Real-world approaches to outpatient treatment of status migrainosus: A survey study.

OBJECTIVES: Identify how the American Headache Society (AHS) membership manages status migrainosus (SM) among outpatients. BACKGROUND: SM is defined as a debilitating migraine attack lasting more than 72 h. There is no standard of care for SM, including whether a 72-h duration is required before the attack can be treated as SM. METHODS: The Refractory Headache Special Interest Group from AHS developed a four-question survey distributed to AHS members enquiring (1) whether they treat severe refractory migraine attacks the same as SM regardless of duration, (2) what their first step in SM management is, (3) what the top three medications they use for SM are, and (4) whether they are United Council for Neurologic Subspecialties (UCNS) certified. The survey was conducted in January 2022. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Responses were received from 196 of 1859 (10.5%) AHS members; 64.3% were UCNS certified in headache management. Respondents treated 69.4% (136/196) of patients with a severe refractory migraine attack as SM before the 72-h period had elapsed. Most (76.0%, 149/196) chose "treat remotely using outpatient medications at home" as the first step, 11.2% (22/196) preferred procedures, 6.1% (12/196) favored an infusion center, 6.1% (12/196) sent patients to the emergency department (ED) or urgent care, and 0.5% (1/196) preferred direct hospital admission. The top five preferred medications were as follows: (1) corticosteroids (71.4%, 140/196), (2) nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (50.1%, 99/196), (3) neuroleptics (46.9%, 92/196), (4) triptans (30.6%, 60/196), and (5) dihydroergotamine (DHE) (21.4%, 42/196). CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare professionals with expertise in headache medicine typically treated severe migraine attacks early and did not wait 72 h to fulfill the diagnostic criteria for SM. Outpatient management with one or more medications for home use was preferred by most respondents; few opted for ED referrals. Finally, corticosteroids, NSAIDs, neuroleptics, triptans, and DHE were the top five preferred treatments for home SM management.

Developing and delivering a migraine disparities and diagnosis undergraduate medical educational program to underrepresented in medicine medical student members of the Student National Medical Association: A pilot project.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Migraine is underdiagnosed. On average, medical students have approximately 3 h of exposure to headache education throughout medical school training. Moreover, some medical students have racially-based biases in pain. There is a paucity of underrepresented in medicine (UIM) headache practitioners. UIM practitioners are more likely to practice in underserved communities and provider-patient ethnic concordance may help eliminate healthcare disparities. The Student National Medical Association (SNMA) is an organization committed to supporting current and future UIM medical students and addressing the needs of underserved communities. The goal of this project was to develop and deliver a brief Migraine Diagnosis and Disparities Undergraduate Medical Education Program (MD2UMEP) to increase awareness of migraine diagnosis and disparities in UIM medical students in the SNMA. METHODS: For connecting/relationship-building with SNMA, the SNMA Region V website was reviewed. Calls were made to Wayne State University School of Medicine (WSUSOM) Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) explaining the educational initiative with subsequent emails to the Director of WSUSOM's ODEI followed by a video-conference meeting (VCM). VCMs were conducted with two SNMA member leaders from WSUSOM. A local and regional presentation/delivery of the MD2UMEP was planned. Communication was maintained electronically. For development/delivery of the MD2UMEP, headache literature was reviewed for key concepts underpinning migraine diagnosis and migraine disparities with a focus on African Americans. Slides with talking points were developed with references. Pre- and posttest questions were drafted and made accessible via a QR code. The MD2UMEP was presented and students completed the questionnaires. Descriptive statistics were used to quantify responses. RESULTS: The MD2UMEP work began July 31, 2021, with program delivered in final form on October 1, 2022. A professional relationship was established with SNMA leadership. A MD2UMEP was developed then administered at the 2022 SNMA Region V Medical Education Conference. Headache medicine was introduced to UIM SNMA medical students. Anonymously, nine individuals responded to the MD2UMEP pretest questions. Eight individuals answered the posttest questions. At the program's conclusion, UIM student performance improved on seven of 10 test questions on migraine diagnosis and disparities and remained at 100% on one of 10 test questions. On two of the questions, the number correct remained the same (although percentage overall increased due to the smaller denominator). There was a higher proportion of correct responses on the posttest. CONCLUSIONS: There is great need for migraine diagnosis and disparities education among medical students. A new migraine diagnosis and disparities program was developed for medical students. SNMA members were receptive to the MD2UMEP and it strengthened their knowledge of migraine diagnosis and disparities. This program exposed UIM medical students to headache medicine.

