Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-07-31DOI: 10.1111/head.15031
Siyuan Xie, Yunyun Huo, Xinyi Geng, Li Hu, Ran Ao, Hui Su, Desheng Li, Miaomiao Hu, Yusha Liu, Xiaomei Chen, Jinghuan Liu, Qianqian Li, Jiayin Lin, Shengyuan Yu, Zhao Dong
Background: Microstate analysis captures brief but critical fluctuations in brain activity, making it a powerful tool for exploring the cyclic nature of migraine. In this study, we aimed to investigate microstate features during different migraine phases and develop a classification model to identify the pre-ictal phase.
Methods: From May 2023 to June 2024, we conducted a cross-sectional study with consecutive recruitment, collecting resting-state electroencephalography data from 174 individuals with migraine without aura and 50 healthy controls, followed by classification of migraine phases. Microstate features, Lempel-Ziv complexity, and sample entropy were compared across five groups. A model was developed to identify the pre-ictal phase and validated on a test set.
Results: Microstate features, particularly for microstates A and B, exhibited dynamic changes across the migraine cycle. The duration of microstate A was significantly longer in the inter-ictal phase than in the pre-ictal phase, whereas microstate B showed prolonged duration in the pre-ictal phase compared to healthy controls and the post-ictal phase. Microstate A displayed reduced coverage in the pre-ictal phase, whereas microstate B had increased occurrence and coverage during the pre-ictal and ictal phases. Transition probabilities also varied significantly: the pre-ictal phase showed elevated transitions from microstates A, C, and D to B, and the post-ictal phase showed reduced transitions from C and D to A. A classification model based on these microstate features achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.85 (0.73-0.95), an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.83 (0.66-0.95), and an F1 score of 0.78 (0.62-0.90) in the training set; and an AUROC of 0.84 (0.69-0.97), an AUPRC of 0.86 (0.67-0.98), and an F1 score of 0.81 (0.65-0.93) in the test set, indicating robust performance in identifying the pre-ictal phase.
Conclusion: Through the observation of cyclic alterations in the microstates of patients with migraine, we identified a reduction in microstate A and an enhancement in microstate B during the pre-ictal phase. These changes may indicate a heightened sensitivity to auditory stimuli and increased activity in the visual cortex, providing new insights into migraine pathophysiology. Our model effectively identified the pre-ictal phase, offering a promising approach for early intervention in migraine attacks.
{"title":"Exploring the alterations in microstate dynamics during the migraine cycle and detecting pre-ictal phases.","authors":"Siyuan Xie, Yunyun Huo, Xinyi Geng, Li Hu, Ran Ao, Hui Su, Desheng Li, Miaomiao Hu, Yusha Liu, Xiaomei Chen, Jinghuan Liu, Qianqian Li, Jiayin Lin, Shengyuan Yu, Zhao Dong","doi":"10.1111/head.15031","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.15031","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Microstate analysis captures brief but critical fluctuations in brain activity, making it a powerful tool for exploring the cyclic nature of migraine. In this study, we aimed to investigate microstate features during different migraine phases and develop a classification model to identify the pre-ictal phase.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From May 2023 to June 2024, we conducted a cross-sectional study with consecutive recruitment, collecting resting-state electroencephalography data from 174 individuals with migraine without aura and 50 healthy controls, followed by classification of migraine phases. Microstate features, Lempel-Ziv complexity, and sample entropy were compared across five groups. A model was developed to identify the pre-ictal phase and validated on a test set.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Microstate features, particularly for microstates A and B, exhibited dynamic changes across the migraine cycle. The duration of microstate A was significantly longer in the inter-ictal phase than in the pre-ictal phase, whereas microstate B showed prolonged duration in the pre-ictal phase compared to healthy controls and the post-ictal phase. Microstate A displayed reduced coverage in the pre-ictal phase, whereas microstate B had increased occurrence and coverage during the pre-ictal and ictal phases. Transition probabilities also varied significantly: the pre-ictal phase showed elevated transitions from microstates A, C, and D to B, and the post-ictal phase showed reduced transitions from C and D to A. A classification model based on these microstate features achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.85 (0.73-0.95), an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.83 (0.66-0.95), and an F1 score of 0.78 (0.62-0.90) in the training set; and an AUROC of 0.84 (0.69-0.97), an AUPRC of 0.86 (0.67-0.98), and an F1 score of 0.81 (0.65-0.93) in the test set, indicating robust performance in identifying the pre-ictal phase.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Through the observation of cyclic alterations in the microstates of patients with migraine, we identified a reduction in microstate A and an enhancement in microstate B during the pre-ictal phase. These changes may indicate a heightened sensitivity to auditory stimuli and increased activity in the visual cortex, providing new insights into migraine pathophysiology. Our model effectively identified the pre-ictal phase, offering a promising approach for early intervention in migraine attacks.</p>","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"457-469"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144753210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-10-16DOI: 10.1111/head.15069
