Evaluating Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache Prevention: Insights from a Randomized Crossover Pilot Trial

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: Cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating primary headache disorder characterized by severe unilateral pain attacks. Chronic CH (CCH) poses significant treatment challenges, especially in refractory cases. Neuromodulation, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), offers a potential alternative; however, evidence for its efficacy in CCH is lacking. <b>Methods</b>: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot study was conducted. Eligibility criteria included patients with refractory CCH (rCCH), who were then randomized to receive two treatment sequences: A, rTMS followed by sham stimulation, or B, sham followed by rTMS, separated by a one-month washout, with a follow-up period of 3 months. The primary endpoint was to analyze efficacy by assessing the change in the number of attacks per week (APW). Secondary endpoints included treatment tolerability and changes in intensity, duration, and use of rescue medication. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06917144). <b>Results</b>: Eight patients were enrolled and randomized with a 50% probability of assignment to either treatment arm. Despite this, five patients were allocated to sequence A and three to sequence B. Three patients completed the entire study; five received treatment with rTMS and six with sham. The APW change during rTMS showed a change of (mean ± SD) +2.2 (10.8) attacks per week (<i>p</i> = 0.672). Two patients achieved complete remission during the rTMS phase, though symptoms returned by the washout period. In comparison with sham, the difference was also not statistically significant. No significant changes were observed in secondary endpoints. Side effects (two cases) were mild and transient. <b>Conclusions</b>: This pilot study suggests that rTMS may provide clinical benefits for rCCH in selected cases, though its effects seem transient. Adherence to treatment remains a critical challenge.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Brain Sciences
Published
2025-05-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15060554
Primary Topic
Migraine and Headache Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache Prevention: Insights from a Randomized Crossover Pilot Trial

Cristian Rizea, Exuperio Díez‐Tejedor, Moisés León‐Ruiz, Javier Díaz de Terán et al.
Brain Sciences
Migraine and Headache Studies
article

Evaluating Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Refractory Chronic Cluster Headache Prevention: Insights from a Randomized Crossover Pilot Trial

Cristian Rizea, Exuperio Díez‐Tejedor, Moisés León‐Ruiz, Javier Díaz de Terán, Leonardo Portocarrero-Sánchez
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: Cluster headache (CH) is a debilitating primary headache disorder characterized by severe unilateral pain attacks. Chronic CH (CCH) poses significant treatment challenges, especially in refractory cases. Neuromodulation, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), offers a potential alternative; however, evidence for its efficacy in CCH is lacking. <b>Methods</b>: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot study was conducted. Eligibility criteria included patients with refractory CCH (rCCH), who were then randomized to receive two treatment sequences: A, rTMS followed by sham stimulation, or B, sham followed by rTMS, separated by a one-month washout, with a follow-up period of 3 months. The primary endpoint was to analyze efficacy by assessing the change in the number of attacks per week (APW). Secondary endpoints included treatment tolerability and changes in intensity, duration, and use of rescue medication. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06917144). <b>Results</b>: Eight patients were enrolled and randomized with a 50% probability of assignment to either treatment arm. Despite this, five patients were allocated to sequence A and three to sequence B. Three patients completed the entire study; five received treatment with rTMS and six with sham. The APW change during rTMS showed a change of (mean ± SD) +2.2 (10.8) attacks per week (<i>p</i> = 0.672). Two patients achieved complete remission during the rTMS phase, though symptoms returned by the washout period. In comparison with sham, the difference was also not statistically significant. No significant changes were observed in secondary endpoints. Side effects (two cases) were mild and transient. <b>Conclusions</b>: This pilot study suggests that rTMS may provide clinical benefits for rCCH in selected cases, though its effects seem transient. Adherence to treatment remains a critical challenge.

Brain SciencesVol. 15(6)
Hospital Universitario La Paz (ES), Hospital La Paz Institute for Health Research (ES), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (ES)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
Migraine and Headache Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.