Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies: What Headache Specialists Need to Know

Adverse event profile of CGRP monoclonal antibodies: findings from the FDA adverse event reporting database

BACKGROUND

Four CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs) have been approved for migraine prophylaxis by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) since 2018. However, there are concerns about the safety of these four drugs for real-world use.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the adverse event profiles of four CGRP-mAbs with FAERS data.

METHODS

The study was based on records from the FAERS database. Only reports containing one of the active ingredients with CGRP-mAbs were included in this study. Disproportionality analyses including but not limited to reporting odds ratio (ROR) and information components (IC) were conducted to identify drug-AE associations.

RESULTS

In total, 58110 reports were identified for CGRP-mAbs. 80 overlapping signals were disproportionately reported. They affected a range of organs and systems, including the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular systems, skin, and hair. Additionally, the rare cardiovascular adverse events were significantly different among the four CGRP-mAbs.

CONCLUSION

We identified numerous shared underlying signals (overlapping signals) for CGRP-mAbs as suspected drugs in multiple systems and organs. The unlabeled common signals may indicate potential safety issues. In addition, the underlying safety signals varied among the four CGRP-mAbs, particularly in the cardiovascular system, and further studies are needed to confirm these associations and the potential clinical implications.

Preclinical effects of cannabidiol in an experimental model of migraine

ABSTRACT

Migraine is a disabling disorder characterized by recurrent headaches, accompanied by abnormal sensory sensitivity and anxiety. Despite extensive historical use of cannabis in headache disorders, there is limited research on the nonpsychoactive cannabidiol (CBD) for migraine and there is no scientific evidence to prove that CBD is an effective treatment. The effects of CBD are examined here using a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-induced migraine model that provides measures of cephalic allodynia, spontaneous pain, altered light sensitivity (photophobia), and anxiety-like behavior in C57BL/6J mice. A single administration of CGRP induced facial hypersensitivity in both female and male mice. Repeated CGRP treatment produced progressively decreased levels in basal thresholds of allodynia in females, but not in males. A single CBD administration protected both females and males from periorbital allodynia induced by a single CGRP injection. Repeated CBD administration prevented increased levels of basal allodynia induced by repeated CGRP treatment in female mice and did not lead to responses consistent with migraine headache as occurs with triptans. Cannabidiol, injected after CGRP, reversed CGRP-evoked allodynia. Cannabidiol also reduced spontaneous pain traits induced by CGRP administration in female mice. Finally, CBD blocked CGRP-induced anxiety in male mice, but failed in providing protection from CGRP-induced photophobia in females. These results demonstrate the efficacy of CBD in preventing episodic and chronic migraine-like states with reduced risk of causing medication overuse headache. Cannabidiol also shows potential as an abortive agent for treating migraine attacks and headache-related conditions such as spontaneous pain and anxiety.

Perspective for Discovery of Small Molecule IL-6 Inhibitors through Study of Structure–Activity Relationships and Molecular Docking

Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a proinflammatory cytokine that plays a key role in the pathogenesis and physiology of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, such as coronary heart disease, cancer, Alzheimer's disease, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, and most recently COVID-19. IL-6 and its signaling pathway are promising targets in the treatment of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Although, anti-IL-6 monoclonal antibodies are currently being used in clinics, huge unmet medical needs remain because of the high cost, administration-related toxicity, lack of opportunity for oral dosing, and potential immunogenicity of monoclonal antibody therapy. Furthermore, nonresponse or loss of response to monoclonal antibody therapy has been reported, which increases the importance of optimizing drug therapy with small molecule drugs. This work aims to provide a perspective for the discovery of novel small molecule IL-6 inhibitors by the analysis of the structure-activity relationships and computational studies for protein-protein inhibitors targeting the IL-6/IL-6 receptor/gp130 complex.

A phase IV clinical trial of gastrointestinal motility in adult patients with migraine before and after initiation of a calcitonin gene-related peptide ligand (galcanezumab) or receptor (erenumab) antagonist

OBJECTIVE

To compare effects of an initial dose of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb) antagonists on gastrointestinal (GI) motility in patients with migraine and to explore if the mechanistic difference contributes to GI adverse events (AEs).

