Citations

We set out to identify predictors for the prophylactic effect of placebo injections in subjects with migraine by post hoc analysis of 81 subjects with episodic migraine receiving single-blind placebo injections in a prospective trial of botulinum toxin. Possible predictors of placebo prophylaxis were compared among placebo responders (PRs) and placebo non-responders (PNRs). There were 34 PRs (42%) and 47 PNRs (58%). Male gender [odds ratio (OR) 5.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12, 30.14, P = 0.022], a history of opioid use (OR 4.44, 95% CI 1.47, 13.41, P = 0.005) and injections in the neck/shoulders (OR 2.44, 95% CI 0.93, 3.19, P = 0.033) were associated with placebo response. Of subjects with two or more of these signs, 88% were PRs compared with 31% of subjects with one or less. Male gender, opioid use and injections in the neck/shoulders are associated with placebo prophylaxis. These findings may have important implications for the design of future clinical trials and for the clinical management of migraineurs.

Occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) may be effective for the treatment of headaches that are recalcitrant to medical therapy. The objective of this study was to determine if response to occipital nerve block (ONB) predicts response to ONS in patients with chronic, medically intractable headaches. We evaluated 15 patients who underwent placement of occipital nerve stimulators for the treatment of chronic headaches. Data were collected regarding analgesic response to ONB and to ONS. Nine of 15 patients were ONS responders (≥50% reduction in headache frequency or severity). Thirteen patients had ONB prior to stimulator implantation. Ten of 13 who had ONB had significant relief of head pain lasting at least 24 h, and three were ONB non-responders. Of the three ONB non-responders, two were ONS responders. Of the two patients who did not have ONB prior to ONS, one was an ONS responder and one was an ONS non-responder. In conclusion, analgesic response to ONB may not be predictive of the therapeutic effect from ONS in patients with medically refractory chronic headaches.

If treatment-emergent central nervous system (CNS) symptoms following triptan therapy represent direct pharmacological effects of the drug, they should occur independent of response to active drug. However, if they represent unmasking of neurological symptoms of the migraine attack after pain is relieved, they should be more common in responders both to active drug and to placebo. To explore this issue, we evaluated the relationship between the CNS adverse events and treatment response following triptan or placebo treatment. We used pooled data from seven double-blind, placebo-controlled trials involving eletriptan 20 mg (E20, n = 402), eletriptan 40 mg (E40, n = 1870), eletriptan 80 mg (E80, n = 1393), sumatriptan 100 mg (S100, n = 275) and placebo (Pbo, n = 1024). Somnolence was more prevalent among 2 h headache responders than non-responders for all treatments, including E80 (8.8% vs. 5.0%; P < 0.05), E40 (6.4% vs. 5.0%; NS), E20 (4.0% vs. 2.0%; NS), S100 (4.7% vs. 3.2%; NS) and Pbo (7.6% vs. 3.0%; P < 0.05). Similarly, the incidence of asthenia was higher among patients who responded to treatment compared with those who did not respond to E80 (15.2% vs. 7.8%; P < 0.05), E40 (6.5% vs. 3.6%; P < 0.05), E20 (6.5% vs. 1.0%; P < 0.05), S100 (10.1% vs. 4.7%; NS) and Pbo (4.4% vs. 2.7%; NS). The generally higher rates of somnolence and asthenia in patients who respond to treatment suggests that these treatment-emergent neurological symptoms may represent the unmasking of CNS symptoms associated with the natural resolution of a migraine attack, rather than simply representing drug-related side-effects. The rate of somnolence in placebo responders is comparable to that in responders to E40 and E80, indicating that somnolence is related, at least in some important part, to headache relief and not treatment.

The aim of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of occipital nerve stimulation for medically intractable headache. Electrical stimulation of large sensory afferents has an antinociceptive effect. Occipital nerve stimulation may be effective for the treatment of medically intractable headache. Retrospective analysis was performed of 15 patients with medically refractory headache who underwent implantation of an occipital nerve stimulator. Pre- and postimplant data regarding headache frequency, severity, disability, depression and post-stimulator complications were collected. Twelve patients were female and three male. Ages ranged from 21 to 52 years (mean 39 years). Eight patients had chronic migraine, three chronic cluster, two hemicrania continua and two had post-traumatic headache. Eight patients underwent bilateral and seven had unilateral lead placement. Patients were measured after 5-42 months (mean 19). All six mean headache measures improved significantly from baseline ( P < 0.03). Headache frequency per 90 days improved by 25 days from a baseline of 89 days; headache severity (0-10) improved 2.4 points from a baseline of 7.1 points; MIDAS disability improved 70 points from a baseline of 179 points; HIT-6 scores improved 11 points from a baseline of 71 points; BDI-II improved eight points from a baseline of 20 points; and the mean subjective percent change in pain was 52%. Most patients (60%) required lead revision within 1 year. One patient required generator revision. Occipital nerve stimulation may be effective in some patients with intractable headache. Surgical revisions may be commonly required. Safety and efficacy results from prospective, randomized, sham-controlled studies in patients with medically refractory headache are needed.

Approximately 57 patients with red ear syndrome have been reported in the literature since it was initially described in 1994. The clinical phenotype therefore continues to be defined and no consistent treatment response has been described. We report three new cases of red ear syndrome and suggest that the disorder may exist as a primary trigeminal or cervical autonomic cephalalgia, coexist with other rare trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias, or may be secondary. The pathogenesis in these different circumstances may be distinct, the triggers specific and, when secondary, the disorder may be more resistant to treatment.