Search

Pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide-38 (PACAP-38), known for its role in migraine pathogenesis, has been identified as a novel drug target. Given the clinical parallels between post-traumatic headache (PTH) and migraine, we explored the possible role of PACAP-38 in the pathogenesis of PTH. To this end, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover trial involving adult participants diagnosed with persistent PTH resulting from mild traumatic brain injury. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a 20-min continuous intravenous infusion of either PACAP-38 (10 pmol/kg/min) or placebo (isotonic saline) on two separate experimental days, with a 1-week washout period in between. The primary outcome was the difference in incidence of migraine-like headache between PACAP-38 and placebo during a 12-h observational period post-infusion. The secondary outcome was the difference in the area under the curve (AUC) for baseline-corrected median headache intensity scores during the same 12-h observational period. Of 49 individuals assessed for eligibility, 21 were enrolled and completed the trial. The participants had a mean age of 35.2 years, and 16 (76%) were female. Most [19 of 21 (90%)] had a migraine-like phenotype. During the 12-h observational period, 20 of 21 (95%) participants developed migraine-like headache after intravenous infusion of PACAP-38, compared with two (10%) participants after placebo (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the baseline-corrected AUC values for median headache intensity scores during the 12-h observational period was higher after PACAP-38 than placebo (P < 0.001). These compelling results demonstrate that PACAP-38 is potent inducer of migraine-like headache in people with persistent PTH. Thus, targeting PACAP-38 signalling might be a promising avenue for the treatment of PTH., Pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide-38 (PACAP-38), known for its role in migraine pathogenesis, has been identified as a novel drug target. Given the clinical parallels between post-traumatic headache (PTH) and migraine, we explored the possible role of PACAP-38 in the pathogenesis of PTH. To this end, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover trial involving adult participants diagnosed with persistent PTH resulting from mild traumatic brain injury. Participants were randomly assigned to receive a 20-minute continuous intravenous infusion of either PACAP-38 (10 pmol/kg/min) or placebo (isotonic saline) on two separate experimental days, with a 1-week wash-out period in between. The primary outcome was the difference in incidence of migraine-like headache between PACAP-38 and placebo during a 12-hour observational period post-infusion. The secondary outcome was the difference in the area under the curve (AUC) for baseline-corrected median headache intensity scores during the same 12-hour observational period. Of 49 individuals assessed for eligibility, 21 were enrolled and completed the trial. The participants had a mean age of 35.2 years, and 16 (76%) were women. Most of them (19 [90%] of 21) had a migraine-like phenotype. During the 12-hour observational period, 20 (95%) of 21 participants developed migraine-like headache after intravenous infusion of PACAP-38, compared with 2 (10%) participants after placebo (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the baseline-corrected AUC values for median headache intensity scores during the 12-hour observational period was higher after PACAP-38 than placebo (P < 0.001). These compelling results demonstrate that PACAP-38 is potent inducer of migraine-like headache in people with persistent PTH. Thus, targeting PACAP-38 signalling might be a promising avenue for the treatment of PTH.