BACKGROUND

Different frequencies of constipation have been observed between CGRP mAbs that target the ligand (galcanezumab [GMB]) or receptor (erenumab [ERE]).

METHODS

Patients (n = 65) with migraine without significant GI symptoms were enrolled in a multi-center, single-blind phase IV clinical trial (NCT04294147) and randomized 1:1 to receive GMB (240 mg; n = 33) or ERE (140 mg; n = 32). GI whole and regional transit times were assessed using a wireless motility capsule 1 week before and 2 weeks after mAb administration. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in colonic transit time (CTT) within each treatment group. Other measures included GI Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS), Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), and spontaneous bowel movement (SBM) evaluation. AEs were monitored throughout the study.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics indicated significant GI transit time variability with minimal GI reported symptoms. While not statistically significant, a numerical mean increase in CTT was observed in ERE patients (n = 28, mean [SD] at baseline: 33.8 [29.4] h; least square [LS] mean [SE] change: 5.8 [5.7] h, 95% confidence interval [CI] -5.7 to 17.2, p = 0.320), while GMB decreased CTT (n = 31, mean [SD] at baseline: 29.3 [24.5] h; LS mean [SE] change: -5.4 [5.4] h, 95% CI -16.2 to 5.5, p = 0.328) compared to baseline. No meaningful changes were observed in other regional transit times. ERE significantly reduced BSFS (LS mean [SE] score -0.5 [0.2], p = 0.004) and SBM (LS mean [SE] -1.2 [0.5], p = 0.0120), and increased GSRS-constipation compared to baseline (LS mean [SE] score 0.3 [0.1], p = 0.016). GMB increased GSRS-constipation (LS mean [SE] score 0.4 [0.1], p = 0.002). There were no discontinuations due to or serious AEs. A higher percentage of treatment-emergent AEs were reported with ERE than GMB (ERE: nine of 32 [28.1%] versus GMB: three of 33 [9.1%]), with constipation the most frequently reported (ERE: five of 32 [15.6%] versus GMB one of 33 [3.0%]).

CONCLUSION

While the primary endpoint of this study was not met, secondary and tertiary endpoints support a within- and between-treatment change in GI effects suggesting possible mechanistic differences between ligand (GMB) and receptor (ERE) antagonism.

Treatment of resistant chronic migraine with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a systematic review

Background

Resistant chronic migraine is a highly disabling condition which is very difficult to treat. The majority of the treatments for migraine prophylaxis are nonspecific and present weak safety profiles, leading to low adherence and discontinuation. Currently, monoclonal antibodies (mAb) targeting the trigeminal sensory neuropeptide, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), are available for migraine prophylaxis being the first drugs developed specifically to target migraine pathogenesis. The main objective of the current work is to carry out a systematic review of randomised controlled trials that specifically analyse the effectivity and safety of anti-CGRP mAb, comparatively to placebo, in patients with resistant chronic migraine and possibly fill the literature gap or be a source of information to health professionals. Additionally the current knowledge on migraine, particularly resistant chronic migraine, was revisited and summarised.

Methods

Literature search was carried out on MEDLINE, Scopus, Science Direct and ClinicalTrials.gov database, from inception to December 2021. Articles were selected according to prespecified criteria of inclusion and exclusion. Efficacy and safety outcomes included were: change from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMD); ≥50% reduction of MMD values from baseline; change from baseline in monthly acute migraine-specific medication days (MAMD); Migraine-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ); and registered adverse events. Additionally, we used the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) to assess the risk of bias of the included studies.

Results

Four studies were included in this systematic review, involving 2811 resistant chronic migraine patients, 667 in a study using erenumab, 838 in a study using fremanezumab and 1306 in two studies using galcanezumab. When compared to placebo, all investigated anti-CGRP mAb and respective doses demonstrate effectiveness in decreasing MMD, reducing acute medication use and improving the MSQ scores, including, sometimes, reversion of chronic to episodic migraine (efficacy outcomes). Regarding the safety outcomes, the number and type of adverse events did not differ between anti-CGRP mAb-treated and placebo groups.