Stephanie J Nahas, Marius Birlea, Alit Stark-Inbar, Sharon Shmuely, Eden Mama, Alon Ironi, William B Young, Alan M Rapoport
<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current study aimed to evaluate the remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) wearable device over 3 years, assessing the potential for tachyphylaxis, consistent effectiveness, overall utilization patterns, and safety.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Migraine is a highly prevalent chronic neurological disease, especially during peak years of productivity, requiring ongoing management to prevent and reduce its disability. Traditional treatments often face challenges with long-term adherence due to waning efficacy, side effects, and medication interactions. REN offers a nonpharmacological approach for acute and preventive migraine treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective real-world cohort study analyzed data from 224 patients with migraine in the United States who consistently treated their migraine attacks with the REN wearable device for 3 years between December 2019 and September 2024. The primary endpoint was defined as lack of tachyphylaxis, aka an increase of no more than 2.5 intensity units on a scale of 100 units between 2 consecutive years, representing a nonclinically meaningful change in treatment intensity over 3 years. Secondary endpoints were consistent effectiveness in at least 50% of treatments and consistent utilization, compared over 3 years. The safety outcome assessed the proportion of users with device-related adverse events (dAEs) and the severity and seriousness of the dAEs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over 3 years, there was no clinically meaningful change in treatment intensity, and the average (± standard deviation, SD) change between 2 consecutive years was no more than 2.5 intensity units (1.8 ± 5.5 between years 1 and 2, and 1.4 ± 5.3 between years 2 and 3; p = 0.120, McNemar test for two related dichotomous variables), indicating no tachyphylaxis. Effectiveness endpoints remained consistent over 3 years of treated attacks (generalized linear mixed model of repeated measures categorical data) with no significant differences over the 3 years: 72.1%-76.8% of users reporting pain relief (p = 0.846), 26.8%-28.7% pain freedom (p = 0.966), 65.3%-70.8% functional disability relief (p = 0.749), 31.4%-38.9% functional disability freedom (p = 0.680), 29.0%-37.0% freedom from photophobia (p = 0.590), 37.9%-49.4% freedom from phonophobia (p = 0.534), and 57.1%-66.7% freedom from nausea/vomiting (p = 0.753). Monthly utilization was consistent, ranging between 8.0 and 8.8 treatments per month, suggesting sustained adherence to therapy (p = 0.337, generalized linear model of repeated measures). Only two (0.9%) expected, nonserious dAEs were reported (mild or moderate localized skin reactions), neither leading to treatment discontinuation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates the long-term safety, consistent utilization, and acute treatment effectiveness, with no tachyphylaxis, in patients with migraine consistently treating with REN for 3 years. This sugg
{"title":"Three years of remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) acute treatment for migraine shows consistent effectiveness and no tachyphylaxis phenomenon.","authors":"Stephanie J Nahas, Marius Birlea, Alit Stark-Inbar, Sharon Shmuely, Eden Mama, Alon Ironi, William B Young, Alan M Rapoport","doi":"10.1111/head.15069","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.15069","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current study aimed to evaluate the remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) wearable device over 3 years, assessing the potential for tachyphylaxis, consistent effectiveness, overall utilization patterns, and safety.