Background Brain tumor cells invade adjacent normal brain along white matter (WM) bundles of axons. We therefore hypothesized that the location of tumor intersecting WM tracts would be associated with differing survival. This study introduces a method, voxel-wise survival analysis (VSA), to determine the relationship between the location of brain tumor intersecting WM tracts and patient prognosis. Methods 113 primary glioblastoma (GBM) patients were retrospectively analyzed for this study. Patient specific tumor location, defined by contrast-enhancement, was combined with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) derived tractography to determine the location of axons intersecting tumor enhancement (AXITEs). VSA was then used to determine the relationship between the AXITE location and patient survival. Results Tumors intersecting the right anterior thalamic radiation (ATR), right inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus (IFOF), right and left cortico-spinal tract (CST), and corpus callosum (CC) were associated with decreased overall survival (OS). Tumors intersecting the CST, body of the CC, right ATR, posterior IFOF, and inferior longitudinal fasciculus are associated with decreased progression-free survival (PFS), while tumors intersecting the right genu of the CC and anterior IFOF are associated with increased PFS. Patients with tumors intersecting the ATR, IFOF, CST, or CC had significantly improved survival prognosis if they were additionally treated with bevacizumab. Conclusions This study demonstrates the usefulness of VSA by locating AXITEs associated with poor prognosis in GBM patients. This information should be included in patient-physician conversations, therapeutic strategy, and clinical trial design.

No abstract

There are only a handful of drugs that have been submitted for and received an indication for the preventative treatment of migraine by the US Food and Drug Administration, as well as international governmental regulatory agencies. However, there are a wide variety of agents that are used for this indication with different levels of evidence for efficacy and tolerability. Several guidelines have been published in recent years examining the evidence-based medicine of migraine preventative therapy and these provide guidance especially for the primary care clinician, but also for neurologists whose primary focus is not headache medicine. Some of the therapies are used in children and adolescents while others are used more commonly in adults. In the adult population, an evolutive state of migraine is more commonly seen than in young persons, that is chronic migraine. There is a paucity of evidence for medications for this stage of migraine but there is a single agent that is approved for this use but not for use in the treatment of episodic migraine. There have been few advances in the field of migraine-preventative medications in recent years but potential novel approaches are in development.

There are multiple choices of agents for the acute management of migraine available. Patient-specific factors such as associated symptoms including nausea, vomiting, and gastroparesis are important considerations. Oral administration may often be the patient-preferred route of delivery because of comfort or convenience but when it is important to bypass gut absorption then either parenteral or intranasal administration may be appropriate delivery approaches. A new formulation of a low-dose sumatriptan intranasal powder administered via a novel breath-powered delivery device may be a viable option Areas covered: Our search of the available literature pertaining to the topic of intranasal sumatriptan powder yielded pharmacokinetic studies and randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (including The TARGET Study, The COMPASS study) published between 2010 and 2015. Expert commentary: A new formulation of a low-dose sumatriptan intranasal powder administered via a novel breath-powered delivery device appears to be a safe and efficacious option for the acute management of a migraine ideally suited for this situation. It appears to have superior efficacy to sumatriptan 100 mg oral tablets with superior pain freedom by 15 minutes and pain relief over the initial 30 minutes post-dose.

No abstract