Calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeting therapies are a first-line option for the prevention of migraine: An American Headache Society position statement update

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) exerts membrane, cellular and synaptic actions on serotonergic dorsal raphe neurons ex vivo: Functional implications for a role in dorsal raphe-controlled functions

Serotonin (5-HT) plays a role in limbic-controlled behaviors and is implicated in migraine, which is often co-morbid with cognitive-based affective disorders. The neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) regulates vascular tone. Serotonin-acting drugs and CGRP receptor antagonists have proved therapeutic in management of migraine. Clinical interactions between the two systems have been shown, however, whether CGRP exerts direct actions on serotonergic Dorsal Raphe (DR) neurons is unknown. To fully understand the role of CGRP in control of behavior and to predict how CGRP targeted therapies (i.e. CGRP receptor antagonists) could alter DR neuronal activity, investigation of whether CGRP can directly affect 5-HT DR activity was conducted. Patch clamp electrophysiology and single photon calcium imaging in DR brain slices revealed that CGRP (10-6 M) elicited postsynaptically mediated, potassium-involved outward currents in the majority of 5-HT DR cells. Miniature excitatory synaptic events were reduced in frequency. Further, intracellular calcium was reduced in the majority of neurons, which did not involve actions on the L-type calcium channel. The CGRP agonist SAX replicated effects on the membrane and intracellular calcium. In contrast, the CGRP receptor antagonist MK-3207 blocked the effects on outward current and attenuated the action of CGRP on reducing intracellular calcium. Despite inhibitory membrane and synaptic effects, no change was noted in firing rate. Our findings raise the intriguing possibility that the CGRP system plays a role in mediating limbic-controlled behaviors, at least in part, through direct actions on serotonergic DR neurons, however the effect of CGRP on DR 5-HT output remains to be investigated.

Chronic Pain Syndromes in Women

Chronic pain syndromes like fibromyalgia, chronic pelvic pain, interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome, and chronic migraine cause significant disability and impair quality of life for many women. Evaluation of chronic pain can be complex because women often have overlapping syndromes as well as comorbid anxiety and depression. Multidisciplinary care including nonpharmacologic treatments like exercise and mindfulness-based therapies as well as pharmacologic medications improve function and decrease pain. With their wide knowledge base, primary care providers are well-equipped to primarily manage chronic pain in their women patients.

Monthly Headaches and Severity in Patients on Galcanezumab or Traditional Preventive Migraine Medication: A 24-Month Claims and Electronic Health Records Study

INTRODUCTION

Migraine, affecting millions globally, imposes a significant burden on patients and healthcare systems. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies are recommended as first-line preventive treatments by international guidelines, yet real-world prospective studies comparing their year-long effectiveness to standard of care (SOC) treatments are time-consuming, resource-intense and therefore limited. This study aimed to test the utility of claims data and electronic health records (EHR) by evaluating changes in monthly headache days (MHDs) and disease severity among US patients with migraine receiving galcanezumab versus traditional standard-of-care preventive migraine medications.

METHODS

A real-world study was conducted using Optum data from US administrative claims and EHR of patients diagnosed with migraine and receiving galcanezumab or SOC. Changes in MHDs over a 24-month follow-up were converted from changes in acute medication using the Pharmacy Quality Alliance (PQA) measure for Migraine Preventive Therapy, and migraine severity was assessed using EHR free text. Data were analyzed using two-sample t-test, chi-square and Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

Of 63,939 patients with eligible claims, 28,264 (44.2%) had notes in EHR; of those, 227 and 65 patients had information for migraine severity and headache days, respectively. Patients receiving galcanezumab showed significant improvement in MHDs compared to the SOC cohort when assessed using PQA measures (mean [SD] change from baseline to follow-up, - 0.18 [4.76] vs 0.15 [3.85]; p < 0.001). A significantly greater proportion of patients treated with galcanezumab exhibited a 50% reduction (25.9% vs 16.7%; p < 0.001) and 75% reduction (15.7% vs 11.6%; p < 0.001) in MHDs than the standard-of-care cohort. Mean change in migraine severity and MHDs was not determined by EHR because of low sample sizes.