Categorizing Sports-Related Concussion Disparities by Key Domains of Social Determinants of Health.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To explore recently published data on disparities in concussion and best categorize these data into domains of social determinants of health (SDOH). RECENT FINDINGS: Disparities in concussion cover a range of SDOH domains. Questions on disparities in concussion remain. Interventions to reduce these disparities and inequities are needed. Social determinants of health may play a significant role in disparities and inequities in sports related concussion. There is interplay and overlap in SDOH domains that affect concussion outcomes. It is possible that an increase in SDOH may affect concussion disparities by moderated mediation; however, further data is needed to validate this potential effect. Moreover, attention to SDOH domains in sports related concussion may provide insight on intervention targets to ameliorate disparities in sports related concussion.

Persistence to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies and onabotulinumtoxinA among patients with migraine: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To date, real-world evidence on persistence to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or onabotulinumtoxinA have excluded eptinezumab. This retrospective cohort study was performed to compare treatment persistency among patients with migraine on anti-CGRP mAbs (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, or eptinezumab) or onabotulinumtoxinA. METHODS: This retrospective study used IQVIA PharmMetrics data. Adult patients with migraine treated with an anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA who had 12 months of continuous insurance enrollment before starting treatment were included. A "most recent treatment episode" analysis was used in which the most recent episode was defined as the latest treatment period with the same drug (anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA) without a ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply on/after June 25, 2020, to December 31, 2021. Patients were indexed at the start of their most recent episode. Patients were considered non-persistent and discontinued the therapy associated with their most recent episode if there was ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply. A Cox proportional-hazards model estimated the discontinuation hazard between treatments. The gap periods and cohort definition were varied in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The study included 66,576 patients (median age 46 years, 88.6% female). More eptinezumab-treated patients had chronic migraine (727/1074), ≥ 3 previous acute (323/1074) or preventive (333/1074) therapies, and more prior treatment episodes (3) than other treatment groups. Based on a 15-day treatment gap, patients on subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs had a 32% (95% CI: 1.19, 1.49; erenumab), 42% (95% CI: 1.27, 1.61; galcanezumab), and 58% (95% CI: 1.42, 1.80; fremanezumab) higher discontinuation hazard than those receiving eptinezumab, with this relationship attenuated, but still statistically significant based on 30-day and 60-day treatment gaps. There was no significant difference in the discontinuation hazard between eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA. Based on a 15-day treatment gap among patients who newly initiated therapy, the discontinuation hazard of subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs remained significantly higher compared to eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with eptinezumab demonstrated persistency that was higher than subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs and similar to onabotulinumtoxinA.

Multimodal Migraine Management and the Pursuit of Migraine Freedom: A Narrative Review.

Migraine is a neurologic disease with a complex pathophysiology that can be controlled with current treatment options but not cured. Therefore, treatment expectations are highly variable. The concept of migraine freedom was recently introduced and can mean different things, with some, for example, expecting complete freedom from headache and associated symptoms and others accepting the occasional migraine attack if it does not impact functioning. Therefore, migraine management should be optimized so that patients can have the best opportunity to achieve their optimal treatment goals. With migraine freedom as a goal and, given the complex pathophysiology of migraine and the high incidence of comorbidities among individuals with migraine, treatment with a single modality may be insufficient, as it may not achieve migraine freedom in those with more frequent or disabling attacks. In this clinical perspective article, we have identified four key, partially overlapping principles of multimodal migraine treatment: (1) manage common comorbidities; (2) control modifiable risk factors for progression by addressing medication and caffeine overuse; (3) diagnose and treat secondary causes of headache, if present; and (4) individualize acute and preventive treatments to minimize pain, functional disability, and allodynia. There are many barriers to pursuing migraine freedom, and strategies to overcome them should be optimized. Migraine freedom should be an aspirational goal both at the individual attack level and for the disease overall. We believe that a comprehensive and multimodal approach that addresses all barriers people with migraine face could move patients closer to migraine freedom.