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Migraine is a highly prevalent chronic neurological disease, especially during peak years of productivity, requiring ongoing management to prevent and reduce its disability. Traditional treatments often face challenges with long-term adherence due to waning efficacy, side effects, and medication interactions. REN offers a nonpharmacological approach for acute and preventive migraine treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective real-world cohort study analyzed data from 224 patients with migraine in the United States who consistently treated their migraine attacks with the REN wearable device for 3 years between December 2019 and September 2024. The primary endpoint was defined as lack of tachyphylaxis, aka an increase of no more than 2.5 intensity units on a scale of 100 units between 2 consecutive years, representing a nonclinically meaningful change in treatment intensity over 3 years. Secondary endpoints were consistent effectiveness in at least 50% of treatments and consistent utilization, compared over 3 years. The safety outcome assessed the proportion of users with device-related adverse events (dAEs) and the severity and seriousness of the dAEs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Over 3 years, there was no clinically meaningful change in treatment intensity, and the average (± standard deviation, SD) change between 2 consecutive years was no more than 2.5 intensity units (1.8 ± 5.5 between years 1 and 2, and 1.4 ± 5.3 between years 2 and 3; p = 0.120, McNemar test for two related dichotomous variables), indicating no tachyphylaxis. Effectiveness endpoints remained consistent over 3 years of treated attacks (generalized linear mixed model of repeated measures categorical data) with no significant differences over the 3 years: 72.1%-76.8% of users reporting pain relief (p = 0.846), 26.8%-28.7% pain freedom (p = 0.966), 65.3%-70.8% functional disability relief (p = 0.749), 31.4%-38.9% functional disability freedom (p = 0.680), 29.0%-37.0% freedom from photophobia (p = 0.590), 37.9%-49.4% freedom from phonophobia (p = 0.534), and 57.1%-66.7% freedom from nausea/vomiting (p = 0.753). Monthly utilization was consistent, ranging between 8.0 and 8.8 treatments per month, suggesting sustained adherence to therapy (p = 0.337, generalized linear model of repeated measures). Only two (0.9%) expected, nonserious dAEs were reported (mild or moderate localized skin reactions), neither leading to treatment discontinuation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates the long-term safety, consistent utilization, and acute treatment effectiveness, with no tachyphylaxis, in patients with migraine consistently treating with REN for 3 years. This sugg","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"440-449"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145307791","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-12-22DOI: 10.1111/head.70037
Amy A Gelfand, Christina L Szperka
{"title":"What's in the pipeline for pediatric headache treatment?","authors":"Amy A Gelfand, Christina L Szperka","doi":"10.1111/head.70037","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.70037","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"548-550"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145809716","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-11-14DOI: 10.1111/head.70001
Basit Ali Chaudhry, Rune Häckert Christensen, Håkan Ashina, Haidar Muhsen Al-Khazali, Tariq Mohammad Amin, Messoud Ashina, Faisal Mohammad Amin
Objectives/background: To determine whether the volume of specific subcortical structures differ between people with migraine and healthy controls, and whether these volumes vary across distinct migraine subtypes and phases. Subcortical structures, including regions involved in pain processing and sensory integration, play a key role in migraine pathophysiology, yet studies on volumetric differences have shown conflicting results. This study uses a large cohort and robust imaging methods to clarify whether subcortical volumes differ in migraine.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study at the Danish Headache Center in Denmark, conducted between January 2020 and December 2023, adult participants with migraine and age- and sex-matched healthy controls underwent a single magnetic resonance imaging session at 3T. T1-weigthed scans were acquired to measure the volumes of subcortical structures using automated segmentation techniques. The structures analyzed included the thalamus, putamen, caudate nucleus, pallidum, nucleus accumbens, amygdala, and hippocampus.
Results: Imaging data from 295 participants and 154 healthy controls were included in the final analyses. No significant differences were observed between participants with migraine and healthy controls in thalamic volume (migraine: 7243 ± 923 mm3 vs. healthy controls: 7350 ± 782 mm3; p = 0.774) or hippocampal volume (migraine: 4204 ± 398 mm3 vs. healthy controls: 4307 ± 446 mm3; p = 0.337). No differences were observed in any other subcortical structure. Likewise, different subgroup analyses revealed no volumetric differences in episodic versus chronic migraine, migraine with aura versus without aura, ictal versus headache free, or between each migraine subgroup and healthy controls (all p > 0.05 after multiple comparison correction).
Conclusion: In this large cross-sectional study, we found no evidence of subcortical volume differences between adults with migraine and healthy controls. Furthermore, no differences were found across migraine subtypes or phases. These findings indicate that subcortical volumetric measures are not suitable as imaging biomarkers of migraine. Future research should explore functional and metabolic alterations in subcortical structures to better understand the neurobiologic underpinnings of migraine.