Conclusions

Anti-CGRP or anti-CGRP receptor monoclonal antibodies are a promising preventive migraine therapy which can be particularly useful for resistant chronic migraine patients.

Hypervigilance, Allostatic Load, and Migraine Prevention: Antibodies to CGRP or Receptor

Migraine involves brain hypersensitivity with episodic dysfunction triggered by behavioral or physiological stressors. During an acute migraine attack the trigeminal nerve is activated (peripheral sensitization). This leads to central sensitization with activation of the central pathways including the trigeminal nucleus caudalis, the trigemino-thalamic tract, and the thalamus. In episodic migraine the sensitization process ends with the individual act, but with chronic migraine central sensitization may continue interictally. Increased allostatic load, the consequence of chronic, repeated exposure to stressors, leads to central sensitization, lowering the threshold for future neuronal activation (hypervigilance). Ostensibly innocuous stressors are then sufficient to trigger an attack. Medications that reduce sensitization may help patients who are hypervigilant and help to balance allostatic load. Acute treatments and drugs for migraine prevention have traditionally been used to reduce attack duration and frequency. However, since many patients do not fully respond, an unmet treatment need remains. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a vasoactive neuropeptide involved in nociception and in the sensitization of peripheral and central neurons of the trigeminovascular system, which is implicated in migraine pathophysiology. Elevated CGRP levels are associated with dysregulated signaling in the trigeminovascular system, leading to maladaptive responses to behavioral or physiological stressors. CGRP may, therefore, play a key role in the underlying pathophysiology of migraine. Increased understanding of the role of CGRP in migraine led to the development of small-molecule antagonists (gepants) and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target either CGRP or the receptor (CGRP-R) to restore homeostasis, reducing the frequency, duration, and severity of attacks. In clinical trials, US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-CGRP-R/CGRP mAbs were well tolerated and effective as preventive migraine treatments. Here, we explore the role of CGRP in migraine pathophysiology and the use of gepants or mAbs to suppress CGRP-R signaling via inhibition of the CGRP ligand or receptor.

Tolerability and safety of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache with up to 15 months of galcanezumab treatment

Objective

The objective of the study was to assess the tolerability and safety of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache (CH) with up to 15 months of treatment.

Background

Chronic CH is a highly debilitating disease with a substantial and unmet medical need.

Methods

Patients were randomized to receive placebo or galcanezumab (300 mg) monthly for 12 weeks, followed by an optional 52‐week open‐label extension and 16‐week posttreatment follow‐up (washout). This is a secondary analysis and long‐term follow‐up of a previously conducted clinical trial. The safety analysis included patients who received galcanezumab at any time during the study. Outcomes included adverse events (AEs), discontinuations, laboratory values, vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and suicidality ratings.

Results

A total of 233 patients received at least one galcanezumab dose. The mean exposure was 341 days. Galcanezumab‐treated patients were mostly male (n = 169/233; 72.5%) with a mean age of 44.9 (±10.9) years. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 185 patients (n = 185/233; 79.4%), 23 patients (n = 23/233; 9.9%) reported serious adverse events (SAEs), and 18 patients (n = 18/233; 7.7%) discontinued due to AEs. The SAE CH was reported by three patients. The most common TEAEs (>10%) were nasopharyngitis (n = 41/233; 17.6%) and injection site pain (n = 33/233; 14.2%). 27.5% of patients (n = 64/233) had TEAEs related to injection sites. Likely hypersensitivity events, including injection site rash, injection site urticaria, and injection site hypersensitivity were reported (n = 14/233; 6.0%). There were past histories of suicidal ideation (n = 55/237; 23.2%) and suicidal behavior (n = 9/236; 3.8%). During the study, 15 patients (n = 15/230; 6.5%), seven with previous history, reported suicidal ideation. One patient had a nonfatal suicide attempt during the open‐label extension and an aborted attempt during the washout. There were no new safety findings compared with the placebo‐controlled treatment period in laboratory values, vital signs, or ECGs.

