Starling, Amaal

Abstract Background Slower speaking rates and higher pause rates are found in individuals with migraine or post‐traumatic headache during headache compared to when headache‐free. We aimed to determine whether headache intensity influences the speaking rate and pause rate of participants with migraine or acute post‐traumatic headache (aPTH) following mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods Using a speech elicitation tool, participants with migraine, aPTH, and healthy controls (HC) submitted speech samples over a period of 3 months. Speaking and pause rates were calculated when participants were headache‐free and when they had mild or moderate headache. In this observational study, speaking and pause rates in participants with migraine and aPTH were compared to HC, controlling for age, sex, and days since mTBI (participants with aPTH only). Results A total of 2902 longitudinal speech samples from 13 individuals with migraine (mean age = 33.5, SD = 6.6; 12 females/1 male), 43 individuals with aPTH (mean age = 44.4, SD = 13.5; 28 females/15 males), and 56 HC (mean age = 40.8, SD = 13.0; 36 females/20 males) were collected. There was no difference in speaking rate between HC and the combined headache cohort of participants (migraine and aPTH) when they had headache freedom or a mild headache. When participants had moderate intensity headache, their speaking rate was significantly slower compared to that of HC and compared to their speaking rate during mild headache intensity or headache freedom. For the combined headache cohort of participants, pause rates were significantly higher when they had headache freedom or had a headache of mild or moderate intensity relative to HC. Compared to participants' pause rate during headache freedom, their pause rate was significantly higher during mild and moderate headache intensity. Participants with aPTH had significantly slower speaking rates compared to participants with migraine during headache freedom, mild headache intensity, and moderate headache intensity. Participants with aPTH had significantly higher pause rates compared to participants with migraine when experiencing moderate headache intensity. Discussion For both aPTH and migraine, more severe headache pain was associated with higher pause rates and slower speaking rates, suggesting that speaking rate and pause rate could serve as objective biomarkers for headache‐related pain. Slower speaking rate in participants with aPTH could reflect additional consequences of TBI‐related effects on motor control and speech production.

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to interrogate brain iron accumulation in participants with acute post-traumatic headache (PTH) due to mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), and to determine if functional connectivity is affected in areas with iron accumulation. We aimed to examine the correlations between iron accumulation and headache frequency, post-concussion symptom severity, number of mTBIs and time since most recent TBI. Methods Sixty participants with acute PTH and 60 age-matched healthy controls (HC) underwent 3T magnetic resonance imaging including quantitative T2* maps and resting-state functional connectivity imaging. Between group T2* differences were determined using T-tests (p < 0.005, cluster size threshold of 10 voxels). For regions with T2* differences, two analyses were conducted. First, the correlations with clinical variables including headache frequency, number of lifetime mTBIs, time since most recent mTBI, and Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT) symptom severity scale scores were investigated using linear regression. Second, the functional connectivity of these regions with the rest of the brain was examined (significance of p < 0.05 with family wise error correction for multiple comparisons). Results The acute PTH group consisted of 60 participants (22 male, 38 female) with average age of 42 ± 14 years. The HC group consisted of 60 age-matched controls (17 male, 43 female, average age of 42 ± 13). PTH participants had lower T2* values compared to HC in the left posterior cingulate and the bilateral cuneus. Stronger functional connectivity was observed between bilateral cuneus and right cerebellar areas in PTH compared to HC. Within the PTH group, linear regression showed negative associations of T2* and SCAT symptom severity score in the left posterior cingulate (p = 0.05) and with headache frequency in the left cuneus (p = 0.04). Conclusions Iron accumulation in posterior cingulate and cuneus was observed in those with acute PTH relative to HC; stronger functional connectivity was detected between the bilateral cuneus and the right cerebellum. The correlations of decreased T2* (suggesting higher iron content) with headache frequency and post mTBI symptom severity suggest that the iron accumulation that results from mTBI might reflect the severity of underlying mTBI pathophysiology and associate with post-mTBI symptom severity including PTH.

Abstract Objective To assess cardiovascular (CV) safety of erenumab in clinical trial patients associated with degree of CV risk. Background Hypertension has been considered a theoretical risk associated with the inhibition of the calcitonin gene‐related peptide pathway in migraine management, particularly in a patient population with pre‐existing CV risk factors. Methods Data pooled from four double‐blind, randomized trials were used to assess blood pressure (BP) changes and CV safety in patients grouped based on 10‐year risk of cardiac, cerebrovascular, and peripheral artery disease as no‐risk‐factors, low‐risk (>0% to ≤10%), moderate‐risk (>10% to ≤20%), and high‐risk (>20%) categories. CV safety was assessed as ischemic cardiovascular and cerebrovascular adverse events (ICCAE). Results There was no apparent difference between placebo‐ ( N = 1032) and erenumab‐treatment groups (70 mg, N = 885; 140 mg, N = 504) in clinical worsening of BP category from baseline to Months 1–3 (14% [143/1032] placebo vs. 13% [114/885] and 14% [71/504] for erenumab 70 and 140 mg, respectively) regardless of baseline BP category. The adverse event (AE) profile of erenumab was similar across CV risk categories throughout the long‐term analysis. Erenumab‐treated patients with high and moderate 10‐year CV risk ( N = 107) did not experience any ICCAEs during the double‐blind treatment period; there was a single ICCAE (a cerebral dural venous sinus thrombosis) observed in the low‐risk erenumab group ( N = 273). There were no increases in AEs during the long‐term extensions of up to 5 years ( N = 2499; 3482 patient‐years of exposure to erenumab) with exposure‐adjusted incidence rates of cardio/cerebrovascular disorder AEs of 0.4, 0.5, 0.0, and 1.1 (per 100 patient‐years) for no risk factor ( N = 1805), low ( N = 492), moderate ( N = 121), and high ( N = 81) 10‐year CV risk groups, respectively. Conclusions Ischemic CV and cerebrovascular AEs were uncommon and the incidence rates were similar across the 10‐year CV risk categories. This analysis helps provide more detail on the CV safety of erenumab.