目的/背景:确定特定皮质下结构的体积在偏头痛患者和健康对照者之间是否存在差异,以及这些体积在不同的偏头痛亚型和阶段是否存在差异。皮层下结构,包括涉及疼痛处理和感觉整合的区域,在偏头痛病理生理中起着关键作用,然而关于体积差异的研究显示了相互矛盾的结果。本研究采用大队列和强大的成像方法来澄清偏头痛的皮质下体积是否不同。方法:在2020年1月至2023年12月期间在丹麦丹麦头痛中心进行的这项横断面研究中,患有偏头痛的成年参与者和年龄和性别匹配的健康对照者在3T时接受了单次磁共振成像。使用自动分割技术获得t1加权扫描以测量皮质下结构的体积。分析的结构包括丘脑、壳核、尾状核、苍白球、伏隔核、杏仁核和海马。结果:295名参与者和154名健康对照者的影像学数据被纳入最终分析。偏头痛患者和健康对照者在丘脑体积(偏头痛:7243±923 mm3 vs健康对照:7350±782 mm3; p = 0.774)或海马体积(偏头痛:4204±398 mm3 vs健康对照:4307±446 mm3; p = 0.337)上没有观察到显著差异。在任何其他皮质下结构中未观察到差异。同样,不同的亚组分析显示,发作性偏头痛与慢性偏头痛、先兆偏头痛与无先兆偏头痛、发作性偏头痛与无头痛、每个偏头痛亚组与健康对照组之间的体积没有差异(经多次比较校正后,所有p < 0.05)。结论:在这项大型横断面研究中,我们没有发现成人偏头痛患者和健康对照者皮质下体积差异的证据。此外,没有发现偏头痛亚型或阶段之间的差异。这些发现表明皮质下体积测量不适合作为偏头痛的成像生物标志物。未来的研究应该探索皮质下结构的功能和代谢变化,以更好地了解偏头痛的神经生物学基础。
{"title":"No differences in subcortical volume between people with and without migraine: A REFORM study.","authors":"Basit Ali Chaudhry, Rune Häckert Christensen, Håkan Ashina, Haidar Muhsen Al-Khazali, Tariq Mohammad Amin, Messoud Ashina, Faisal Mohammad Amin","doi":"10.1111/head.70001","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.70001","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives/background: </strong>To determine whether the volume of specific subcortical structures differ between people with migraine and healthy controls, and whether these volumes vary across distinct migraine subtypes and phases. Subcortical structures, including regions involved in pain processing and sensory integration, play a key role in migraine pathophysiology, yet studies on volumetric differences have shown conflicting results. This study uses a large cohort and robust imaging methods to clarify whether subcortical volumes differ in migraine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cross-sectional study at the Danish Headache Center in Denmark, conducted between January 2020 and December 2023, adult participants with migraine and age- and sex-matched healthy controls underwent a single magnetic resonance imaging session at 3T. T1-weigthed scans were acquired to measure the volumes of subcortical structures using automated segmentation techniques. The structures analyzed included the thalamus, putamen, caudate nucleus, pallidum, nucleus accumbens, amygdala, and hippocampus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Imaging data from 295 participants and 154 healthy controls were included in the final analyses. No significant differences were observed between participants with migraine and healthy controls in thalamic volume (migraine: 7243 ± 923 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. healthy controls: 7350 ± 782 mm<sup>3</sup>; p = 0.774) or hippocampal volume (migraine: 4204 ± 398 mm<sup>3</sup> vs. healthy controls: 4307 ± 446 mm<sup>3</sup>; p = 0.337). No differences were observed in any other subcortical structure. Likewise, different subgroup analyses revealed no volumetric differences in episodic versus chronic migraine, migraine with aura versus without aura, ictal versus headache free, or between each migraine subgroup and healthy controls (all p > 0.05 after multiple comparison correction).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this large cross-sectional study, we found no evidence of subcortical volume differences between adults with migraine and healthy controls. Furthermore, no differences were found across migraine subtypes or phases. These findings indicate that subcortical volumetric measures are not suitable as imaging biomarkers of migraine. Future research should explore functional and metabolic alterations in subcortical structures to better understand the neurobiologic underpinnings of migraine.</p>","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"494-501"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145512729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-12-10DOI: 10.1111/head.70017
Yunzhu Tang, Chunyan Lu, Yao Zhou, Shuxia Qian
{"title":"Treatment of abdominal migraine in an 8-year-old child with calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist: A case report.","authors":"Yunzhu Tang, Chunyan Lu, Yao Zhou, Shuxia Qian","doi":"10.1111/head.70017","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.70017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"546-547"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145714108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-12-10DOI: 10.1111/head.70023
Todd J Schwedt, Amaal J Starling, Jessica Ailani, Andrew D Hershey, Hope L O'Brien, Elizabeth Seng, Adam S Sprouse-Blum, Scott B Turner, Richard B Lipton
Objectives: The aim of this work was to develop an American Headache Society position statement addressing diagnostic screening for migraine among girls and women.
