OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND:The intent of this review is to provide practical guidance for trainees considering a headache medicine fellowship and examine key factors that contribute to program selection. Headache medicine continues to gain appeal as a neurologic subspecialty, and the number of headache fellowship programs across the country has paralleled that growth. Residents who develop interest in the field must decide whether to pursue fellowship for more specialized training. Establishing a framework for navigating this process can help trainees better evaluate programs and make informed decisions. METHODS:This narrative review was conducted as an initiative by the New Investigators and Trainees Special Interest Group of the American Headache Society in collaboration with a group of academic leaders and headache clinicians who participated in headache fellowship and/or the match process. Topics were selected based on themes identified in existing literature on fellowship selection across other disciplines. Headache-specific information was obtained from a review of literature on headache education and fellowship, along with relevant professional society and program institution websites. This information was supplemented by the authors' perspectives when available evidence was limited. RESULTS:Physicians choose headache medicine for various reasons. This career path derives from inspiration through mentorship received during residency, exposure to a diverse patient population during training, and the desire to provide new therapies and procedural interventions. Headache medicine fellowships offer structured and in-depth training through clinical, educational, professional, and scholarly activities. Programs may vary in size, structure, support, and patient care settings. These factors can help trainees decide whether to pursue fellowship and what to evaluate in different programs. CONCLUSION:This review identifies key factors in pursuing a headache medicine fellowship, allowing trainees to seek programs that support professional interests and career aspirations.

To summarize the literature on neurologic care for transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people and provide implications for clinical practice.

Purpose of Review:To summarize the literature on neurologic care for transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) people and provide implications for clinical practice. Recent Findings:There are limited data on the frequency and management of neurologic conditions among TGD people. TGD people have a higher prevalence of various neurologic conditions compared with cisgender or general population cohorts, including migraine, subjective cognitive decline, sleep disturbances, functional disorders, and cerebrovascular disease. Gender-affirming hormone therapy interacts with commonly prescribed neurologic medications and increases stroke risk among transfeminine people. Sex hormones and sex chromosomes may play a role in neurodegeneration and disability progression in neuroimmunologic diseases. Clitoral reduction surgeries on intersex children can cause neurologic disability and sexual dysfunction in adulthood. Socioeconomic disparities among TGD people contribute to health care barriers. Summary:Neurologists should consider the unique experiences and health care needs of TGD people in their clinical practice and research protocols.

Purpose of Review This review summarizes the evolution in diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of primary headache associated with sexual activity (PHASA). Recent Findings Despite increased access to patient information and advances in imaging, the pathophysiology of PHASA remains not fully understood. There are many secondary headaches that may present with headache during sexual activity, and a thorough workup is indicated to rule out potentially life-threatening etiologies. Many recent case series discuss the efficacy of known treatments of PHASA, as well as suggest other potential therapies for this condition including the newer CGRP-targeted therapies. Summary Headaches during sexual activity can be worrisome events which necessitate urgent evaluation, particularly when presenting with sudden-onset and severe “thunderclap” headaches. A thorough workup including imaging should be conducted to rule out etiologies such as subarachnoid hemorrhage, reversible cerebral vasoconstrictive syndrome (RCVS), vasospasm, and dissection. PHASA is commonly comorbid with migraine, tension-type headache, exertional headache, and hypertension. PHASA can present as a dull headache that progresses with sexual excitement, or an explosive headache at or around orgasm. Pain is primarily occipital, diffuse, and bilateral. The headaches are discrete, recurrent events with bouts that typically self-resolve, but may also relapse and remit or continue chronically in some patients. PHASA can be treated preemptively with indomethacin and triptans administered prior to sexual activity, or treated prophylactically with beta-blockers, topiramate, and calcium channel blockers. CGRP-targeted therapies may provide relief in PHASA based on a few case reports, but there are no randomized controlled trials looking at specific efficacy for these therapies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:There is increasing interest in the use of cannabis and cannabinoid therapies (CCT) by the general population and among people with headache disorders, which results in a need for healthcare professionals to be well versed with the efficacy and safety data. In this manuscript, we review cannabis and cannabinoid terminology, the endocannabinoid system and its role in the central nervous system (CNS), the data on efficacy, safety, tolerability, and potential pitfalls associated with use in people with migraine and headache disorders. We also propose possible mechanisms of action in headache disorders and debunk commonly held myths about its use.RECENT FINDINGS:Preliminary studies show that CCT have evidence for the management of migraine. While this evidence exists, further randomized, controlled studies are needed to better support its clinical use. CCT can be considered an integrative treatment added to mainstream medicine for people with migraine who are refractory to treatment and/or exhibit disability and/or interest in trying these therapies. Further studies are warranted to specify appropriate formulation, dosage, and indication(s). Although not included in guidelines or the AHS 2021 Consensus Statement on migraine therapies, with the legalization of CCT for medical or unrestricted use across the USA, recent systematic reviews highlighting the preliminary evidence for its use in migraine, it is vital for clinicians to be well versed in the efficacy, safety, and clinical considerations for their use. This review provides information which can help people with migraine and clinicians who care for them make mutual, well-informed decisions on the use of cannabis and cannabinoid therapies for migraine based on the existing data.