Black Patients Matter in Neurology: Race, Racism, and Race-Based Neurodisparities.

Black people living in the United States suffer disproportionate morbidity and mortality across a wide range of neurologic conditions. Despite common conceptions to the contrary, "race" is a socially defined construct with little genetic validity. Therefore, racial health inequities in neurology ("neurodisparities") are not a consequence of biologic differences between races. Instead, racism and associated social determinants of health are the root of neurodisparities. To date, many neurologists have neglected racism as a root cause of neurologic disease, further perpetuating the problem. Structural racism, largely ignored in current neurologic practice and policy, drives neurodisparities through mediators such as excessive poverty, inferior health insurance, and poorer access to neurologic and preventative care. Interpersonal racism (implicit or explicit) and associated discriminatory practices in neurologic research, workforce advancement, and medical education also exacerbate neurodisparities. Neurologists cannot fulfill their professional and ethical responsibility to care for Black patients without understanding how racism, not biologic race, drives neurodisparities. In our review of race, racism, and race-based disparities in neurology, we highlight the current literature on neurodisparities across a wide range of neurologic conditions and focus on racism as the root cause. We discuss why all neurologists are ethically and professionally obligated to actively promote measures to counteract racism. We conclude with a call for actions that should be implemented by individual neurologists and professional neurologic organizations to mitigate racism and work towards health equity in neurology.

Migraine history and response to lasmiditan across racial and ethnic groups.

OBJECTIVE: The robust enrollment in SPARTAN and SAMURAI provided the opportunity to present post-hoc descriptive details on migraine disease characteristics and treatment outcomes after treatment with lasmiditan, a selective serotonin (5-HT1F) receptor agonist, in racial and ethnic subgroups. METHODS: Descriptive data from racial (White [W](n = 3471) and Black or African American [AA](n = 792)) and ethnic (Hispanic or Latinx [HL](n = 775) and Non-Hispanic or Latinx [Non-HL](n = 3637)) populations are presented on pooled data from two double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 3 studies (SAMURAI [NCT02439320] and SPARTAN [NCT2605174]). Patients were treated with lasmiditan (50 (SPARTAN only), 100, or 200 mg) or placebo for a single migraine attack of moderate-to-severe intensity. Efficacy data were recorded in an electronic diary at baseline, 30, 60, 90, and 120 min. Safety was evaluated and reported by occurrences of adverse events. RESULTS: Clinical characteristics were generally similar across populations. W participants had longer migraine history than AA participants, and Non-HL participants had more migraine disability than HL participants. In the lasmiditan single-attack studies, AA participants waited longer than W participants to take study drug. A higher proportion of HL participants rated baseline migraine severity as severe compared to Non-HL participants. Response to lasmiditan was similar across racial and ethnic groups, including pain response, freedom from most bothersome symptom and migraine-related disability, and safety and tolerability. Across multiple outcomes, AA and HL participants tended to report more positive outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There were few differences in demographic and clinical characteristics across racial and ethnic groups. Similar lasmiditan efficacy and safety outcomes were observed in AA versus W participants, and in HL versus Non-HL participants. Small observed differences may be driven by a tendency toward a more positive response observed across all treatment groups by AA and HL participants.

A Review of Underserved and Vulnerable Populations in Headache Medicine in the United States: Challenges and Opportunities.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review will briefly summarize recent literature published on headache disparities in underserved and vulnerable populations. It will also report the personal observations of headache medicine providers working with underserved and vulnerable populations in the USA, specifically in an urban practice dedicated to patients in a safety net program and a rural practice dedicated to Native American patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Headache disorders are recognized as one of the most prevalent neurological conditions. People with headache and migraine encounter several barriers to obtaining appropriate care, which are magnified in vulnerable and underserved populations. Research has shown disparities in headache and migraine diagnosis, prevalence rates, treatment, and outcomes based on race, socioeconomic status, and geography. Continued research regarding disparities in headache medicine is required. Strategies to address the identified challenges, including structural competence and the underrepresented in medicine pipeline, are reviewed.