CONCLUSION

In this exploration of multiple data sources and methodologies, changes in MHDs over 24 months were small in patients treated with galcanezumab or SOC. While real-world data from administrative claims and EHR provided insights, limitations such as small sample sizes for migraine severity data and challenges in extracting clinical outcomes underscore the need for further research.

Clinical evaluation of zavegepant for the acute treatment of migraine

Zavegepant is the first intranasal calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine and offers a new nonoral option for patients. This article reports the findings of a comprehensive literature review to assess zavegepant's safety and effectiveness. Evidence synthesis involved reporting findings from clinical trials and evaluating comparative effectiveness. This review was prepared by the University of Connecticut School of Pharmacy Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) Student Chapter. The student author group won the AMCP National Pharmacy and Therapeutics competition for their zavegepant product review in March 2024.

Cannabinoids in headache: helpful or harmful?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cannabinoids have gained attention as a potential treatment for headache disorders, including migraine and cluster headache. While some studies suggest cannabinoids may provide analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, concerns remain regarding their potential for overuse headache, cognitive impairment, and psychological dependence. This study critically evaluates the current evidence on cannabinoids in headache treatment, weighing their benefits and risks.

RECENT FINDINGS

With the migraine treatment landscape expanding faster than ever, recent studies explore immune cells as a target for cannabinoids. Immune cells express cannabinoid and CGRP (calcitonin gene-related peptide) receptors. As a result, cannabinoids might potentially modulate the efficacy of current CGRP-targeting drugs. Additionally, emerging studies suggest that cannabinoids may enhance neuronal resilience and mitigate central sensitization in chronic migraine. Research into optimal delivery mechanisms, including inhaled, sublingual, and transdermal formulations, is also expanding.

SUMMARY

Cannabinoids are being studied as a potential treatment for headache disorders, particularly migraine, due to their interaction with the endocannabinoid system, which regulates pain, inflammation, and vascular function. Studies suggest cannabinoids may help reduce headache frequency, alleviate pain, and improve sleep, though concerns remain about dependency, cognitive impairment, and medication overuse headache. While retrospective studies indicate benefits, the lack of standardized dosing, long-term safety data, and controlled trials limits conclusive recommendations. Comparisons with conventional treatments show mixed results, with cannabinoids presenting variable effectiveness and a risk of adverse effects. Further research, including randomized controlled trials, is needed to establish optimal dosing, safety, and efficacy in headache management.

Hispidulin Isolated from the Leaves of Clerodendrum inerme (L.) Gaertn Suppresses Trigeminovascular System Activation in a Rat Model Mimicking Migraine

BACKGROUND

Hispidulin (6-methoxy-4',5,7-trihydroxyflavone) is a flavonoid commonly found in various plant products, including the leaves of Clerodendrum inerme (L.) Gaertn (CI). While there's an abundance of literature describing the therapeutic effect of hispidulin and CI in oncological, immunological, and dermatological models, their effect on neuropsychiatric disorders is also of research interest.

OBJECTIVE

The previous reports on the neuroprotective and GABAA receptor positive modulatory effect of hispidulin may render it as a possible novel candidate as an antimigraine agent.

METHODS

In the present study, we employed the intracisternal instillation of capsaicin in anesthetized rats to induce the activation of trigeminovascular system (TGVS), which mimics the histopathological hallmarks of migraine that include increased neuronal activation in the trigeminal cervical complex (TCC), calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) immunoreactivity in the trigeminal ganglia (TG) and CGRP depletion in the dura mater.

RESULTS

Administration of hispidulin (4, 10, and 50 mg/kg, i.p.) significantly reduced all three TGVS activation parameters induced by i.c. capsaicin. However, pre-treatment of a selective antagonist for α6 subunit-containing GABAA receptor, furosemide (20 mg/kg, i.p.), did not significantly reverse the antimigraine effect of hispidulin.

CONCLUSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on hispidulin's suppressive effect on preclinical model of migraine. Further studies are required to explore the mechanism(s) of the antimigraine effect of hispidulin. However, these findings could potentially guide future clinical studies of hispidulin, with the aim of improving human health.

Genetic migraine disorders and the response to calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist treatment

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a potent cerebral vasodilator and part of the trigeminal migraine cascade. Newer migraine therapies target CGRP signaling for both acute and preventative management of headache. In this series, we present two cases of genetic conditions, of which migraine is a key feature, responsive to CGRP antagonist therapy. A 31-year-old female with mitochondrial encephalopathy with lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes and a phenotype of chronic migraine with visual aura, and a 62-year-old female with cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy with a phenotype of chronic migraine and side-locked headache with cranial autonomic symptoms. Each experienced a significant reduction in the frequency of their migraine attacks with monoclonal antibody treatment against CGRP. In this case series, we add to the growing body of evidence that CGRP-blocking medications are safe and effective in some heritable neurological disorders in which vasomodulation is a common underlying pathology. To our knowledge, we present the first cases of galcanezumab use in an individual with mitochondrial encephalopathy with lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes and eptinezumab in an individual with cerebral autosomal dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy.

Effectiveness and Safety of CGRP-Targeted Therapies Combined with Lifestyle Modifications for Chronic Migraine in Korean Pediatric Patients: A Retrospective Study

Background/Objectives: Pediatric chronic migraine (CM) is a debilitating condition with challenging management due to diagnostic complexities and a lack of evidence-based treatment. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies have transformed adult CM management, but their use in pediatric populations is underexplored. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of CGRP-targeted therapies combined with structured lifestyle modifications in Korean pediatric patients with CM. Methods: This retrospective study examined 10 pediatric CM patients treated at Gangnam Severance Hospital from 2021 to 2024. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) Pediatric Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (PedMIDAS) score ≥ 30, (2) >2 failed preventive therapies, and (3) ≥8 migraine days per month. Patients received CGRP monoclonal antibodies or antagonists, alongside sleep, dietary, and exercise interventions. Changes in migraine burden, neuropsychological outcomes, and adherence to lifestyle interventions were assessed over 12 months. Results: Migraine frequency significantly decreased from a median of 26.5 to 14 days per month (p < 0.001); PedMIDAS scores declined from 58.5 to 48.0 (p = 0.037); and acute analgesic use was reduced from 14 to 5 days per month (p < 0.001). Adherence to lifestyle interventions improved significantly (p < 0.001). No serious adverse events were reported, and minor side effects, such as injection site pain and dizziness, were self-limiting. Conclusions: CGRP-targeted therapies, combined with structured lifestyle modifications, safely and effectively reduce migraine burden in pediatric CM patients. These therapies have facilitated sustainable improvements in management and support their integration into comprehensive pediatric CM care. This study highlights the importance of integrating pharmacologic and lifestyle-based approaches for holistic pediatric migraine management.

[Headache Management in Portugal: Consensus among the Portuguese Headache and Neurology Societies, the Portuguese Association of General and Family Medicine, and MiGRA]

Headaches are a significant cause of global disability, with migraines ranking second of all conditions in terms of years lived with disability. Most headache patients, including those with migraine, can and should be effectively diagnosed, treated, and managed in primary healthcare settings. This approach not only reduces the disability associated with these conditions but also prevents progression to chronic forms or the development of medication overuse. The establishment of an efficient referral network, involving patient associations and healthcare professionals beyond primary care, is essential to ensure adequate support for more complex cases and to promote population health in a timely and effective manner. These guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and referral are the result of a consensus among the Portuguese Headache Society, the Portuguese Society of Neurology, the Portuguese Association of Family Medicine, and MiGRA Portugal, the Portuguese association of migraine and headache patients. This document was designed to empower all physicians to contribute effectively to the management of these conditions.