Conclusions

Galcanezumab 300 mg monthly had a favorable tolerability and safety profile in patients with chronic CH with up to 15 months of treatment.

The impact of CGRPergic monoclonal antibodies on prophylactic antimigraine therapy and potential adverse events

Migraine is a prevalent medical condition and the second most disabling neurological disorder. Regarding its pathophysiology, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) plays a key role, and, consequently, specific antimigraine pharmacotherapy has been designed to target this system. Hence, apart from the gepants, the recently developed monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are a novel approach to treat this disorder. In this review we consider the current knowledge on the mechanisms of action, specificity, safety, and efficacy of the above mAbs as prophylactic antimigraine agents, and examine the possible adverse events that these agents may trigger. Antimigraine mAbs act as direct scavengers of CGRP (galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and eptinezumab) or against the CGRP receptor (erenumab). Due to their long half-lives, these molecules have revolutionized the prophylactic treatment of this neurovascular disorder. Moreover, because of their physicochemical properties, these agents are hepato-friendly and do not cross the blood-brain barrier (highlighting the relevance of peripheral mechanisms in migraine). Nevertheless, apart from potential cardiovascular side effects, the interaction with AMY₁ receptors and immunogenicity induced by autoantibodies against mAbs could be a concern for the safety of long-term treatment with these molecules.

A narrative review of the importance of pharmacokinetics and drug-drug interactions of preventive therapies in migraine management

Objective

To review the pharmacokinetics of major classes of migraine preventives and the clinical implications of drug–drug interactions (DDIs) with the use of these therapies in migraine management.

Background

Preventive treatments for migraine are recommended for a large proportion of patients with frequent migraine attacks. These patients often exhibit a number of comorbidities, which may lead to the introduction of multiple concomitant therapies. Potential DDIs must be considered when using polytherapy to avoid increased risk of adverse events (AEs) or inadequate treatment of comorbid conditions.

Methods

A literature search was performed to identify pharmacokinetic properties and potential DDIs of beta‐blockers, antiepileptic drugs, antidepressants, calcium channel blockers, gepants, and monoclonal antibody therapies targeting the calcitonin gene‐related peptide pathway with medications that may be used for comorbid conditions.

Results

Most DDIs occur through alterations in cytochrome P450 isoenzyme activity and may be complicated by genetic polymorphism for metabolic enzymes. Additionally, drug metabolism may be altered by grapefruit juice ingestion and smoking. The use of migraine preventive therapies may exacerbate symptoms of comorbid conditions or increase the risk of AEs associated with comorbid conditions as a result of DDIs.

Conclusions

DDIs are important to consider in patients with migraine who use multiple medications. The development of migraine‐specific evidence‐based preventive treatments allows for tailored clinical management that reduces the risk of DDIs and associated AEs in patients with comorbidities.

Demographic and clinical characteristics of prevention-eligible patients with migraine in the US: a linked national survey and administrative claims database study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize burden of migraine in prevention-eligible patients compared with prevention non-eligible patients in the United States (US). Receipt of preventive therapy was also examined among prevention-eligible patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study utilized data from the 2017 US National Health and Wellness Survey linked with medical and pharmacy claims. Patients aged ≥18 years who self-reported experiencing migraine and had confirmed evidence of migraine (≥1 medical or pharmacy claim) were included. Prevention eligibility was based on number of headache days in the past 30 days (prevention-eligible: ≥4 and prevention non-eligible: <4). Descriptive statistics summarized study variables; bivariate and multivariable analyses were conducted to examine the association of prevention-eligibility status with outcomes.