Patient-reported outcomes, health-related quality of life, and acute medication use in patients with a ≥ 75% response to eptinezumab: subgroup pooled analysis of the PROMISE trials.

BACKGROUND: PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 evaluated the preventive efficacy, tolerability, and safety of eptinezumab, a calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted monoclonal antibody, in adults with episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), finding significant reductions in migraine frequency. This post hoc analysis compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and acute medication use in patients with a ≥ 75% migraine responder rate (MRR) after treatment with eptinezumab to patients with a ≥ 50- < 75% MRR. METHODS: PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. This analysis included patients from both studies treated with eptinezumab 100 mg or 300 mg who experienced ≥ 75% and ≥ 50-< 75% MRR over Weeks 1-12 (wks1-12). In both studies, HRQoL was measured by the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and acute medication usage. PROMISE-2 also included the 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), patient-identified most bothersome symptom (PI-MBS), and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). RESULTS: In PROMISE-1, a total of 115/443 (26.0%; 100 mg, n = 49, 300 mg, n = 66) and 120/443 (27.0%; 100 mg, n = 61, 300 mg, n = 59) eptinezumab-treated patients achieved ≥ 75% and ≥ 50-< 75% MRR over wks1-12, respectively. In PROMISE-2, a total of 211/706 (30.0%; 100 mg, n = 95; 300 mg, n = 116) and 209/706 (29.6%; 100 mg, n = 110, 300 mg, n = 99) eptinezumab-treated patients achieved ≥ 75% and ≥ 50-< 75% MRR over wks1-12, respectively. EM and CM patients with ≥ 75% and ≥ 50-< 75% MRR over wks1-12 showed reduced use of acute headache medication and increased HRQoL to normative levels across SF-36 domains of bodily pain, social functioning, and physical functioning. In CM patients with ≥ 75% and ≥ 50-< 75% MRR over wks1-12, the mean change in HIT-6 total score with eptinezumab (pooled) was - 11.7 and - 7.6, respectively. "Very much" or "much" improvement responses were reported in 41.8% and 16.5% on PI-MBS and 36.2% and 20.0% on PGIC in ≥ 75% and ≥ 50-< 75% MRR, respectively. CONCLUSION: Eptinezumab treatment induced a ≥ 75% MRR over wks1-12 in the majority of patients. This patient subgroup reported substantial improvements in PROs associated with headache-related life impact and HRQoL, and reductions in acute headache medication use, which were more marked than those in the ≥ 50-< 75% responders. This study supports the clinical meaningfulness of ≥ 75% MRR for patients with either EM or CM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02559895 (PROMISE-1), NCT02974153 (PROMISE-2).

Early response to eptinezumab indicates high likelihood of continued response in patients with chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND: A clinical ability to describe the response trajectory of patients receiving preventive migraine treatment could expedite and improve therapeutic management decisions. This post hoc analysis of the PROMISE-2 study evaluated the consistency and predictive power of Month 1 treatment response on later response in patients with chronic migraine. METHODS: PROMISE-2 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized adults with chronic migraine to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo administered IV every 12 weeks for up to 24 weeks (2 infusions over 6 study months). Migraine responder rates (MRRs) were calculated from monthly migraine days over 4-week intervals compared with baseline. Patients were grouped by MRR during Month 1 (< 25%, 25-< 50%, 50-< 75%, and ≥ 75%), with the number of subsequent study months (Months 2-6) with ≥50% and ≥ 75% MRR calculated in each subgroup. A similar analysis was conducted using Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) rating to define Month 1 subgroups (very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, and no change/worse) and rates of very much improved or much improved PGIC during Months 2-6. RESULTS: In the eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, and placebo groups, respectively, 194/356 (54.5%), 212/350 (60.6%), and 132/366 (36.1%) patients were ≥ 50% migraine responders during Month 1. More eptinezumab-treated patients were ≥ 75% migraine responders (100 mg, 110/356 [30.9%]; 300 mg, 129/350 [36.9%]; placebo, 57/366 [15.6%]) and more placebo-treated patients were < 25% migraine responders (eptinezumab 100 mg, 103/356 [28.9%]; 300 mg, 80/350 [22.9%]; placebo, 153/366 [41.8%]). Among patients who achieved ≥75% migraine response in Month 1, more than one-third attained ≥75% migraine response for all 5 subsequent study months and more than two-thirds achieved ≥75% migraine response for ≥3 months. More than two-thirds of those in the very much improved (PGIC) subgroup at Month 1 were much or very much improved for all 5 subsequent months. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis of data from PROMISE-2, more eptinezumab-treated than placebo-treated patients were early (Month 1) responders, and most early responders went on to achieve a high level of response for at least half of the 24-week treatment period. Potential for later response in early non-responders was also observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02974153 ; registered November 23, 2016.