Background: Despite its high prevalence and substantial negative impacts, migraine is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Diagnostic screening for migraine enables more patients to receive timely, appropriate, and effective management.
Methods: Development of this position statement followed the rules established by the American Headache Society Guidelines Committee. The published literature was reviewed to determine if migraine meets criteria for when disease screening is justified, to guide recommendations for screening tools, and to determine subpopulation(s) for which migraine screening is indicated. After author consensus was reached, the position statement was reviewed and approved by the American Headache Society Board of Directors.
Results: Migraine fulfills established criteria for conditions in which screening is appropriate since it is highly prevalent, results in significant morbidity, and exerts substantial economic and social costs. Migraine incidence and prevalence are exceptionally high among girls and women during adolescence and through menopause. Furthermore, there are valid and reliable diagnostic screening methods (e.g., ID Migraine) and effective treatments that reduce migraine symptoms and disease impact.
Conclusion: Yearly diagnostic screening for migraine should be included as part of women's preventive healthcare services, particularly from adolescence to menopause.
{"title":"Routine migraine screening as a standard of care for Women's health: A position statement from the American Headache Society.","authors":"Todd J Schwedt, Amaal J Starling, Jessica Ailani, Andrew D Hershey, Hope L O'Brien, Elizabeth Seng, Adam S Sprouse-Blum, Scott B Turner, Richard B Lipton","doi":"10.1111/head.70023","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.70023","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this work was to develop an American Headache Society position statement addressing diagnostic screening for migraine among girls and women.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite its high prevalence and substantial negative impacts, migraine is underdiagnosed and undertreated. Diagnostic screening for migraine enables more patients to receive timely, appropriate, and effective management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Development of this position statement followed the rules established by the American Headache Society Guidelines Committee. The published literature was reviewed to determine if migraine meets criteria for when disease screening is justified, to guide recommendations for screening tools, and to determine subpopulation(s) for which migraine screening is indicated. After author consensus was reached, the position statement was reviewed and approved by the American Headache Society Board of Directors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Migraine fulfills established criteria for conditions in which screening is appropriate since it is highly prevalent, results in significant morbidity, and exerts substantial economic and social costs. Migraine incidence and prevalence are exceptionally high among girls and women during adolescence and through menopause. Furthermore, there are valid and reliable diagnostic screening methods (e.g., ID Migraine) and effective treatments that reduce migraine symptoms and disease impact.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Yearly diagnostic screening for migraine should be included as part of women's preventive healthcare services, particularly from adolescence to menopause.</p>","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"511-516"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145721140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-10-03DOI: 10.1111/head.15062
Lawrence C Newman, Christine Lay, Richard B Lipton, Jessica Ailani, Kathleen B Digre, Arthur Caplan, Nim Singh, Heather Phillips, Rachel Koh, Royce Warrick, David W Dodick
<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to understand the factors limiting access to medications for the preventive treatment of migraine and to improve access to evidence-based preventive care.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>For decades, the effective use of medication for the preventive treatment of migraine was limited by slow onset, slow and complex dose titration schedules, modest benefits, drug interactions, frequent side effects, and very low long-term adherence. The calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) targeted preventive medications mitigate some of these limitations and demonstrated substantial therapeutic benefits in a significant proportion of adults with migraine. The American Headache Society considers these medications among the first-line options for migraine prevention, although access to them remains limited. The American Migraine Foundation hosted a single-day, multidisciplinary expert panel discussion to identify barriers to optimal preventive care and developed recommendations to address them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants identified and prioritized barriers and used a modified nominal group technique to achieve consensus on them. A series of moderated discussions in plenary and breakout sessions was used to create possible solutions. Modified nominal group technique was also employed to achieve consensus on the priorities among these barriers and to achieve whole-group consensus on the recommendations. Ethical issues that inform access were discussed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants included eight neurologists and board-certified