RESULTS

Analyses included 450 patients, 291 (65%) prevention-eligible, and of these 56 (19%) received preventive therapy. Overall, patients were 42.98 ± 14.51 years old; 84% were female. Prevention-eligible patients reported significantly more migraine headache days in the past 6 months (29.27 ± 37.96 vs. 8.61 ± 7.88), had lower mental component summary scores (35.80 ± 2.73 vs. 37.90 ± 2.96), and more presenteeism (47.30 ± 2.98% vs. 37.90 ± 2.60%), overall work impairment (46.30 ± 2.87% vs. 37.90 ± 2.55%) and activity days missed due to migraine (8.16 ± 3.05 vs. 3.82 ± 1.58) than prevention non-eligible patients (all p<.001). Prevention-eligible patients receiving preventive therapy reported more migraine headache days during the past month (9.21 ± 7.99 vs. 6.06 ± 7.10; p=.002) and activity days lost due to migraine (18.39 ± 28.08 vs. 10.69 ± 21.43, p=.015) than those not receiving preventive therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevention-eligible patients experience greater burden due to migraine, including more headache days, worse health-related quality-of-life, and greater work and activity impairment than prevention non-eligible patients.

Optimal treatment strategy of fremanezumab in migraine prevention: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Identifying the optimal fremanezumab treatment strategy is crucial in treating patients with migraines. The optimal strategy was investigated by assessing the cumulative 50% reduction rate (50%CRR), cumulative 75% reduction rate (75%CRR), reduction in the number of migraine days, treatment-related adverse events, and serious adverse events in patients treated with fremanezumab 225 mg monthly (225 mg), 675 mg monthly (675 mg), 900 mg monthly (900 mg), a single high dose of 675 mg (S675mg), 675 mg at baseline with 225 mg monthly (675/225 mg), and placebo. Biomedical databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on this topic, and data were individually extracted. Risk ratios and mean differences were used to present the pooled results. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to determine the effects of the medication strategies of fremanezumab. Five trials (n = 3404) were used to form a six-node network meta-analysis. All fremanezumab medication strategies displayed significantly higher cumulative 50% reduction rates than the placebo. The SUCRA revealed that treatment with 675 mg yielded the highest 50%CRR value (mean rank = 2.5). S675 mg was the only treatment with significantly higher 75%CRR reduction rate than placebo, whereas the SUCRA for 225 mg displayed the highest mean rank (2.2). Moreover, 225 mg (mean rank = 2.2) and S675 mg (mean rank = 2.2) presented lower probabilities of serious adverse events. Collectively, S675mg and 225 mg exhibited the optimal balance between efficacy and safety within three months. Long-term efficacy and safety remain unclear, and future studies should further evaluate the long-term outcomes.

Assessment of immunogenicity from galcanezumab phase 3 trials in patients with episodic or chronic migraine

BACKGROUND

This analysis characterizes the immunogenicity profile of galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its activity, in phase 3 migraine trials.

METHODS

Immunogenicity data were analyzed from baseline and double-blind, placebo-controlled phases of the 3-month chronic migraine study REGAIN, the 6-month episodic migraine studies EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2, and from baseline and open-label phases of the 12-month chronic and episodic migraine Study CGAJ. The incidence of baseline antidrug antibodies, treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies, neutralizing antidrug antibodies, and the effect of antidrug antibody titer on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed. The relationship between antidrug antibody status and efficacy was explored using average change in monthly migraine headache days. Safety analyses assessed the potential relationship between treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies and hypersensitivity events or adverse events related to injection sites.

FINDINGS

Across studies, 5.9-11.2% of patients had baseline antidrug antibodies. The incidence of treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies was 2.6-12.4% in the galcanezumab group and 0.5-1.7% in the placebo group. The majority of treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies were detected approximately 3-6 months after first study drug dose. Overall, the observed antidrug antibody titer did not impact galcanezumab concentrations, calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations, or galcanezumab efficacy. There was no evidence that hypersensitivity events or adverse events related to injection sites were mediated by treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies.

INTERPRETATION

These data showed that immunogenicity did not impact galcanezumab concentrations, calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations, or the efficacy and hypersensitivity profile of galcanezumab in patients with migraine.