Headache neuroimaging: A survey of current practice, barriers, and facilitators to optimal use.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to understand current practice, clinician understanding, attitudes, barriers, and facilitators to optimal headache neuroimaging practices. BACKGROUND: Headaches are common in adults, and neuroimaging for these patients is common, costly, and increasing. Although guidelines recommend against routine headache neuroimaging in low-risk scenarios, guideline-discordant neuroimaging is still frequently performed. METHODS: We administered a 60-item survey to headache clinicians at the Veterans Affairs health system to assess clinician understanding and attitudes on headache neuroimaging and to determine neuroimaging practice patterns for three scenarios describing hypothetical patients with headaches. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses, stratified by clinician type (physicians or advanced practice clinicians [APCs]) and specialty (neurology or primary care). RESULTS: The survey was successfully completed by 431 of 1426 clinicians (30.2% response rate). Overall, 317 of 429 (73.9%) believed neuroimaging was overused for patients with headaches. However, clinicians would utilize neuroimaging a mean (SD) 30.9% (31.7) of the time in a low-risk scenario without red flags, and a mean 67.1% (31.9) of the time in the presence of minor red flags. Clinicians had stronger beliefs in the potential benefits (268/429, 62.5%) of neuroimaging compared to harms (181/429, 42.2%) and more clinicians were bothered by harms stemming from the omission of neuroimaging (377/426, 88.5%) compared to commission (329/424, 77.6%). Additionally, APCs utilized neuroimaging more frequently than physicians and were more receptive to potential interventions to improve neuroimaging utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Although a majority of clinicians believed neuroimaging was overused for patients with headaches, many would utilize neuroimaging in low-risk scenarios with a small probability of changing management. Future studies are needed to define the role of currently used red flags given their importance in neuroimaging decisions. Importantly, APCs may be an ideal target for future optimization efforts.

Factors Associated With, and Mitigation Strategies for, Health Care Disparities Faced by Patients With Headache Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To review contemporary issues of health care disparities in headache medicine with regard to race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and geography and propose solutions for addressing these disparities. METHODS: An Internet and PubMed search was performed and literature was reviewed for key concepts underpinning disparities in headache medicine. Content was refined to areas most salient to our goal of informing the provision of equitable care in headache treatment through discussions with a group of 16 experts from a range of headache subspecialties. RESULTS: Taken together, a multitude of factors, including racism, SES, insurance status, and geographical disparities, contribute to the inequities that exist within the health care system when treating headache disorders. Interventions such as improving public education, advocacy, optimizing telemedicine, engaging in community outreach to educate primary care providers, training providers in cultural sensitivity and competence and implicit bias, addressing health literacy, and developing recruitment strategies to increase representation of underserved groups within headache research are proposed as solutions to ameliorate disparities. CONCLUSION: Neurologists have a responsibility to provide and deliver equitable care to all. It is important that disparities in the management of headache disorders are identified and addressed.

Diversity in neurology leadership: Nuances and nudges.