IntroductionInterprofessional consultations ("eConsults") can reduce healthcare utilization. However, the impact of eConsults on healthcare utilization remains poorly characterized among patients with headache.MethodsWe performed a retrospective, 1:1 matched cohort study comparing patients evaluated for headache via eConsult request or in-person referral at the Mount Sinai Health System in New York. Groups were matched on clinical and demographic characteristics. Our primary outcome was one or more outpatient headache-related encounters in 6 months following referral date. Secondary outcomes included one or more all-cause outpatient neurology and headache-related emergency department (ED) encounters during the same period. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression to model associations between independent variables and outcomes.ResultsWe identified 74 patients with headache eConsults who were matched to 74 patients with in-person referrals. Patients in the eConsult group were less likely to achieve the primary outcome (29.7% vs 62.2%, P < 0.0001) or have an all-cause outpatient neurology encounter (33.8% vs 79.7%, P < 0.0001) than patients in the comparison group. Both groups did not significantly differ by headache-related ED encounters. In multivariable analyses, patients in the eConsult group had significantly lower odds of having one or more headache-related or all-cause neurology encounters than patients in the comparison group (odds ratio (OR) 0.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.6; OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.1-0.3, respectively).DiscussionIn comparison to in-person referrals, eConsult requests for headache were associated with reduced likelihood of outpatient neurology encounters in the short-term but not with differential use of headache-related ED encounters. Larger-scale, prospective studies should validate our findings and assess patient outcomes.

We sought to investigate the prevalence of triptan use among patients with migraine who have contraindications to triptan usage, and to explore specifics of the medication prescribed, dosage, and route of administration.

To identify the characteristics associated with high utilization of remote communications (RCs) in patients with headache.

To describe the current headache medicine education paradigm in North American medical schools, and determine barriers to implementing headache education.

Purpose of Review This review aims to discuss the experience of migraine in transgender and gender-diverse individuals as it relates to other psychiatric comorbidities such as anxiety, depression, PTSD, and others. As this population faces stigma and discrimination, literature posits that gender minority stress can also contribute to the experience of pain in these individuals. Recent Findings Though there is little explicit data on these topics, more recent studies have explored the concept of gender minority stress and how stigma and discrimination can affect health outcomes and overall perception of health. These findings, as well as data on psychiatric comorbidities in cisgender individuals with migraine, can be extrapolated to understand how gender minority individuals may experience migraine. Research has demonstrated that stigma and discrimination can affect health outcomes in the transgender and gender-diverse community. A recent study has shown that sexual minority stress associated with stigma, discrimination, and barriers to care can exacerbate migraine. It is known that psychiatric comorbidities such as anxiety, depression, and PTSD can affect migraine frequency and severity in cisgender individuals. Though there are no specific studies in the transgender and gender-diverse patient population, these highly prevalent mental health conditions could potentially contribute to their migraine experience. Hormones, as well, may affect mood in those on gender-affirming hormone therapy, with some studies exploring how this may have both a direct and indirect relationship with migraine. There are clear knowledge gaps that can be addressed by future research in these areas to better understand the migraine experience in transgender and gender-diverse individuals and improve overall care.

