Update on the pathophysiology of cluster headache: imaging and neuropeptide studies

Orexins and primary headaches: an overview of the neurobiology and clinical impact

INTRODUCTION

Primary headaches, including migraines and cluster headaches, are highly prevalent disorders that significantly impact quality of life. Several factors suggest a key role for the hypothalamus, including neuroimaging studies, attack periodicity, and the presence of altered homeostatic regulation. The orexins are two neuropeptides synthesized almost exclusively in the lateral hypothalamus with widespread projections across the central nervous system. They are involved in an array of functions including homeostatic regulation and nociception, suggesting a potential role in primary headaches.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes current knowledge of the neurobiology of orexins, their involvement in sleep-wake regulation, nociception, and functions relevant to the associated symptomology of headache disorders. Preclinical reports of the antinociceptive effects of orexin-A in preclinical models are discussed, as well as clinical evidence for the potential involvement of the orexinergic system in headache.

EXPERT OPINION

Several lines of evidence support the targeted modulation of orexinergic signaling in primary headaches. Critically, orexins A and B, acting differentially via the orexin 1 and 2 receptors, respectively, demonstrate differential effects on trigeminal pain processing, indicating why dual-receptor antagonists failed to show clinical efficacy. The authors propose that orexin 1 receptor agonists or positive allosteric modulators should be the focus of future research.

Unusually Severe Bout in a Patient With a History of Cluster Headache Associated With COVID-19: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Although coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mainly exhibits respiratory symptoms, neurological symptoms are also reported, with headache being the most common neurological symptom. Headache associated with COVID-19 is widely reported. However, there are few precise case reports concerning headaches in patients with a history of migraine, tension headaches, or cluster headaches associated with COVID-19. Herein, we report a case of a woman with a history of cluster headaches who showed an unusually severe bout 10 days before typical COVID-19 symptoms. Such a case has not been reported until now.

Comorbidity or combination - more evidence for cluster-migraine?

BACKGROUND

While migraine and cluster headache share some clinical features and therapies, they differ considerably in the frequency and duration of the headache, as well as the inter-attack, or inter-bout, pathophysiology. Neither is fully understood, with their shared pathways being of interest.

FINDINGS

Five patients for whom it was difficult to distinguish migraine from cluster headache are presented. They had aspects of their phenotypes, which could be attributed to both disorders. Each patient was thoroughly examined, excluding secondary causes of headache, and had been treated with a number of medicines.

CONCLUSION

A correct diagnosis is key to the appropriate treatment approach. Especially, if treatment is not successful for the suspected headache type, and enlargement of the diagnostic and therapeutic range, respectively, should be evaluated. Whether in such settings there is shared or different pathophysiology can only be speculated upon.

CGRP-Targeted Therapy for Episodic and Chronic Cluster Headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic cluster headache (CH) substantially affects patients' quality of life, and treatment remains challenging. The current article reviewed controlled studies for new treatment options targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptors in CH and discussed the current gaps and future directions for the treatment of chronic CH.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (i.e., galcanezumab and fremanezumab) completed randomized-control trials for efficacy for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic CH. Galcanezumab was effective for preventing episodic CH but not chronic CH. Fremanezumab was ineffective in preventing episodic and chronic CH. Studies for other anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies and CGRP antagonists are still pending for results. There are no randomized controlled trials for CGRP-targeted therapies that showed efficacy for chronic CH prevention. The different responses to galcanezumab between episodic and chronic CH may be due to the study design, i.e., the allowance of concomitant preventive therapies in the chronic CH study but not in the episodic CH study. Another reason for the discrepancies is the different roles and sensitivity of CGRP in chronic CH.

Cluster headache pathophysiology: What we have learned from advanced neuroimaging

Background

Although remarkable progress has been achieved in understanding cluster headache (CH) pathophysiology, there are still several gaps about the mechanisms through which independent subcortical and cortical brain structures interact with each other. These gaps could be partially elucidated by structural and functional advanced neuroimaging investigations.

Objective

Although we are aware that substantial achievements have come from preclinical, neurophysiological, and biochemical experiments, the present narrative review aims to summarize the most significant findings from structural, microstructural, and functional neuroimaging investigations, as well as the consequent progresses in understanding CH pathophysiological mechanisms, to achieve a comprehensive and unifying model.