Digital Step Therapy: A Smart Framework for Payer Adoption of Prescription Digital Therapeutics

As prescription digital therapeutics (PDTs) gain FDA authorization and clinical traction, health insurers and policymakers face a growing imperative to define reimbursement strategies that ensure equitable access while delivering demonstrable value. We propose digital step therapy: a modernized framework in which patients initiate care with evidence-based PDTs before escalating to more intensive or costly interventions. Unlike traditional step therapy, which often enforces rigid fail-first hierarchies, digital step therapy can leverage real-time engagement data, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and modular design features unique to software-based therapeutics. This editorial outlines the rationale, opportunities, risks, and implementation principles for a smart, patient-centered digital step therapy model. It emphasizes the need for clinician override mechanisms, equity-driven usability standards, and regulatory alignment to avoid replicating historical barriers to care. Using CT-132 (Click Therapeutics, Inc., New York, NY, USA) for episodic migraine as an illustrative case, we demonstrate how digital step therapy can deliver a clinically adaptive, data-informed, and payer-aligned approach that promotes early access to safe, scalable interventions, acknowledging implementation barriers, while continuously refining care pathways based on real-world outcomes.

Assessing blood pressure changes and hypertension-related outcomes in patients with migraine treated with erenumab: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES/BACKGROUND

We aimed to systematically review and summarize evidence on the effects of erenumab on systemic blood pressure (BP) in patients with migraine (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews ID: CRD42024571056). US Prescribing Information for erenumab was updated to include the potential risk of hypertension, although randomized trials did not link it previously. The association of this monoclonal antibody with an elevated vascular risk remains uncertain.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane databases were searched up to June 18, 2024 for studies examining the impact of erenumab on BP in patients with migraine. I2 statistics and prediction intervals (PIs) were applied to assess heterogeneity, and sensitivity and subgroup analyses were used to explore it. Data were collected using mean difference (MD) or proportion of events. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

Systolic (MD = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.02 to 2.73, p = 0.370, I2 = 63%) and diastolic (MD = 1.33, 95% CI = -0.05 to 2.72, p = 0.060, I2 = 69%) BP measures did not significantly differ between after and before erenumab treatment. This lack of significant difference persisted at 3 and 12 months. The leave-one-out technique did not change heterogeneity. The proportion of participants presenting worsening BP appears to be 22.04% (95% CI = 11.12-38.98, PI = 0.54-93.60), with 56.40% corresponding to nonhypertensive individuals at baseline. The incidence of patients starting antihypertensive medications during the study was 3.96% (95% CI = 1.30-11.42, PI = 0.02-90.04), of which 62.88% corresponded to nonhypertensive patients at baseline.

CONCLUSION

We did not find an association of erenumab with significant increases in systemic BP. There is a considerable degree of fragility in the current evidence available. The decision to prescribe erenumab, especially for patients with multiple comorbidities and risk factors for hypertension, must be made weighing the risks and benefits. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Fremanezumab for the Treatment of Migraine Complicated by Medication Overuse: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway, such as fremanezumab, are effective for migraine prevention. However, their effectiveness in treating migraine complicated by medication overuse, remains underexplored.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of fremanezumab in adults with migraine complicated by medication overuse.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and Embase (Ovid) databases for studies on fremanezumab, selecting primary studies that included adults with migraine complicated by medication overuse and reported at least one efficacy outcome. The search was performed in January 2024 and then updated in June 2024. Risk of bias for randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool, while real-world studies were evaluated using both the ROBINS-I and ROB-ME tools. Data extraction and analysis followed established guidelines.

RESULTS

Our search identified 176 records, of which 2 clinical trials and 7 real-world studies were included. Included studies recruited a total of 1422 adults with migraine complicated by medication overuse. In post hoc analyses from clinical trials, fremanezumab significantly reduced monthly migraine days, days with acute headache medication use, and Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores compared to placebo during a 12-week period. The real-world studies reported a reduction in monthly headache days at 6 months, and a high reversion rate from medication overuse headache (MOH) after one year of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Both post hoc analyses from clinical trials and real-world studies support fremanezumab benefits in reducing migraine frequency, medication use, and headache-related disability in adults with migraine complicated by medication overuse. Given the limited quality of data, further real-world research with standardized reporting criteria is needed to substantiate long-term benefits and establish optimal treatment protocols.