Background Persistent headache attributed to traumatic injury to the head is divided into two subtypes, one attributed to moderate or severe traumatic injury and another attributed to mild traumatic injury (i.e., concussion). The latter is much more prevalent, in part because more than 90% of cases with traumatic brain injury are classified as mild. The pathophysiology of persistent post-traumatic headache is poorly understood and the underlying mechanisms are likely multifactorial. There is currently no approved treatment specifically for persistent post-traumatic headache, and management strategies rely on medications used for migraine or tension-type headache. Therefore, high-quality trials are urgently needed to support clinical decision-making and optimize management strategies. International guidelines can facilitate appropriate trial design and ensure the acquisition of high-quality data evaluating the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of available and novel pharmacological therapies for the preventive treatment of persistent post-traumatic headache. Methods The development of this guideline was based on a literature review of available studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, along with a review of previously published guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment for episodic and chronic migraine. The identified literature was critically appraised, and due to the scarcity of scientific evidence, recommendations were primarily based on the consensus of experts in the field. Objective To provide guidelines for designing state-of-the-art controlled clinical trials aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of preventive treatments for persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury., BACKGROUND: Persistent headache attributed to traumatic injury to the head is divided into two subtypes, one attributed to moderate or severe traumatic injury and another attributed to mild traumatic injury (i.e., concussion). The latter is much more prevalent, in part because more than 90% of cases with traumatic brain injury are classified as mild. The pathophysiology of persistent post-traumatic headache is poorly understood and the underlying mechanisms are likely multifactorial. There is currently no approved treatment specifically for persistent post-traumatic headache, and management strategies rely on medications used for migraine or tension-type headache. Therefore, high-quality trials are urgently needed to support clinical decision-making and optimize management strategies. International guidelines can facilitate appropriate trial design and ensure the acquisition of high-quality data evaluating the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of available and novel pharmacological therapies for the preventive treatment of persistent post-traumatic headache. METHODS: The development of this guideline was based on a literature review of available studies in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, along with a review of previously published guidelines for controlled trials of preventive treatment for episodic and chronic migraine. The identified literature was critically appraised, and due to the scarcity of scientific evidence, recommendations were primarily based on the consensus of experts in the field. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidelines for designing state-of-the-art controlled clinical trials aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of preventive treatments for persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: Women show increased prevalence and severity of migraine compared to men. Whether small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP-R) antagonists (i.e., gepants) and monoclonal antibodies targeting either the CGRP-R or the CGRP peptide might show sexually dimorphic outcomes for acute and preventive therapy has not been established.METHODS: We conducted a subpopulation analysis of available published data from FDA reviews to evaluate potential sex differences in the response rates of ubrogepant, rimegepant and zavegepant for acute migraine therapy. Available data from FDA reviews of erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab and eptinezumab, approved CGRP-R and CGRP monoclonal antibodies and of atogepant were examined for prevention outcomes based on patient sex. Preventive outcomes were analyzed separately for patients with episodic migraine and chronic migraine. RESULTS: In women, the three approved gepants produced statistically significant drug effects regardless of dose tested on the FDA mandated co-primary endpoints, the proportion of patients achieving two-hour pain-freedom and the proportion of patients free of their most bothersome symptom at two hours post-dose. In women, the average placebo-subtracted two-hour pain-freedom proportion was 9.5% (CI: 7.4 to 11.6) and the average numbers needed to treat was 11. The free from most bothersome symptom at two hours outcomes were also significant in women. The gepant drugs did not reach statistically significant effects on the two-hour pain-freedom endpoint in the men, with an average drug effect of 2.8% (CI: -2.5 to 8.2) and an average number needed to treat of 36. For freedom from most bothersome symptom at two hours post-dose endpoint, differences were not significant in male patients. The treatment effect in each of the gepant studies was always numerically greater in women than in men. In evaluation of prevention outcomes with the an

Neurological conditions are the leading cause of death and disability combined. This public health crisis has become a global priority with the introduction of WHO's Intersectoral Global Action Plan on Epilepsy and Other Neurological Disorders 2022–2031 (IGAP). 18 months after this plan was adopted, global neurology stakeholders, including representatives of the OneNeurology Partnership (a consortium uniting global neurology organisations), take stock and advocate for urgent acceleration of IGAP implementation. Drawing on lessons from relevant global health contexts, this Health Policy identifies two priority IGAP targets to expedite national delivery of the entire 10-year plan: namely, to update national policies and plans, and to create awareness campaigns and advocacy programmes for neurological conditions and brain health. To ensure rapid attainment of the identified priority targets, six strategic drivers are proposed: universal community awareness, integrated neurology approaches, intersectoral governance, regionally coordinated IGAP domestication, lived experience-informed policy making, and neurological mainstreaming (advocating to embed brain health into broader policy agendas). Contextualised with globally emerging IGAP-directed efforts and key considerations for intersectoral policy design, this novel framework provides actionable recommendations for policy makers and IGAP implementation partners. Timely, synergistic pursuit of the six drivers might aid WHO member states in cultivating public awareness and policy structures required for successful intersectoral roll-out of IGAP by 2031, paving the way towards brain health for all.