Results

Advanced neuroimaging techniques have contributed to overcoming the peripheral hypothesis that CH is of cavernous sinus pathology, in transitioning from the pure vascular hypothesis to a more comprehensive trigeminovascular model, and, above all, in clarifying the role of the hypothalamus and its connections in the genesis of CH.

Conclusion

Altogether, neuroimaging findings strongly suggest that, beyond the theoretical model of the “pain matrix,” the model of the “neurolimbic pain network” that is accepted in migraine research could also be extended to CH. Indeed, although the hypothalamus’ role is undeniable, the genesis of CH attacks is complex and seems to not be just the result of a single “generator.” Cortical‐hypothalamic‐brainstem functional interconnections that can switch between out‐of‐bout and in‐bout periods, igniting the trigeminovascular system (probably by means of top‐down mechanisms) and the consensual trigeminal autonomic reflexes, may represent the “neuronal background” of CH.

Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of cluster headache

Cluster headache, a primary headache disorder, consists of short (15-180 minutes), frequent (up to eight a day), unilateral attacks of facial pain with associated ipsilateral autonomic features and restlessness. The attacks are suspected to be one of the most painful human experiences, and the disorder is associated with a high rate of suicidal ideation. Proper diagnosis is key, as some of the most effective treatments, such as high flow oxygen gas, are rarely used in other headache disorders. Yet diagnostic delay is typically years for this disorder, as it is often confused with migraine and trigeminal neuralgia, and secondary causes may be overlooked. This review covers the clinical, pathophysiologic, and therapeutic features of cluster headache. Recent updates in diagnosis include the redefinition of chronic cluster headache (remission periods lasting less than three months instead of the previous one month), and recent advances in management include new treatments for episodic cluster headache (galcanezumab and non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation).

Psychedelics in the Treatment of Headache and Chronic Pain Disorders

The therapeutic potential of psychedelics in headache and chronic pain disorders is documented over decades of anecdotal and early investigational reports, which have paved the way for the first controlled studies of psilocybin and lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in these disorders. The reported lasting clinical effects after limited dosing with psychedelics present a novel means for disease management, but considerable further study will be required to address disease-specific treatments, uncover mechanism(s) of action, and verify safety. In this chapter, these topics are reviewed with particular attention to the neurobiological systems that offer potential sources of psychedelics' unique clinical effects in headache and pain.

Regional cerebral blood flow as predictor of response to occipital nerve block in cluster headache

Background

Cluster headache is an excruciating disorder with no cure. Greater occipital nerve blockades can transiently suppress attacks in approximately 50% of patients, however, its mechanism of action remains uncertain, and there are no reliable predictors of treatment response. To address this, we investigated the effect of occipital nerve blockade on regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF), an index of brain activity, and differences between treatment responders and non-responders. Finally, we compared baseline perfusion maps from patients to a matched group of healthy controls.

Methods

21 male, treatment-naive patients were recruited while in a cluster headache bout. During a pain-free phase between headaches, patients underwent pseudo-continuous arterial spin labelled MRI assessments to provide quantitative indices of rCBF. MRIs were performed prior to and 7-to-21 days following treatment. Patients also recorded the frequency of their headache attacks in a daily paper diary. Neuropsychological assessment including anxiety, depression and quality of life measures was performed in a first, scanning free session for each patient.

Results

Following treatment, patients demonstrated relative rCBF reductions in posterior temporal gyrus, cerebellum and caudate, and rCBF increases in occipital cortex. Responders demonstrated relative rCBF increases, compared to non-responders, in medial prefrontal cortex and lateral occipital cortex at baseline, but relative reductions in cingulate and middle temporal cortices. rCBF was increased in patients compared to healthy controls in cerebellum and hippocampus, but reduced in orbitofrontal cortex, insula and middle temporal gyrus.

Conclusions

We provide new mechanistic insights regarding the aetiology of cluster headache, the mechanisms of action of occipital nerve blockades and potential predictors of treatment response. Future investigation should determine whether observed effects are reproducible and extend to other headache disorders.

Cluster Headache and Other Trigeminal Autonomic Cephalalgias

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias (TACs) are relatively rare, but they represent a distinct set of syndromes that are important to recognize. Despite their unique features, TACs often go undiagnosed or misdiagnosed for several years, leading to unnecessary pain and suffering. 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.

