality of life, disability, economic and job-related burdens and suicidality. Several studies have reported decreasing male-to-female ratios and a wide age range at disease onset. The non-headache phases of cluster headache, including pre-cluster, pre-attack and postictal symptoms, have recently been revisited. The latest data regarding attack characteristics, bout characteristics, and circadian and seasonal rhythmicity from different countries have shown variability among bouts, attacks, individuals and ethnicities. Studies on the disease course of cluster headache have shown typical characteristics of attacks or bouts that decrease with time.

CONCLUSIONS

Cluster headache may be more than a "trigeminal autonomic headache" because it involves complex central nervous system phenomena. The spectrum of attacks and bouts is wider than previously recognised. Cluster headache is a dynamic disorder that evolves or regresses over time.

Management of Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias Including Chronic Cluster: A Review

Importance

Trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) comprise a unique collection of primary headache disorders characterized by moderate or severe unilateral pain, localized in in the area of distribution of the first branch of the trigeminal nerve, accompanied by cranial autonomic symptoms and signs. Most TACs are rare diseases, which hampers the possibility of performing randomized clinical trials and large studies. Therefore, knowledge of treatment efficacy must be based only on observational studies, rare disease registries, and case reports, where real-world data and evidence play an important role in health care decisions.

Observations

Chronic cluster headache is the most common of these disorders, and the literature offers some evidence from randomized clinical trials to support the use of pharmacologic and neurostimulation treatments. Galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide, was not effective at 3 months in a randomized clinical trial but showed efficacy at 12 months in a large case series. For the other TACs (ie, paroxysmal hemicrania, hemicrania continua, short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with conjunctival injection and tearing, and short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with cranial autonomic symptoms), only case reports and case series are available to guide physicians in everyday management.

Conclusions and Relevance

The accumulation of epidemiologic, pathophysiologic, natural history knowledge, and data from case series and small controlled trials, especially over the past 20 years from investigators around the world, has added to the previously limited evidence and has helped advance and inform the treatment approach to rare TACs, which can be extremely challenging for clinicians.

From basic mechanisms to therapeutic perspectives in cluster headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The pathophysiological understanding of cluster headache has evolved significantly over the past years. Although it is now well known that the trigeminovascular system, the parasympathetic system and the hypothalamus play important roles in its pathomechanism, we increasingly understand the functional role several neurotransmitters and hormones play in the communication between these structures.

RECENT FINDINGS

This work will give an overview of the current understanding of the role of calcitonin gene-related peptide, vasoactive intestinal peptide, pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide, melatonin and orexins in cluster headache. On the basis of recent evidence, this study will also review the relevance of the monoclonal calcitonin gene-related peptide antibody galcanezumab as well as the sleep-regulating hormone melatonin in the treatment of cluster headache.

SUMMARY

Herein, we aim to review the basic mechanisms implicated in the pathophysiology of cluster headache and how the increased mechanistic understanding may lead to the discovery of novel therapeutic targets.

Diagnostic protocols and newer treatment modalities for cluster headache

Cluster Headaches are one of the most arguably severe forms of primary headache syndrome that affects humans. Although it is relatively uncommon, it has a significant impact on the quality of life. It is a multifactorial disease that has risk factors ranging from seasonal changes, lifestyle habits to genetics. It occurs in 2 forms- Episodic and Chronic, each having its well-defined Diagnostic Criteria. Moreover, Cluster Headache has an exhaustive list of options for both Preventive and Abortive treatment. This article focuses on Cluster Headache, its pathophysiology, risk factors, differentials, and its diverse treatment modalities. In this study, an all-language literature search was conducted on Medline, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar till October 2021. The following search strings and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were used: "Cluster Headache," "Triptans," "Neuromodulation," and "Migraine." We explored the literature on Cluster Headache for its epidemiology, pathophysiology, the role of various genes and how they bring about the disease as well as its episodic and chronic variants, and treatment options. Although we have a wide variety of options for Preventive and Abortive therapy, newer more effective pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions are being developed, and must be integrated into new treatment protocols.

Drug Treatment of Cluster Headache

Cluster headache belongs to the group of trigeminal autonomic headaches. This review summarizes drug therapy of cluster attacks and prophylactic treatment. Neurostimulation methods are not addressed. The therapy for acute cluster attacks includes inhalation of 100% oxygen, subcutaneous administration of sumatriptan, and intranasal application of sumatriptan or zolmitriptan. Bridging therapy, which is used until oral prophylactic therapy is effective, is performed either with oral prednisolone or with a pharmacological block of the major occipital nerves. Best documented drugs for preventive treatment of cluster headache are verapamil and lithium, and possibly effective drugs are gabapentin, topiramate, divalproex sodium, and melatonin. The efficacy of monoclonal antibodies to the calcitonin gene-related peptide so far has been only demonstrated for episodic cluster headache. Several drug therapies are being investigated including ketamine, onabotulinumtoxinA, lysergic acid, and sodium oxybate.

