Pathophysiology of migraine: an increasingly complex narrative to 2020
Vinod Kumar Gupta
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2217/fnl-2019-0003
2019-05-01
Future Neurology
Abstract:Migraine has been known to afflict humankind since antiquity as an intense pulsatile painful neurological entity [<a href="#B1">1</a>,<a href="#B2">2</a>]. Migraine headache is currently the third most common disease with an estimated global prevalence of 15%, and, is also ranked among the top ten debilitating diseases imparting substantial suffering to the family in addition to the sufferer, being the fourth most burdensome disease in women according to the 2012 Global Burden of Disease study that, in desperation, propels medication abuse, yet by general consensus its etiology remains uncertain [<a href="#B3%20B4%20B5">3–5</a>]. Management of both episodic and chronic migraine has a massive escalating fiscal impact in developed countries, as the poorly understood frequently refractory noncommunicable disorder(s) with a typical but only partially defined genetic component [<a href="#B5%20B6%20B7%20B8%20B9">5–9</a>] continues to challenge current human problem-solving capacity despite impressive technological advances. Increasingly frequent multicenter often industry-specific bottom-line driven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in the face of incomplete scientific logic or commonsense add data into a profusely confused perspective [<a href="#B10%20B11%20B12">10–12</a>]. Without a salient and robust pathophysiologic matrix, all therapies advocated at the tertiary-care level are empirical cart-before-the-horse strategies poorly translated at the level of the general population, leading to research frustration [<a href="#B12">12</a>]. Precisely for the same reason, migraine has the broadest possible spectrum of potential therapies, both pharmacological and nonpharmacological, including surgery. Although, by wide consensus, migraine is regarded as a primary brain disorder [<a href="#B3%20B4%20B5%20B6%20B7%20B8%20B9">3–9</a>,<a href="#B13%20B14%20B15">13–15</a>], disruption of the blood–brain barrier (BBB) during attacks has not been established [<a href="#B13">13</a>], and, first-line hydrophilic preventive drugs that clearly influence the primary pathogenetic processes(es) or 'afferent limb' of migraine aura-headache such as atenolol and nadolol [<a href="#B16%20B17%20B18%20B19">16–19</a>] do not freely cross BBB or influence occipital- or brainstem neuronal function [<a href="#B10">10</a>]. Application of nitroglycerin ointment to skin of fronto-temporal region precipitates headache in migraineurs without involving the CNS [<a href="#B20">20</a>]. This unacknowledged pharmacologic–clinical disconnect is being steadily widened by logic-challenging RCTs and meta-analyses, both being commonly used to sustain assumptive but intrinsically weak pathogenetic theories and therapies through mathematic extrapolations.While there has been an exponential accumulation of data, opinion and reviews in migraine (and other primary headache) literature, pathophysiologic certitude has proven elusive. Experiment, statistical sophistication and extreme nosologic 'splitting' has left reflection and logic far behind data in evolution of migraine as a discipline, while observation – never itself completely objective – has no scaffolding to be arranged into a meaningful matrix. Interpretation of the biologic significance of a large, fragmented, disconnected, burgeoning but disparate and often controversial body of data encompassing recorded peripheral and central changes in the laboratory including neuroimaging remains unresolved [<a href="#B10%20B11%20B12">10–12</a>]. Biology of migraine is not synonymous with 'laboratory' or 'nonenvironmental' but is the elucidation of the concatenation of physiologic forces that push or pull the migraine patient towards either the aura/headache phase or the aura/headache-free state [<a href="#B11">11</a>]. While perceived psychophysical stress as well as occurrence of reactive oxygen species stress is both ubiquitous and nonspecific, migraine affects approximately only up to a fifth of humankind, with an apparently inexhaustible adaptive cranial/brain intrinsic noradrenergic-serotonergic-vasopressinergic mechanism keeping the majority of the human cohort free from the disorder [<a href="#B11">11</a>,<a href="#B21">21</a>]. Conversely, despite a nebulous clinical and scientific landscape, some researchers believe that understanding of migraine pathophysiology is advancing rapidly [<a href="#B14">14</a>,<a href="#B15">15</a>]. Supporting evidence for such enthusiastic belief for an imminent breakthrough, is, however, conspicuously absent.The chance discovery of cortical spreading depression (CSD) in experimental animals by Leão (1944) [<a href="#B22">22</a>], the presumed cortical origin of personal experience of scintillating scotomata (SS) without headache attacks by Lashley (1941) [<a href="#B23">23</a>] and the assumed linkage between these two sets of cross-species events by Milner (1958) [<a href="#B24">24</a>], set stage for a prolonged philo<p>-Abstract Truncated-</p>