Current advances in the management of cluster headaches

Introduction: Cluster headache (CH) is probably the most severe idiopathic pain condition, yet its current medical management remains poor.Areas covered: Only repurpose medicines are currently in use for the prevention of CH, partially because the pathophysiology of the condition is still elusive. In this article we performed a systematic review to evaluate the evidence for efficacy of the currently available or emerging treatments for CH.Expert opinion: We found several ongoing randomized clinical trials testing prophylactic treatments for CH and only few for the standard ones. Recent data from randomized trials with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs) are controversial, although its role in the pathogenesis of the condition is well documented. This inconsistency may depict inadequacies in clinical trial designing. Anti-CGRP mAbs and antagonists of pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) along with neuromodulation techniques, are curing the necessary valuable evidence that could illuminate the therapeutical future for cluster headache. Orexin pathway is another attractive target for CH treatment. To improve the evidence for efficacy, we further propose that the design of the clinical trials for CH needs to be radically reviewed to allow more patients to participate.

Clinical features of cluster headache without cranial autonomic symptoms: results from a prospective multicentre study

Although cranial autonomic symptoms (CAS) are typical in cluster headache (CH), some individuals with CH show no CAS during their headache attacks. Probable cluster headache (PCH) is a subtype of CH that fulfils all but one criterion of CH. This study aimed to investigate the frequency and clinical features of CH and PCH without CAS in comparison to those with CAS. We analysed data from the Korea Cluster Headache Registry, a prospective multicentre registry involving data from 16 hospitals. Of the 216 participants with CH and 26 with PCH, 19 (8.8%) and 7 (26.9%), respectively, did not have CAS. Participants with CH without CAS exhibited less severe anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder-7 score, median [interquartile range], 2.0 [1.0–6.0] vs 8.0 [3.0–12.0], p = 0.001) and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score, 3.0 [1.0–7.0] vs 7.0 [3.0–11.0], p = 0.042) than those with CAS. Among participants with PCH, headache intensity was less severe in participants without CAS than in those with CAS (numeric rating scale, 8.0 [7.0–8.0] vs 9.5 [8.0–10.0], p = 0.015). In conclusion, a significant proportion of participants with CH and PCH did not have CAS. Some clinical features of CH and PCH differed based on the presence of CAS.

Association of dynamic and widespread mechanical sensitivity in cluster headache

We investigated if dynamic pressure pain sensitivity in the symptomatic area is associated with pressure sensitivity in local and distant pain-free areas in cluster headache (CH). A pressure algometry set consisting of 8 rollers with fixed pressure levels ranging from 500 to 5300 g was used to assess dynamic pressure pain sensitivity in men with episodic CH. Each roller was moved from an anterior-to-posterior direction over the temporalis muscle. The load level of the first painful roller was considered the dynamic pain threshold (DPT). Further, pain elicited during DPT (roller evoked pain) was also assessed. We used a pressure algometer to determine pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) over the temporalis muscle, C5/C6 joint, second metacarpal, and tibialis anterior. Patients were assessed in an asymptomatic (remission) phase, at least 6 months after their last cluster period and without taking pharmacological treatment. Forty men with episodic CH (mean age 42 years) were included. Both outcomes, DPTs (r = 0.781, P < 0.001) and roller-evoked pain (r = 0.586; P < 0.001) were bilaterally correlated. Further, DPT, but not roller-evoked pain, was moderately associated with PPTs measured at the symptomatic (temporalis: r = 0.665, P < 0.001) and distant pain-free (C5-C6 joint: r = 0.389, P = 0.013; second metacarpal: r = 0.551, P < 0.001; and, tibialis anterior: r = 0.308, P = 0.035) points. Dynamic pressure sensitivity in the trigeminal area was correlated to pressure pain sensitivity at both symptomatic and distant pain-free areas in men with CH supporting the use of roller pressure algometry. Dynamic pressure algometry may be a new tool for assessing the status of sensitization in primary headaches.

Understanding the most commonly billed diagnoses in primary care: Headache disorders

This article, part of a series about the most commonly billed diagnoses in primary care, describes the pathophysiologic processes of the three most common types of headache disorders as well as how the clinical manifestations and treatments are linked to the pathogenesis of the disorders.