Objective To investigate the current headache medicine education paradigm in allopathic and osteopathic medical schools in the United States and Canada. Background There is a disparity in the number of clinicians specially trained to treat patients with headache disorders and the number of people who have them. Early education and exposure to headache medicine is crucial to address this disparity. However, the current state of headache education within medical schools across the United States and Canada is unknown. Methods The authors created a medical student headache education survey, which is a 20-question REDCap survey that was distributed via email to the neurology clerkship director, curriculum dean, or similar role at each US and Canadian MD or DO conferring medical school. The email listserv was created using the American Academy of Neurology Clerkship Directory, the Association of American Medical Colleges Organization Directory, the American Association of College of Osteopathic Medicine Organization Directory, manual searches of the institutions' websites, and phone calls and emails to administrators as needed. Results Of the 249 individuals contacted, 78 completed the survey, yielding a response rate of 31.3%. Of those responses, 84.6% of respondents (66/78) reported that their institution has at least one mandatory session on headache disorders. Many of these sessions (72.7% (48/78)) occurred during preclinical training, and 74.2% (49/78) occurred as part of the clinical curricula. Of respondents, 44.9% (39/78) reported that their institutions coordinate headache education across training levels (i.e., from preclinical to clinical), and only 17.9% (14/78) coordinate across clinical rotations. The most common topics covered were headache red flags, migraine, pharmacologic management, and differentiating primary versus secondary headache. 65.4% of respondents (51/78) felt that the preclinical headache curriculum prepares their students for the clinical experience, and 55.1% (43/78) felt that medical students were learning enough about headache medicine at their institution. Barriers to educating medical students about headache included insufficient time during courses, lack of administrative support in curricula development, lack of available resources, and lack of student interest. Case-based learning modules and online lectures were the most desired educational materials to improve medical student headache education at their institution. Conclusions The majority of medical schools report incorporating headache medicine education into preclinical or clinical curricula and cover a range of topics in headache medicine. Yet there remains a lack of consistency, with some reporting limited headache education, citing barriers such as lack of administrative support and available educational resources. There is also variation in what is being taught at the medical student level. Future projects should aim to address said barriers, with the goal of providing a standardized headache medicine curriculum for use across medical schools.

To summarize the unique aspects of managing headache in gender minorities and current research in this area including the potential relationship between gender‐affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) and headache.

Objective To summarize the unique aspects of managing headache in gender minorities and current research in this area including the potential relationship between gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) and headache. Background The study of headache in gender minorities is intrinsically important. Gender minorities are medically underserved, and their medical care to date has been limited by socioeconomic disadvantages including stigma and an unsupportive clinical environment. Despite the rising population of transgender and gender-diverse adults and youth, headache research has also been limited. Knowledge of hormonal effects on headache in cisgender patients raises the question of possible effects of GAHT on transgender patients. Methods/Results The manuscript is a narrative review of current best practices in treating transgender patients, including the use of appropriate terminology and ways to create a supportive environment. It also contains current guidelines on GAHT and reviews drug-drug interactions and secondary headache related to hormone therapy. We also review transgender headache research and related research on hormonal effects on headache in cisgender individuals. Conclusion Creating a supportive environment for transgender and gender-diverse patients and being knowledgeable about GAHT are key to providing quality headache care. This review identifies further research needs for this population including the epidemiology of headache disorders in sexual minorities and the potential effects of GAHT on headache disorders in transgender patients.

: Ganglionic acetylcholine receptor autoantibodies (AChR Ab) typically cause autoimmune dysautonomia and are commonly associated with malignancy. : We report a case of a 56-year-old man with longstanding refractory headaches, vertigo, and cerebellar ataxia who was found to have α3-AChR Ab seropositivity in the absence of other neurological symptoms including dysautonomia. His-neurological symptoms improved significantly after treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin. : This is the first reported case of AChR Ab causing headache, vertigo, and ataxia and expands the spectrum of neurological symptoms associated with AChR Ab. The case highlights the importance of recognizing possible central nervous system manifestations of AChR Ab.