Cluster Headache is Still Lurking in the Shadows

Cluster headache, apart from its legendary reputation as the most violent headache that can exist, suffers from an average 60-month delay in diagnosis. The simplicity of the clinical manifestations, although dramatic, makes this delay inexplicable. The education of emergency department physicians and various specialists not specifically dedicated to headaches allows cluster headache to remain in a lurking position with flourishing periods of disease that are often unpredictable in both onset and disappearance. Older drugs have always shown high efficacy but also an equally high rate of adverse events, often discouraging their appropriate use. The availability of a new drug class such as monoclonal antibodies for calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor (CGRP_(r)), which have already been efficient for migraine, shows a jeopardized geography of access in the world, and this favors the progression of the episodic form into chronic and of the chronic into refractory.

Beyond chronic migraine: a systematic review and expert opinion on the off-label use of botulinum neurotoxin type-A in other primary headache disorders

Introduction: Botulinum neurotoxin type-A (BoNTA) is licensed for the treatment of chronic migraine (CM), but it has been tested off-label as a therapeutic choice in other primary headaches (PHs). We aimed to provide a systematic review and expert opinion on BoNTA use in PHs, beyond CM.Areas covered: After providing an overview on PHs and mechanism of BoNTA action, we report the results of a systematic review, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, of BoNTA therapeutic trials in PHs beyond CM. Studies and results were reviewed and discussed, and levels of evidence were graded. We also collected data on relevant ongoing trials.Expert opinion: Although there are contradictory findings on PHs other than CM, BoNTA may represent a therapeutic option for patients who do not respond to conventional prophylactic treatments. Based on limited available evidence, BoNTA may be considered in refractory tension-type headache, trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, primary stabbing headache, nummular headache, hypnic headache, and new daily persistent headache, after the primary nature of cephalalgia has been documented and other drugs have failed. Experienced physicians in BoNTA treatment are required to guide the therapeutic protocol for each patient to optimize good and safe outcomes.

Mapping Assessments Instruments for Headache Disorders against the ICF Biopsychosocial Model of Health and Disability

Headache disorders have a strong impact on sufferers’ lives. However, the “content” of assessment instruments addressing concepts, such as disability and quality of life (QoL), has not comprehensively been addressed. We searched SCOPUS for research papers in which outcome measures were used in adult populations of patients with migraine, tension-type headache (TTH), and cluster headache (CH). The content of single instruments was then mapped against the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. A total of 150 papers and 26 instruments were included: 15 addressed disability or impact, two addressed work-related difficulties, and nine addressed QoL. Few instruments were commonly used across the conditions and covered domains of functioning were impact on daily life activities, homework, school, and work-related tasks, leisure time, informal and family relations, pain, emotional difficulties, energy level, and impulse control. Most of the research is based on instruments that were developed for migraine, which is critical for CH, and the impact of headache disorders on work-related activities is poorly acknowledged. Further research is needed to expand the scope of headaches impact on daily life activities, and on environmental factors relevant to headache disorders to raise knowledge on the less represented areas, e.g., TTH impact.

Recent Advances in the Management of Cluster Headache

Purpose of review

Among the spectrum of pain conditions, cluster headache represents one of the most severe. Targeted therapies for cluster headache are evolving thus improving the available therapeutic armamentarium. A better understanding of the currently available therapies, as well as new and emerging options, may aide physicians to manage affected sufferers better by evolving treatment guidance.

Recent findings

While classic first-line medications are useful in some patients with cluster headache, they are often accompanied by significant side effects that limit their use. Recently, novel treatments with better tolerability and decreased medication interactions have proven to be effective. A remarkable example of this is the blockage of the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway with monoclonal antibodies, which may be a key element in the future treatment of cluster headache. The sphenopalatine ganglion and vagus nerve perform a critical role in the regulation of pain and the trigeminal autonomic reflex. Neuromodulation therapies targeting these structures have shown excellent tolerability and few significant adverse events, constituting a promising form of treatment. Finally, several potential therapeutic targets are examined in this review, such as small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists, known as gepants, and serotonin receptor 5-HT1F receptor agonists: ditans.

Summary

In summary, a deepening of the understanding of cluster headache mechanisms in recent years has driven the evolution of sophisticated therapeutic approaches that could allow a new era in the treatment of this difficult condition.

Benefits Beyond Headache Days With OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment: A Pooled PREEMPT Analysis

Introduction

The double-blind, phase 3 PREEMPT trials demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA for headache prevention in adults with chronic migraine. This post hoc analysis evaluated the effect of onabotulinumtoxinA on clinically meaningful changes in headache severity, headache-related impact, and quality of life.

Methods

Pooled, 24-week data were used to determine percentages of patients meeting responder criteria for the change in headache days (≥ 50% reduction in headache-day frequency), Headache Impact Test (HIT-6; ≥ 5-point improvement), MSQ Role Function-Restrictive (MSQ-RFR; ≥ 10.9-point improvement), and Average Daily Headache Severity (ADHS; ≥ 1-point improvement on a 4-point ordinal scale [0 = no pain, 3 = severe pain]).