headache specialists, six representatives of reimbursement decision-makers, six employees of life sciences companies, four patient advocates with lived experience with migraine, and a medical ethicist. Among those who have consulted healthcare professionals and received a diagnosis of migraine, we identified four main barriers to accessing preventive treatment: restrictive prior authorization requirements, the perceived lack of real-world evidence and treatment guidelines, the need for clinician education, and the need for patient education. Consensus recommendations for eliminating barriers centered on using new evidence to evaluate policies that restrict the selection of first-line therapies, initiating/improving collaboration among stakeholders, sharing of data and best practices, and increased training. Participants agreed to explore novel definitions of the value of preventive treatment and to establish the Migraine Prevention Network to facilitate ongoing cooperation and collective action. However, due to financial limitations, staffing changes, and time constraints, post-meeting discussions led to a shift from establishing a broad Migraine Prevention Network to forming smaller task forces focused on the top-priority barriers (real-world evidence and The Patient Playbook) identified through collaborative voting among American Headache Society, American
{"title":"Navigating the patient journey in migraine prevention: An American Migraine Foundation position paper.","authors":"Lawrence C Newman, Christine Lay, Richard B Lipton, Jessica Ailani, Kathleen B Digre, Arthur Caplan, Nim Singh, Heather Phillips, Rachel Koh, Royce Warrick, David W Dodick","doi":"10.1111/head.15062","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.15062","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to understand the factors limiting access to medications for the preventive treatment of migraine and to improve access to evidence-based preventive care.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>For decades, the effective use of medication for the preventive treatment of migraine was limited by slow onset, slow and complex dose titration schedules, modest benefits, drug interactions, frequent side effects, and very low long-term adherence. The calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) targeted preventive medications mitigate some of these limitations and demonstrated substantial therapeutic benefits in a significant proportion of adults with migraine. The American Headache Society considers these medications among the first-line options for migraine prevention, although access to them remains limited. The American Migraine Foundation hosted a single-day, multidisciplinary expert panel discussion to identify barriers to optimal preventive care and developed recommendations to address them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants identified and prioritized barriers and used a modified nominal group technique to achieve consensus on them. A series of moderated discussions in plenary and breakout sessions was used to create possible solutions. Modified nominal group technique was also employed to achieve consensus on the priorities among these barriers and to achieve whole-group consensus on the recommendations. Ethical issues that inform access were discussed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants included eight neurologists and board-certified headache specialists, six representatives of reimbursement decision-makers, six employees of life sciences companies, four patient advocates with lived experience with migraine, and a medical ethicist. Among those who have consulted healthcare professionals and received a diagnosis of migraine, we identified four main barriers to accessing preventive treatment: restrictive prior authorization requirements, the perceived lack of real-world evidence and treatment guidelines, the need for clinician education, and the need for patient education. Consensus recommendations for eliminating barriers centered on using new evidence to evaluate policies that restrict the selection of first-line therapies, initiating/improving collaboration among stakeholders, sharing of data and best practices, and increased training. Participants agreed to explore novel definitions of the value of preventive treatment and to establish the Migraine Prevention Network to facilitate ongoing cooperation and collective action. However, due to financial limitations, staffing changes, and time constraints, post-meeting discussions led to a shift from establishing a broad Migraine Prevention Network to forming smaller task forces focused on the top-priority barriers (real-world evidence and The Patient Playbook) identified through collaborative voting among American Headache Society, American","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"428-439"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145225302","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-11-21DOI: 10.1111/head.15090
Charly Gaul, Sónia Ferreira, Troels Johansen
Objective: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel partial rebreathing device for early treatment of acute attacks of migraine with aura.
Background: Earlier clinical studies have indicated a potential for CO2-enriched gas to be effective for acute treatment of migraine with aura, especially when applied during the early part of the aura stage. We developed a partial rebreathing device inducing moderate, steady-state hypercapnia with normoxia in order to provide a carbon dioxide delivery system combining efficacy, usability, safety, and affordability.
