Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation for the management of refractory primary chronic headaches: A real-world experience

Cephalalgia ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 1276-1285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Trimboli ◽  
Adnan Al-Kaisy ◽  
Anna P Andreou ◽  
Madeleine Murphy ◽  
Giorgio Lambru

Background Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation has initial evidence of efficacy in migraine and cluster headache. However, little is known about its role in the management of refractory chronic headaches. Methods We evaluated the preventive and abortive effects of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation in 41 consecutive patients with refractory primary chronic headaches in an open-label prospective clinical audit. Headache diaries were used to collect clinical information. Those who obtained at least 30% reduction in headache days/episodes after three months of treatment were considered responders and were offered treatment continuation. Results Twenty-three patients with chronic migraine, 12 with chronic cluster headache, four with hemicrania continua and two with short-lasting unilateral neuralgiform headache attacks with autonomic symptoms (SUNA) were treated. Two of 23 chronic migraine patients, one of 12 chronic cluster headache patients, and two of four hemicrania continua patients were considered responders. None of the patients with SUNA benefited from the therapy. Two chronic migraine patients were able to reduce the pain severity of moderate migraines with non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation. Conclusion Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation may not constitute an effective acute nor preventive treatment in refractory chronic primary headaches. The encouraging effect in hemicrania continua warrants further evaluation in larger studies.

Cephalalgia ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 959-969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J Goadsby ◽  
Ilse F de Coo ◽  
Nicholas Silver ◽  
Alok Tyagi ◽  
Fayyaz Ahmed ◽  
...  

Background Clinical observations and results from recent studies support the use of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) for treating cluster headache (CH) attacks. This study compared nVNS with a sham device for acute treatment in patients with episodic or chronic CH (eCH, cCH). Methods After completing a 1-week run-in period, subjects were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nVNS or sham therapy during a 2-week double-blind period. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of all treated attacks that achieved pain-free status within 15 minutes after treatment initiation, without rescue treatment. Results The Full Analysis Set comprised 48 nVNS-treated (14 eCH, 34 cCH) and 44 sham-treated (13 eCH, 31 cCH) subjects. For the primary endpoint, nVNS (14%) and sham (12%) treatments were not significantly different for the total cohort. In the eCH subgroup, nVNS (48%) was superior to sham (6%; p < 0.01). No significant differences between nVNS (5%) and sham (13%) were seen in the cCH subgroup. Conclusions Combing both eCH and cCH patients, nVNS was no different to sham. For the treatment of CH attacks, nVNS was superior to sham therapy in eCH but not in cCH. These results confirm and extend previous findings regarding the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of nVNS for the acute treatment of eCH.


Cephalalgia ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (8) ◽  
pp. 967-977 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilse F de Coo ◽  
Juana CA Marin ◽  
Stephen D Silberstein ◽  
Deborah I Friedman ◽  
Charly Gaul ◽  
...  

Background Two randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trials (ACT1, ACT2) evaluated non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) as acute treatment for cluster headache. We analyzed pooled ACT1/ACT2 data to increase statistical power and gain insight into the differential efficacy of nVNS in episodic and chronic cluster headache. Methods Data extracted from ACT1 and ACT2 were pooled using a fixed-effects model. Main outcome measures were the primary endpoints of each study. This was the proportion of participants whose first treated attack improved from moderate (2), severe (3), or very severe (4) pain intensity to mild (1) or nil (0) for ACT1 and the proportion of treated attacks whose pain intensity improved from 2–4 to 0 for ACT2. Results The pooled population included 225 participants (episodic: n = 112; chronic: n = 113) from ACT1 (n = 133) and ACT2 (n = 92) in the nVNS (n = 108) and sham (n = 117) groups. Interaction was shown between treatment group and cluster headache subtype ( p < 0.05). nVNS was superior to sham in episodic but not chronic cluster headache (both endpoints p < 0.01). Only four patients discontinued the studies due to adverse events. Conclusions nVNS is a well-tolerated and effective acute treatment for episodic cluster headache. Trial registration The studies were registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ACT1: NCT01792817; ACT2: NCT01958125).