Chronic Cluster Headache Update and East-West Comparisons: Focusing on Clinical Features, Pathophysiology, and Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides an update on chronic cluster headache (CH) focusing on clinical features, pathophysiology, and management as well as comparisons between Eastern and Western populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Chronic CH in Eastern populations was relatively rare, compared to that in Western populations. Lacrimation and/or conjunctival injection is the most frequently reported cranial autonomic symptom, and visual aura is predominant in chronic CH patients. Neuroimaging evidence in both ethnic groups suggests that CH pathophysiology involves the hypothalamus and pain-modulatory areas, with dynamic alternations between CH episodes. Recent evidence indicates that midbrain dopaminergic systems may participate in CH chronicity. Noteworthy advances have emerged in neuromodulatory therapies for chronic CH, but treatment with calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies has been unsuccessful. Recent evidence shows divergence of chronic CH between Eastern and Western populations. Neuromodulatory therapies but not CGRP inhibition is effective in this intractable patient group.

The impact of remission and coexisting migraine on anxiety and depression in cluster headache

Background

Our aim was to investigate the relationship between coexisting cluster headache (CH) and migraine with anxiety and depression during active cluster bouts, and how symptoms change during remission.

Methods

We analyzed data from 222 consecutive CH patients and 99 age- and sex-matched controls using a prospective multicenter registry. Anxiety or depression was evaluated using the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) or Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), respectively. Moderate-to-severe anxiety or depression was defined as a score of ≥10 at baseline (during a cluster bout). We assessed for changes in anxiety and depression during CH remission periods.

Results

Among the CH patients, the prevalence of moderate-to-severe anxiety and depression was seen in 38.2% and 34.6%, respectively. Compared with controls, CH patients were associated with moderate-to-severe anxiety and depression (multivariable-adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 7.32, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 3.35–15.99 and aOR = 4.95, 95% CI = 2.32–10.57, respectively). CH patients with migraine were significantly more likely to have moderate-to-severe anxiety and depression (aOR = 32.53, 95% CI = 6.63–159.64 and aOR = 16.88, 95% CI = 4.16–68.38, respectively), compared to controls without migraine. The GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores were significantly reduced between cluster bout and remission periods (from 6.8 ± 5.6 to 1.6 ± 2.8; P < 0.001, and from 6.1 ± 5.0 to 1.8 ± 2.4; P < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusions

Our results indicate that CH patients are at increased risk of anxiety and depression, especially in the presence of coexisting migraine. However, the anxiety and depression can improve during remission periods.

Development and Evaluation of a Screening Tool to Aid the Diagnosis of a Cluster Headache

Cluster headache (CH), a severe primary headache, is often misdiagnosed and mismanaged. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a screening tool to aid the diagnosis of CH. We developed a novel 12-item screening tool. This was comprised of four components: (1) images depicting headache pain; (2) pain descriptors; (3) key questions that could differentiate between CH and migraine; and (4) a visual analogue pain scale. The total possible questionnaire score ranged from 3-32. Patients with CH and migraines (control group) were recruited prospectively from a headache centre in the North of England, UK. Two-hundred and ninety-six patients were included in the study: 81 CH patients, 36 of which suffer with episodic CH and 45 with chronic CH; 215 migraine patients, 92 of which suffer with episodic migraine and 123 with chronic migraine. The mean questionnaire score was higher in CH patients versus migraine patients (28.4 versus 19.5). At a cut-off score of >25 out of 32, the screening tool had a sensitivity of 86.4% and a specificity of 92.0% in differentiating between CH and migraine. The screening tool could be a useful instrument to aid the diagnosis of a CH. The images depicting headache pain do not clearly discriminate between CH and migraine.

Long-term efficacy of superficial temporal artery ligation and auriculotemporal nerve transection for temporal cluster headache in adolescent

OBJECTIVES

Cluster headache is a primary headache disorder, which has affected up to 0.1% population. Superficial temporal artery ligation combined with auriculotemporal nerve transection (SLAT) is one of the surgical alternatives to treat the drug-resistant temporal cluster headache (TCH). The current work aimed to assess the effect of SLAT on TCH patients based on the very long-term clinical follow-up.

METHODS

The current retrospective study had enrolled 20 adolescent TCH patients undergoing SLAT between December 2016 and January 2018. The headache diaries as well as the pain severity questionnaire of the visual analog scale (VAS) had been collected to measure the pain severity before and after surgery.

RESULTS

The pain-free rates 3 days, as well as 1, 6, and 12 months, after SLAT surgery were 2.00%, 10.00%, 25.00%, and 70.00%, respectively. The frequency of TCH attack daily was found to be markedly reduced on the whole; besides, the pain degree was also remarkably decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Results in this study indicate that the sustained headache can be relieved after SLAT in adolescent patients with intractable TCH.