Methods: This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, parallel-group, group-sequential study was conducted at 15 study sites, nine located in the United States and six in Germany, between March 2023 and February 2025. The study enrolled patients aged 18-65 years with migraine with aura. The study had a sequential two-stage study design. At the beginning of stage 1, participants were randomized to active or sham and treated up to four attacks. Participants were instructed to treat from the onset of aura and until 5 min after aura cessation. After having reported four attacks in stage 1, participants had the option to continue into stage 2, an open-label extension in which they could treat up to five attacks with the active device. During stage 1, participants recorded symptom scores in a study diary app at the onset of aura and after 1, 2, 24, and 48 h.
Results: The study was terminated at the interim analysis point due to the lack of effect, at which point 142 participants had been enrolled (mean age 39.2 years, 81% women [115/142]). Sixty-seven participants had reported at least one study attack by the time of the study termination. None of the primary or secondary endpoints reached statistical significance. The primary endpoint Absence of Moderate or Severe Pain at 2 hours was 69.7% (46/66) [95.2% confidence interval (CI), 48.5, 90.9] in the sham group and 60.0% (42/70) [95.2% CI, 37.6, 82.4] in the active group (p = 0.379), whereas Pain Freedom at 2 hours was 18.2% (12/66) [95.2% CI, 1.3, 35.1] in the sham group and 21.4% (15/70) [95.2% CI, 3.6, 39.2] in the active group (p = 0.717).
Conclusion: Partial rebreathing inducing moderate hypercapnia with normoxia was not effective for aura-stage treatment of migraine-with-aura attacks. The study was preregistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number NCT05546385).
{"title":"Partial rebreathing is not effective for early treatment of migraine with aura attacks: Results of a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial (PAREMA1).","authors":"Charly Gaul, Sónia Ferreira, Troels Johansen","doi":"10.1111/head.15090","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.15090","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel partial rebreathing device for early treatment of acute attacks of migraine with aura.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Earlier clinical studies have indicated a potential for CO<sub>2</sub>-enriched gas to be effective for acute treatment of migraine with aura, especially when applied during the early part of the aura stage. We developed a partial rebreathing device inducing moderate, steady-state hypercapnia with normoxia in order to provide a carbon dioxide delivery system combining efficacy, usability, safety, and affordability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, parallel-group, group-sequential study was conducted at 15 study sites, nine located in the United States and six in Germany, between March 2023 and February 2025. The study enrolled patients aged 18-65 years with migraine with aura. The study had a sequential two-stage study design. At the beginning of stage 1, participants were randomized to active or sham and treated up to four attacks. Participants were instructed to treat from the onset of aura and until 5 min after aura cessation. After having reported four attacks in stage 1, participants had the option to continue into stage 2, an open-label extension in which they could treat up to five attacks with the active device. During stage 1, participants recorded symptom scores in a study diary app at the onset of aura and after 1, 2, 24, and 48 h.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study was terminated at the interim analysis point due to the lack of effect, at which point 142 participants had been enrolled (mean age 39.2 years, 81% women [115/142]). Sixty-seven participants had reported at least one study attack by the time of the study termination. None of the primary or secondary endpoints reached statistical significance. The primary endpoint Absence of Moderate or Severe Pain at 2 hours was 69.7% (46/66) [95.2% confidence interval (CI), 48.5, 90.9] in the sham group and 60.0% (42/70) [95.2% CI, 37.6, 82.4] in the active group (p = 0.379), whereas Pain Freedom at 2 hours was 18.2% (12/66) [95.2% CI, 1.3, 35.1] in the sham group and 21.4% (15/70) [95.2% CI, 3.6, 39.2] in the active group (p = 0.717).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Partial rebreathing inducing moderate hypercapnia with normoxia was not effective for aura-stage treatment of migraine-with-aura attacks. The study was preregistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (registration number NCT05546385).</p>","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"417-427"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145573405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-02-01Epub Date: 2025-12-31DOI: 10.1111/head.70032
Nan Cheng, Christopher C Anderson, Nan Zhang, Juliana H VanderPluym, Amaal J Starling
Background: OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) is an established preventive treatment for chronic migraine but involves 31 to 40 injections per session, often causing discomfort and post-procedural headaches. Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) is a noninvasive therapy with efficacy in migraine treatment via conditioned pain modulation but has not been evaluated for procedural pain. This study evaluated REN's effectiveness in reducing acute procedural pain and postprocedural headache associated with BoNT-A injections.