Sunday, April 26April 14, 2020Free AccessBuilding a Case for Magnesium in Reversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction (4634)Mallory Roberts, Elizabeth Pedowitz, and Anna PaceAuthors Info & AffiliationsApril 14, 2020 issue94 (15_supplement)https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.94.15_supplement.4634 Letters to the Editor

Headache and neck pain (cervicalgia) are frequently reported among patients with joint hypermobility but the prevalence and scope of these symptoms has not been studied in the era of contemporary Ehlers-Danlos and hypermobility disorder nosology. We performed a single-center retrospective study on the incidence of head and neck symptoms in 140 patients with hypermobility disorders over a 2-year period. Overall, 93 patients (66%) reported either headache or neck pain with 49 of those (53%) reporting both. Migraine (83%) was the most common headache type among those with headache disorders and cervical spondylosis (61%) the most common pathology among those with neck symptoms. Fifty-nine percent of spondylosis patients who underwent cervical facet procedures reported significant improvement in neck and head symptoms. Of patients with both head and neck complaints, 82% had both migraine and spondylosis, which, when combined with the high response rate to injections raises the possibility of cervicogenic headache. In this large multidisciplinary retrospective study of patients with hypermobility disorders, head and neck symptoms were highly prevalent, with migraine and cervical spondylosis common, often coexisting, and frequently responsive to targeted therapy for the cervical spine suggesting that degenerative spinal pathology may cause or contribute to headache symptoms in some patients with hypermobility disorders.

Purpose of Review This review intends to characterize the recent literature pertaining to the role of aerobic exercise in the prevention of migraine. Areas of consensus within that literature may be used to guide clinical practice, allowing for the promulgation of evidence-based practice recommendations. Recent Findings The past decade has seen the publication of numerous high-quality studies that explore aspects of exercise’s effects on migraine prevention, including its success as a stand-alone prevention strategy, as well as its non-inferiority to some pharmacologic preventive measures. Summary Exercise often tops providers’ lists of recommended lifestyle modifications that help reduce migraine burden. Biologically, exercise suppresses inflammatory modulators, including numerous cytokines, and stress hormones, like growth hormone and cortisol. Exercise has also been shown to affect microvascular health, which may be implicated in cortical spreading depression. Psychologically, there is evidence that exercise improves migraine self-efficacy and internalizes the locus of control, leading to reduced migraine burden. Randomized control trials have demonstrated that a sufficiently rigorous aerobic exercise regimen alone is sufficient to yield a statistically significant reduction in migraine frequency, intensity, and duration. Higher-intensity training appears to confer more benefit. Studies have also demonstrated non-inferiority of exercise compared with certain pharmacologic prophylactic interventions, like topiramate. However, the addition of exercise to a traditional preventive regimen may provide added benefit. Special populations, like those with comorbid neck pain or tension headache, may benefit from exercise; and patients who cannot tolerate high-impact exercise may even benefit from low-impact exercise like yoga. Therefore, exercise is a reasonable evidence-based recommendation for migraine prevention.

American Journal of Medical Genetics Part AVolume 182, Issue 12 p. 2807-2811 ISSUE INFORMATIONFree Access Table of Contents, Volume 182A, Number 12, December 2020 First published: 20 November 2020 https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.61251AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume182, Issue12December 2020Pages 2807-2811 RelatedInformation

Migraine is a common neurologic disorder. This article will discuss a few factors that influence migraine (mostly episodic) and its treatment, such as sleep, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), obesity, and affective disorders, as well as autoimmune diseases. Practitioners must be aware of these coexisting conditions (comorbidities) as they affect treatment. It is noted in literature that both the quantity (too much or too few hours) and the quality (OSA related) of sleep may worsen migraine frequency. An associated risk factor for OSA, obesity also increases migraine frequency in episodic migraine cases. A bidirectional relationship with migraine along with depression and anxiety is debated in the literature. Retrospective cohort studies are undecided and lack statistical significance, but prospective studies do show promising results on treatment of anxiety and depression as a means of improving migraine control. Finally, we address the topic of autoimmune diseases and migraine. While few studies exist at this time, there are cohort study groups looking into the association between rheumatoid arthritis, hypothyroidism, and antiphospholipid antibody. There is also evidence for the link between migraine and vascular diseases, including coronary and cerebral diseases. We suggest that these comorbid conditions be taken into account and individualized for each patient along with their pharmaceutical regimen. Physicians should seek a multifactorial treatment plan including diet, exercise, and healthy living to reduce migraine frequency.