Novel Medications for the Treatment of Migraine

OBJECTIVE

To describe the new classes of medication for headache management and their roles in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a key component in the underlying pathophysiology of migraine. Research focused on targeting CGRP for headache treatment has led to the development of entirely new classes of medications - the gepants and the CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) - for both acute and preventive treatment. A third class, the ditans, is being developed to target the 5-HT1F receptor to provide acute treatment without vasoconstrictive effects.

METHODS

This article reviews the pathophysiology of migraine that has led to these new pharmacologic developments. Available information from randomized controlled trials, abstracts, press releases, and relevant preclinical studies is summarized for each class of medications.

RESULTS

At the time of this writing, one ditan has been submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval. One gepant is anticipated to be submitted within the first quarter of 2019, and others are in clinical trials. Three CGRP mAbs have been FDA approved and are now available in clinical practice, and a fourth was submitted in the first quarter of 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of new migraine-specific classes of medications provides more treatment options for both acute and preventive treatment of migraine.

Antibodies Targeting Chemokine Receptors CXCR4 and ACKR3

Dysregulation of the chemokine system is implicated in a number of autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, as well as cancer. Modulation of chemokine receptor function is a very promising approach for therapeutic intervention. Despite interest from academic groups and pharmaceutical companies, there are currently few approved medicines targeting chemokine receptors. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and antibody-based molecules have been successfully applied in the clinical therapy of cancer and represent a potential new class of therapeutics targeting chemokine receptors belonging to the class of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Besides conventional mAbs, single-domain antibodies and antibody scaffolds are also gaining attention as promising therapeutics. In this review, we provide an extensive overview of mAbs, single-domain antibodies, and other antibody fragments targeting CXCR4 and ACKR3, formerly referred to as CXCR7. We discuss their unique properties and advantages over small-molecule compounds, and also refer to the molecules in preclinical and clinical development. We focus on single-domain antibodies and scaffolds and their utilization in GPCR research. Additionally, structural analysis of antibody binding to CXCR4 is discussed. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Modulating the function of GPCRs, and particularly chemokine receptors, draws high interest. A comprehensive review is provided for monoclonal antibodies, antibody fragments, and variants directed at CXCR4 and ACKR3. Their advantageous functional properties, versatile applications as research tools, and use in the clinic are discussed.

How to integrate monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor in daily clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a major public health issue associated with significant morbidity, considerable negative impact on quality of life, and significant socioeconomic burden. Preventive treatments are required to reduce the occurrence and the severity of acute attacks and to minimize the use of abortive medications and the associate risk of drug-related adverse events, as well as the onset of medication-overuse headache and chronification of migraine. We performed a review of all available evidence on the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor for the preventive treatment of migraine to provide evidence-based guidance on their use in clinical practice. Monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor are mechanism-specific drugs for the preventive treatment of migraine. Double-blind randomized clinical trials have shown that monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor are effective across all the spectrum of migraine patients who require prevention and have a good safety and tolerability profile. Nevertheless, high costs limit the affordability of those drugs at the moment.

CONCLUSIONS

Specificity, long half-life, efficacy, tolerability, and ease of use make monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor an appealing treatment option for migraine prevention. Optimal strategies to manage treatment over time still need to be clarified with real-life data.

Recent Advances in Pharmacotherapy for Migraine Prevention: From Pathophysiology to New Drugs

Migraine is a common and disabling neurological disorder, with a significant socioeconomic burden. Its pathophysiology involves abnormalities in complex neuronal networks, interacting at different levels of the central and peripheral nervous system, resulting in the constellation of symptoms characteristic of a migraine attack. Management of migraine is individualised and often necessitates the commencement of preventive medication. Recent advancements in the understanding of the neurobiology of migraine have begun to account for some parts of the symptomatology, which has led to the development of novel target-based therapies that may revolutionise how migraine is treated in the future. This review will explore recent advances in the understanding of migraine pathophysiology, and pharmacotherapeutic developments for migraine prevention, with particular emphasis on novel treatments targeted at the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway.