Methods: This was an investigator-initiated single-center, randomized, single-blind, sham-controlled crossover study enrolled 80 adults (aged 22 to 74 years) with chronic migraine undergoing routine BoNT-A treatment. Each participant received one injection session without a device, followed by sessions using active REN and sham in randomized order. REN was applied to the upper arm 10 min prior to injections and removed after injection completion. Pain intensity was measured using a visual analog scale (0 to 100) at pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and post-procedure time points. The primary outcome was procedural pain intensity, and secondary outcomes included post-procedural headache incidence and adverse events. Due to clear benefit, the study was terminated early based on predefined stopping criteria.
Results: Final analysis of 60 participants (mean age 48.0 years; 49/60, 82% female) demonstrated that pre-procedural pain levels were not significantly different between baseline and the active REN or sham (p > 0.999 and p = 0.485, respectively). However, during and after BoNT-A administration, the active REN group reported significantly lower pain scores compared to both the sham and baseline conditions. At intra-procedure, the REN group experienced a mean pain reduction of 15.0 points (p < 0.001), and at post-procedure experienced a 19.1-point reduction (p < 0.001). Sham treatment did not result in significant pain reduction compared to baseline (p > 0.999 for both intra-procedure and post-procedure). Additionally, REN lowered the incidence of headache as an adverse event, with only 15% (8/52) of participants experiencing post-procedural headache compared to 55% (29/53) in the sham group and 39% (23/59) at baseline (odds ratio = 0.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.10 to 0.69, p = 0.008). No additional adverse events were reported.
Conclusions: REN significantly reduces procedural pain and post-procedural headache associated with BoNT-A injections for chronic migraine and may serve as a noninvasive, easily implemented pain management strategy for acute procedural pain. REN represents a promising approach to improving patient comfort during routine migraine treatment as well as reducing post-procedural headache.
{"title":"Remote electrical neuromodulation for reducing procedural pain in patients with chronic migraine receiving onabotulinumtoxinA injections: A randomized sham-controlled study.","authors":"Nan Cheng, Christopher C Anderson, Nan Zhang, Juliana H VanderPluym, Amaal J Starling","doi":"10.1111/head.70032","DOIUrl":"10.1111/head.70032","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) is an established preventive treatment for chronic migraine but involves 31 to 40 injections per session, often causing discomfort and post-procedural headaches. Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) is a noninvasive therapy with efficacy in migraine treatment via conditioned pain modulation but has not been evaluated for procedural pain. This study evaluated REN's effectiveness in reducing acute procedural pain and postprocedural headache associated with BoNT-A injections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an investigator-initiated single-center, randomized, single-blind, sham-controlled crossover study enrolled 80 adults (aged 22 to 74 years) with chronic migraine undergoing routine BoNT-A treatment. Each participant received one injection session without a device, followed by sessions using active REN and sham in randomized order. REN was applied to the upper arm 10 min prior to injections and removed after injection completion. Pain intensity was measured using a visual analog scale (0 to 100) at pre-procedure, intra-procedure, and post-procedure time points. The primary outcome was procedural pain intensity, and secondary outcomes included post-procedural headache incidence and adverse events. Due to clear benefit, the study was terminated early based on predefined stopping criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Final analysis of 60 participants (mean age 48.0 years; 49/60, 82% female) demonstrated that pre-procedural pain levels were not significantly different between baseline and the active REN or sham (p > 0.999 and p = 0.485, respectively). However, during and after BoNT-A administration, the active REN group reported significantly lower pain scores compared to both the sham and baseline conditions. At intra-procedure, the REN group experienced a mean pain reduction of 15.0 points (p < 0.001), and at post-procedure experienced a 19.1-point reduction (p < 0.001). Sham treatment did not result in significant pain reduction compared to baseline (p > 0.999 for both intra-procedure and post-procedure). Additionally, REN lowered the incidence of headache as an adverse event, with only 15% (8/52) of participants experiencing post-procedural headache compared to 55% (29/53) in the sham group and 39% (23/59) at baseline (odds ratio = 0.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.10 to 0.69, p = 0.008). No additional adverse events were reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>REN significantly reduces procedural pain and post-procedural headache associated with BoNT-A injections for chronic migraine and may serve as a noninvasive, easily implemented pain management strategy for acute procedural pain. REN represents a promising approach to improving patient comfort during routine migraine treatment as well as reducing post-procedural headache.</p>","PeriodicalId":12844,"journal":{"name":"Headache","volume":" ","pages":"397-406"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145862711","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}