Cephalalgia ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 534-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charly Gaul ◽  
Hans-Christoph Diener ◽  
Nicholas Silver ◽  
Delphine Magis ◽  
Uwe Reuter ◽  
...  

Background Chronic cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating disorder for which few well-controlled studies demonstrate effectiveness of available therapies. Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) was examined as adjunctive prophylactic treatment of chronic CH. Methods PREVA was a prospective, open-label, randomised study that compared adjunctive prophylactic nVNS ( n = 48) with standard of care (SoC) alone (control ( n = 49)). A two-week baseline phase was followed by a four-week randomised phase (SoC plus nVNS vs control) and a four-week extension phase (SoC plus nVNS). The primary end point was the reduction in the mean number of CH attacks per week. Response rate, abortive medication use and safety/tolerability were also assessed. Results During the randomised phase, individuals in the intent-to-treat population treated with SoC plus nVNS ( n = 45) had a significantly greater reduction in the number of attacks per week vs controls ( n = 48) (−5.9 vs −2.1, respectively) for a mean therapeutic gain of 3.9 fewer attacks per week (95% CI: 0.5, 7.2; p = 0.02). Higher ≥50% response rates were also observed with SoC plus nVNS (40% (18/45)) vs controls (8.3% (4/48); p < 0.001). No serious treatment-related adverse events occurred. Conclusion Adjunctive prophylactic nVNS is a well-tolerated novel treatment for chronic CH, offering clinical benefits beyond those with SoC.


Author(s):  
Nicholas Silver ◽  
Carl Bradley ◽  
Rebecca Stuckey ◽  
Madeleine Murphy ◽  
Fiona Greenwood ◽  
...  

Background/Aims Beginning in April 2019, non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation was included in the NHS Innovation and Technology Payment programme. The programme guaranteed reimbursement of at least a 3-month course of treatment using gammaCore, through a prescription refill card, authorised by a headache specialist for patients with cluster headache who reported a clinically meaningful benefit. This study evaluated prescribing and refill trends to assess the use of gammaCore in England since the beginning of this programme. Methods Data regarding gammaCore prescriptions and refills from 1 April 2019 to 31 December 2020 were collected and tabulated. Patients were categorised into three groups: those who initiated gammaCore therapy under the programme (new starters), those who were prescribed ≥1 refill, and those who were prescribed ≥2 refills. One refill corresponds to 3 months of gammaCore therapy. Results In total, 52 NHS sites submitted 2092 prescriptions for gammaCore devices, including 655 for new starters. Among new starters, 46.3% received ≥1 refill and 30.9% received ≥2 refills. Those who started using gammaCore after its inclusion in the Innovation and Technology Payment programme received up to seven refills during the data collection period, representing 21 months of therapy. Conclusions This is one of the largest clinical audits of patients with cluster headache. Patients' continued use of gammaCore treatment through multiple 3-month refills in this audit suggests that non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation is efficacious, tolerable and practical for patients with cluster headache.


Cephalalgia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (12) ◽  
pp. 1370-1384
Author(s):  
Stephen D Silberstein ◽  
Hsiangkuo Yuan ◽  
Umer Najib ◽  
Jessica Ailani ◽  
Andreia Lopes de Morais ◽  
...  

Background Non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) is a proven treatment for cluster headache and migraine. Several possible mechanisms of action by which nVNS mitigates headache have been identified. Methods We conducted a narrative review of recent scientific and clinical research into nVNS for headache, including findings from mechanistic studies and their possible relationships to the clinical effects of nVNS. Results Findings from animal and human studies have provided possible mechanistic explanations for nVNS efficacy in headache involving four core areas: Autonomic nervous system functions; cortical spreading depression inhibition; neurotransmitter regulation; and nociceptive modulation. We discuss how overlap and interplay among these areas may underlie the utility of nVNS in the context of clinical evidence supporting its safety and efficacy as acute and preventive therapy for both cluster headache and migraine. Possible future nVNS applications are also discussed. Conclusion Significant progress over the past several years has yielded valuable mechanistic and clinical evidence that, combined with the excellent safety and tolerability profile of nVNS, suggests that it should be considered a first-line treatment for both acute and preventive treatment of cluster headache, an effective option for acute treatment of migraine, and a highly relevant, practical option for migraine prevention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document