Images depicting headache pain - a tool to aid the diagnosis of cluster headache: a pilot study

Introduction and objective

The diagnosis of primary headaches is based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3). Cluster headache (CH), a debilitating primary headache, is often misdiagnosed as migraine. In the absence of biological markers, a new visual screening tool with images depicting pain could aid the correct diagnosis of CH. The objective of the study is to test the tool on healthy participants and participants with CH and migraine.

Methods

In phase 1, 6 images portraying people with pain were tested on 150 healthy participants. The healthy participants were asked to rate the images as mild, moderate, severe or excruciating pain. In phase 2, the images were further tested on 116 participants with headache (16 participants with CH, 100 participants with migraine). The participants were recruited prospectively from a tertiary headache center between February and May 2017. The participants were asked to choose which image best illustrated their headache attacks.

Results

Phase 1 results showed that the images represent a range of headache pain severities from mild to excruciating as rated by healthy participants. They rated two images as excruciating, one image as severe, one image as moderate/severe, one image as moderate and one image as mild. Phase 2 results showed that two-thirds of participants with CH (69%) and half of the participants with migraine (52%) chose an image described as excruciating by the healthy participants.

Conclusion

We developed a screening tool with six drawings depicting headache pain severities from mild to excruciating as rated by the healthy participants. Although the images did not differentiate between CH and migraine, the study indicated the potential of using visual aids to assess headache severity.

Spatial Distribution of Temporalis Pressure Pain Sensitivity in Men with Episodic Cluster Headache

(1) Background: Spatial changes in pressure sensitivity have been described in migraine and tension-type headaches. Our aim was to determine differences in the spatial distribution of pressure pain sensitivity of the temporalis muscle between cluster headache (CH) patients and headache-free controls; (2) Methods: Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were determined over nine points covering the temporalis muscle in 40 men with episodic CH and 40 matched headache-free controls in a blinded fashion. Topographical pressure pain sensitivity maps were constructed based on interpolation of the PPTs. Patients were evaluated in a pain-free period (remission phase), at least 3 months from the last attack and without medication; (3) Results: The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) found significant difference between points (F = 21.887; P < 0.001) and groups (F = 24.416; P = 0.602), but not between sides (F = 0.440; P = 0.508). No effect of depression (F = 0.014; P = 0.907) or anxiety (F = 0.696; F = 0.407) was observed. A post-hoc analysis revealed: 1) lower PPTs at all points in patients than in controls, 2) an anterior-to-posterior gradient in patients but not in controls, with lower PPTs located in the anterior column. Large between-groups effects were shown in all points (standardized mean difference, SMD > 0.8); (4) Conclusions: Bilateral pressure pain hypersensitivity to pressure pain in the temporalis muscle and an anterior-to-posterior gradient to pressure pain was observed in men with episodic CH.

Widespread Hypersensitivity to Pressure Pain in Men With Cluster Headache During Prolonged Remission Is Not Related to the Levels of Depression and Anxiety

BACKGROUND

Diminished pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) have been found in patients with cluster headache (CH), suggesting the presence of central sensitization. However, it is not known whether sensitization persists over time during the asymptomatic periods.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if men with episodic CH in a long-lasting remission phase exhibit widespread pressure pain hypersensitivity.

METHODS

Forty men with episodic CH and 40 matched controls were enrolled. PPTs were assessed bilaterally over 1 trigeminal (temporalis muscle) and 3 extra-trigeminal points (C5/C6 zygapophyseal joint, second metacarpal, tibialis anterior muscle) by a blinded assessor. Patients were assessed in a prolonged remission phase, at least 6 months after their last CH attack and without taking any medication. Depression and anxiety levels were assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). For each point, differences in PPTs were evaluated with a multivariate mixed-model analysis of covariance test, with side and group as main factors and depression and anxiety levels as covariates.

RESULTS

PPTs were significantly decreased bilaterally over the temporalis muscle (mean difference: 85 to 100 kPa), C5/C6 zygapophyseal joint (mean difference: 65 to 80 kPa), second metacarpal (mean difference: 65 to 90 kPa), and tibialis anterior muscle (mean difference: 135 to 155 kPa) in patients with CH when compared to headache-free subjects (all, P < 0.001). No effect of anxiety or depression levels was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CH exhibited bilateral widespread hypersensitivity to pressure pain during long-lasting remission periods, which was not associated with depression or anxiety. These results support the persistence of central sensitization in episodic CH, even in remote asymptomatic phases.