Results

In the pooled analysis population (N = 1384; onabotulinumtoxinA, n = 688; placebo, n = 696), significantly more patients treated with onabotulinumtoxinA compared with placebo were responders on HIT-6 (40.8 vs. 25.3%), MSQ-RFR (59.0 vs. 40.2%), and ADHS (35.5 vs. 22.4%) measures, and achieved traditional ≥ 50% reduction in headache days (44.8 vs. 34.2%; all P < 0.001). At least one responder criterion was met by 72.1% and 56.6% of onabotulinumtoxinA- and placebo-treated patients, respectively; all four were met by 20.4% and 8.6%, respectively (P < 0.001). Linear regression analysis showed that approximately 20% of the variance in HIT-6 and MSQ-RFR improvement was explained by improvement in headache days.

Conclusions

Treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA for 24 weeks was associated with clinically meaningful benefits beyond reduction in headache days; including reductions in headache severity and headache-related impact, and improved quality of life. While 45% of patients met responder criteria for monthly headache days, over 70% had clinically meaningful improvements on at least one outcome measure.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00156910 (PREEMPT 1) and NCT00168428 (PREEMPT 2)

The Impact of OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo on Efficacy Outcomes in Headache Day Responder and Nonresponder Patients with Chronic Migraine

Introduction

The phase 3 PREEMPT trials demonstrated efficacy and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA for headache prevention in adults with chronic migraine. OnabotulinumtoxinA significantly reduced headache frequency from baseline vs. placebo at 24 weeks; however, this measure may not fully capture the benefits of treatment. We evaluated the impact of onabotulinumtoxinA on patient-reported outcomes according to headache responder status.

Methods

A post hoc analysis pooled 24-week data from the placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind treatment phases of the PREEMPT trials. Patients were stratified by randomized treatment (onabotulinumtoxinA vs. placebo) and headache day responder status (responder vs. nonresponder). Headache day responders had a ≥ 50% headache day reduction from baseline measured at weeks 21–24. Outcomes evaluated were patient-reported reductions in moderate-to-severe headache days, Headache Impact Test, and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. Missing values were estimated using a modified last-observation-carried-forward approach.

Results

In the pooled analysis population (N = 1384; onabotulinumtoxinA, n = 688; placebo, n = 696), headache day responder rates were 308/688 (45%) for onabotulinumtoxinA- and 238/696 (34%) for placebo-treated patients. At 24 weeks compared with baseline, onabotulinumtoxinA nonresponders showed significantly (all P < 0.01) greater mean (standard error) reductions vs. placebo nonresponders in moderate-to-severe headache days (– 3.5 [0.2] vs. − 2.4 [0.2]) and Headache Impact Test scores (– 2.3 [0.3] vs. – 0.8 [0.2]), and greater mean improvements in Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire domains (Restrictive, 8.8 [1.0] vs. 2.9 [0.8]; Preventive, 6.0 [1.0] vs. 1.8 [0.8]; Emotional, 8.5 [1.3] vs. 2.8 [1.1]). Moderate-to-severe headache day and headache impact differences between nonresponder groups were evident at week 4 and sustained through week 24.

Conclusions

Relative to placebo nonresponders, onabotulinumtoxinA nonresponders experienced significant reductions in moderate-to-severe headache days and disability and improvement in quality of life, implying that the full benefits of onabotulinumtoxinA are not captured by headache day reduction.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT00156910 (PREEMPT 1) and NCT00168428 (PREEMPT 2).

The fifth cranial nerve in headaches

The fifth cranial nerve is the common denominator for many headaches and facial pain pathologies currently known. Projecting from the trigeminal ganglion, in a bipolar manner, it connects to the brainstem and supplies various parts of the head and face with sensory innervation. In this review, we describe the neuroanatomical structures and pathways implicated in the sensation of the trigeminal system. Furthermore, we present the current understanding of several primary headaches, painful neuropathies and their pharmacological treatments. We hope that this overview can elucidate the complex field of headache pathologies, and their link to the trigeminal nerve, to a broader field of young scientists.

OnabotulinumtoxinA in Migraine and Other Headaches: Review and Update

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

The role of onabotulinumtoxinA in headache management was serendipitously found over a decade ago and approved for chronic migraine in 2010 based on pivotal studies. The purpose of this review is to highlight the impact on headache and other health parameters which is critically reviewed, as well as the putative mechanisms of action.

RECENT FINDINGS

OnabotulinumtoxinA is effective in migraine, not only headache frequency and pain intensity but also other health parameters including quality of life. Tolerability is high and benefit/cost analysis is favorable. It should be considered off-label in refractory trigeminal neuralgia and post-herpetic neuralgia but further research in these areas. Ongoing investigation of onabotulinumtoxinA in cluster headache is too preliminary for recommendation of use but promising. Recent and future developments in other headache disorders are discussed. OnabotulinumtoxinA has been approved for migraine almost a decade ago and been proven beneficial not only on headache parameters but other health outcomes. Its role as adjuvant is being studied and emerging in other headache syndromes.

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.