CGRP and Migraine: The Role of Blocking Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Ligand and Receptor in the Management of Migraine

Migraine is a highly prevalent, complex neurological disorder. The burden of disease and the direct/indirect annual costs are enormous. Thus far, treatment options have been inadequate and mostly based on trial and error, leaving a significant unmet need for effective therapies. While the underlying pathophysiology of migraine is incompletely understood, blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) using monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor and small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) have emerged as a promising therapeutic opportunity for the management of migraine. In this review, we discuss new concepts in the pathophysiology of migraine and the role of CGRP, the current guidelines for treating migraine preventively, the medications that are being used, and their limitations. We then discuss small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists, monoclonal antibodies to CGRP ligand and receptor, as well as the detailed results of Phase II and III trials involving these novel treatments. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of blocking CGRP and its receptor.

Basic Considerations for the Use of Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine impacts more than 36 million people in the United States and 1 billion people worldwide. Despite the increasing availability of acute and preventive therapies, there is still tremendous unmet need. Potential treatments in development include monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Appropriate use of these “biologic” treatments will necessitate an understanding of the aspects that distinguish them from traditional medications.

AIM

Many drug classes are prescribed for migraine treatment, but all have limitations. Recently, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) activity has shown a significant promise as a target for preventive therapy. In this review, we provide an overview of the potential role of CGRP mAbs in migraine, with a focus on their design, pharmacokinetics, safety, and immunogenicity.

CONCLUSIONS

The CGRP mAbs are an innovative new therapy for migraine and address the need for effective and tolerable preventive options. MAbs, including those that target CGRP or its receptor, bind to a target with high specificity and affinity and lead to few off-target adverse effects, although mechanism-based adverse reactions may occur. Unlike other therapeutic antibodies used to treat neurologic disease, CGRP mAbs do not have a target within the immune system and have been designed to avoid altering the immune system. The safety and efficacy of mAbs against CGRP or its receptors are being investigated in clinical development programs, and the first of these therapies has received regulatory approval in the United States.

Current management: migraine headache

Migraine varies in its frequency, severity, and impact; treatment should consider these variations and the patient's needs and goals. Migraine pharmacologic treatment may be acute (abortive) or preventive (prophylactic), and patients often require both. New medication devices are available or in development, including an intracutaneous, microneedle system of zolmitriptan and sumatriptan, and breath-powered powder sumatriptan intranasal treatment. Lasmiditan, a 5-HT1F receptor agonist, is in development for acute treatment, as are small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (Gepants) for acute and preventive treatment. Antibodies to CGRP and its receptor are being developed for migraine prevention. All 4 treatments are effective and have, as of yet, no safety concerns.

Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine: current perspectives

Migraine is a highly disabling neurological pain disorder in which management is frequently problematic. Most abortive and preventative treatments employed are classically non-specific, and their efficacy and safety and tolerability are often unsatisfactory. Mechanism-based therapies are, therefore, needed. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is recognized as crucial in the pathophysiology of migraine, and new compounds that target the peptide have been increasingly explored in recent years. First tested were CGRP receptor antagonists; they proved effective in acute migraine treatment in several trials, but were discontinued due to liver toxicity in long-term administration. Monoclonal antibodies against CGRP (LY2951742, ALD-403, and LBR-101/TEV-48125) or its receptor (AMG334) were subsequently developed. As reviewed in this study, numerous phase 1 and 2 trials and preliminary results of phase 3 trials have shown a good safety/tolerability profile and efficacy in migraine prevention, especially in high frequent episodic and chronic forms. Being macromolecules, these mAbs are not suitable for oral administration; however, their intravenous or subcutaneous delivery can be performed at relatively low frequency-every month or even quarterly-which enhances patients' compliance. Although not all migraineurs respond to this treatment, and longer administration periods will be needed to assess long-term effects, the results so far obtained are extraordinarily promising. The future introduction of mAbs on the market will probably represent a turning point for prevention similar to that represented by triptans for abortive treatment in migraine.