Objective To determine the potential impact of erenumab, a human anti‐calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) receptor monoclonal antibody, on total exercise time (TET), time to exercise‐induced angina, and ST depression in a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study in patients with stable angina due to documented coronary artery disease. Background The relative importance of the CGRP receptor pathway during myocardial ischemia has not been established. Methods An exercise treadmill test was conducted following a single IV infusion of erenumab 140 mg or placebo. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in exercise duration as measured by TET with a noninferiority margin of −90 seconds. Safety follow‐up visits occurred through week 12. Eighty‐eight participants were included in the analysis. Results LS mean (SE) change in TET was −2.9 [14.8] seconds in the erenumab group and 8.1 [14.4] seconds in placebo; adjusted mean (90% CI) treatment difference was −11.0 (–44.9, 22.9) seconds. The CI lower bound (–44.9 sec) did not reach pre‐defined non‐inferiority margin of −90 seconds, demonstrating that TET change from baseline in the erenumab group was non‐inferior to placebo. There was no difference in time to exercise‐induced angina in erenumab and placebo groups (median [90% CI] time of 500 [420, 540] vs 508 [405, 572] seconds; hazard ratio [90% CI]: 1.11 [0.73, 1.69], P = .69) or time to onset of ≥1 mm ST‐segment depression (median [90% CI] time of 407 [380, 443] vs 420 [409,480] seconds; hazard ratio [95% CI]: 1.14 [0.76, 1.69], P = .59). Adverse events were reported by 27% and 32% of patients in erenumab and placebo groups. Conclusions Erenumab did not adversely affect exercise time in a high cardiovascular risk population of patients, supporting that inhibition of the canonical CGRP receptor does not worsen myocardial ischemia.

Objectives We sought to survey the N ew I nvestigators and T rainees S ection ( NITS ) members of the A merican H eadache S ociety ( AHS ) to better understand their exposure to headache medicine during training and to determine their perceptions and attitudes about the field and the future of headache medicine. Background Despite the high prevalence of headache disorders in the general population, only about 2% of neurology residents pursue headache medicine fellowships. Furthermore, there is a paucity of U nited C ouncil of N eurologic S ubspecialties headache specialists in the country to meet the population demands. Thus, there needs to be a focus on how to recruit and retain more headache specialists. Methods A survey was distributed via S urvey M onkey to the NITS listserv. It remained online for 60 days, during which reminder emails were sent to members of the listserv. In addition, the survey was available on laptops at NITS ‐related events at an annual AHS meeting. Descriptive analyses were then conducted using S urvey M onkey and E xcel. Results Of the 93 members of NITS , 64 of the 96 (68.8%) clicked to initiate the survey and 52.7% successfully completed it. Attendings made up the majority of respondents (62.5%), followed by fellows (10.9%), and residents (7.8%). Key highlights of the survey included the following: just under 10% reported no exposure to a headache center during any time in their training (medical school, residency, or fellowship); less than 2% had exposure to a headache center during medical school; less than half of participants reported exposure to a headache center in residency (45.3%) and during fellowship (43.4%). Having a mentor in the field, liking the patient population, and working in a headache center, 64.7%, 52.9%, and 41.2%, respectively, were the top ways in which participants became interested in headache. The journal H eadache (56.9%), attendings (56.3%), and the AHS / A merican A cademy of N eurology guidelines for migraine management (52.0%) are the resources cited as being used all/most of the time. About 82.4% strongly agree that there needs to be improved headache education for physicians of all specialties (primary care, emergency department, psychiatry); 84.4% feel that they are appreciated by their patients; 68.6% feel that there is strong support in their departments for headache; 56.9% believe that their work schedule leaves enough time for personal and family life; and 60.8% agreed that their professional life will improve in years to come. Participants agreed/strongly agreed that they like to treat the following diseases/symptoms: migraine headache (98.0%), cluster headache (92%), chronic daily headache (84%), and post‐concussive syndrome (71.4%). Participants disagreed/strongly disagreed that they like to treat the following comorbid conditions/symptoms: low back pain (66.6%), dizziness (42.9%), sleep apnea (36.7%), depression (32.0%), and anxiety (32.0%). Conclusions In this detailed survey on the recruitment and retention of headache specialists, the following themes emerged: mentorship and exposure to a headache center are key foundations in the young investigator/trainee experience. Young headache specialists appear positive about their field of medicine. These specialists like to treat various headache types but not necessarily some of the related comorbidities (sleep disorders, depression, anxiety, back pain, and dizziness). Finally, there was strong agreement that there needs to be improved headache education for physicians of other medical specialties.