Underrepresented in medicine (UIM) academic physicians are poorly represented among medical school faculty when compared with their proportion in the US population, receive NIH research awards less frequently, are promoted less often, indicate lower career satisfaction, and report higher social isolation, than faculty who are not under-represented. Supporting a successful and sustainable workforce of UIM academic physicians is essential in neurology, because such neurologists are more likely to engage in research to reduce disparities in neurological outcomes that affect underserved and/or low-income communities, and help improve the paucity of diverse race-ethnic participation in clinical trials. Having more diverse academic neurologists serve in such roles could bolster their careers and model possibilities for others who share similar cultures and backgrounds. Beyond leading/joining diversity affairs committees, more UIM are needed in mainstream leadership roles. In this work, we explore self-application vs. appointment/nomination opportunities and how this play a role in leadership opportunities. In addition to considering appropriate weighing of self-applications vs. appointments based opportunities, we highlight approaches and introduce the concept of nudging. Nudging, which refers to purposely increasing the visibility and appeal of particular items with the goal of boosting the odds of selecting those items, has been shown to successfully influence the process of selection, and may help level the leadership playing field for UIM in neurology.

Barriers to care in episodic and chronic migraine: Results from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess rates of and factors associated with traversing fundamental barriers to good medical outcomes and pharmacologic care in individuals with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM), including socioeconomic status and race. BACKGROUND: Barriers to good outcomes in migraine include the lack of appropriate medical consultation, failure to receive an accurate diagnosis, not being offered a regimen with acute and preventive pharmacologic treatments (if indicated), and not avoiding medication overuse. METHODS: The Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study was a longitudinal Internet-based survey. Respondents who met criteria for migraine consistent with the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, had a Migraine Disability Assessment score ≥ 6, and provided health insurance coverage status were included in this analysis. Successfully traversing each barrier to care and the effects of sociodemographic characteristics were examined. RESULTS: Among 16,789 respondents with migraine, 9184 (54.7%; EM: 7930; CM: 1254) were eligible. Current headache consultation was reported by 27.6% (2187/7930) of EM and 40.8% (512/1254) of CM respondents. Among consulters, 75.7% (1655/2187) with EM and 32.8% (168/512) with CM were accurately diagnosed. Among diagnosed consulters, 59.9% (992/1655) with EM and 54.2% (91/168) with CM reported minimally appropriate acute and preventive pharmacologic treatment. Among diagnosed and treated consulters, in the EM group 31.8% (315/992) and in the CM group 74.7% (68/91) met medication overuse criteria. Only 8.5% (677/7930) of EM and 1.8% (23/1254) of CM respondents traversed all four barriers. Higher income was positively associated with likelihood of traversing each barrier. Blacks and/or African Americans had higher rates of consultation than other racial groups. Blacks and/or African Americans and multiracial people had higher rates of acute medication overuse. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to improve care should focus on increasing consultation and diagnosis rates, improving the delivery of all appropriate guideline-based treatment, and avoidance of medication overuse.

Carnitine Responsive Migraine Headache Syndrome: Case Report and Review of the Literature.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review carnitine's role in migraine and headache, present a case of a patient with intractable chronic migraine refractory to medications but exquisitely responsive to mitochondrial cofactors with a particularly prompt response to L-carnitine supplementation with dose response, and suggest scenarios where L-carnitine could be considered for prophylactic treatment in migraine and intractable headache with migraine features. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple treatments modalities are used to treat migraine, including nutraceutical therapies. Mitochondrial supplements are often used to treat migraine, based on controlled trials. One of the nutraceutical therapies used in neurological and non-neurological conditions is L-carnitine. A few studies have examined the effect of carnitine in patients with migraine. We present a case of a patient with chronic migraine-like headaches found to have carnitine deficiency whose headaches greatly improved with carnitine supplementation. This case suggests that secondary carnitine deficiency may cause chronic migraine. Energy deficiency states occur with migraine, and replenishment of energy substrates has demonstrated some improvement in migraine. Recent studies suggest that L-carnitine with other mitochondrial cofactors may be migraine preventives. The exact link between carnitine and migraine is unknown. Perhaps carnitine deficiency should be in the differential for refractory migraine. Supplementation with L-carnitine merits exploration as a nutraceutical treatment of chronic migraine. Our case suggests that there may be a dose-dependent response to L-carnitine.