Transcriptomic analysis of the TRP gene family in human brain physiopathology

The transient receptor potential (TRP) gene family is vital to cellular physiology, mediating ion flow across membranes and facilitating sensory signal transduction. This article examines the transcriptomic landscape of TRP genes, emphasizing their varying expression across organs, tissues, and cells, with a particular focus on the brain. Analysis reveals a distinct spatial distribution of TRP gene expression, notably enriched in the hippocampus during brain development, highlighting their essential role in neuronal function. Utilizing datasets from the Human Protein Atlas, Allen Human Brain Atlas, and studies on aging and dementia, associations are identified between TRP gene expression and the development or pathophysiology of neural tissue, highlighting the therapeutic potential of TRP channels in addressing, e.g., sensory impairments and cognitive decline. These insights into the regulatory dynamics of TRP channels lay a foundation for developing targeted interventions for neurodegenerative disorders.

The burden of migraine in Mexico: a database analysis of migraine-related visits to emergency departments in Mexico's Ministry of Health (MMoH) hospitals

BACKGROUND

The burden of migraine in Mexican Emergency Department (ED) settings remains understudied. This study aimed to determine the frequency of migraine-related ED visits within the ED Mexican Ministry of Health's (MMoH) database and analyze their demographics and treatment patterns.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed MMoH database of ED visits between 2013 and 2022. Visits with migraine diagnosis were selected using ICD-10 codes. Demographic characteristics, geographical location, and time of consultation were described, medication use patterns were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 2013 and 2022, there were 1,022,450 reported ED visits related to primary headache (0.6% of all ED visits), there were 179,618 migraine-related ED visits (19% of all headache visits). Females represented 78% of visits. Visits peaked in 2014 (20,066) and were the lowest in 2019 (8,273). Medication was used in 21% of visits, NSAIDs being the most frequent (15%). Triptan use was low (0.04% of all migraine visits).

CONCLUSION

Our results highlight the significant burden of migraines on Mexico's healthcare system and the importance of considering age and sex in the approach to migraine ED visits. An update in therapeutic strategies for migraine in Mexico is needed to improve patient outcomes.

Effectiveness and tolerability of atogepant in the prevention of migraine: A real life, prospective, multicentric study (the STAR study)

BackgroundFocusing on calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) as a specific target has changed and improved migraine management. After the positive results of monoclonal antibodies directed to the CGRP pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs), randomized controlled trials also demonstrated the efficacy of gepants in migraine prevention. The present study aimed to assess the effectiveness of atogepant in preventing migraine after a 12-week treatment in clinical practice.MethodsAdult patients with a clinical indication for atogepant 60 mg daily were screened for participation in this multicentric prospective observational cohort study. At baseline (T0) and after 12 weeks (T3) since the first atogepant administration, monthly migraine days (MMDs), monthly headache days (MHDs) and monthly acute medications (MAMs) were assessed. The co-primary endpoints were the changes in MMDs from T0 to T3 and the percentage of T3 Responders (those with a reduction of MMDs ≥50%, i.e. 50% response rate (RR)). At T0 and T3, we also collected the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire, the Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire-6 (mTOQ-6), the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MSQ), the 12-item Allodynia Symptom Checklist (ASC-12) and the Migraine Interictal Burden Scale (MIBS-4).ResultsOne hundred and six patients (56/106 (52.8%) with chronic migraine (CM), 93/106 (87.7%) female, aged 50.6 ± 13.2 years) from 10 Italian centers completed the 12-week observation since the first atogepant tablet intake. From baseline to T3, a reduction of 6.9 MMDs (SD 9.7; p < 0.001) was achieved in the whole group and, specifically, of -4.9 (SD 6.6; p < 0.001) in episodic migraine (EM) and of -8.6 (SD 11.7; p < 0.001) in CM patients. Overall, 60/106 (56.6%) of patients were Responders (60.0% in the EM and 46.4% in the CM group). Non-Responders previously experienced more ineffective treatments than Responders with anti-CGRP mAbs (65.2% vs. 43.3%, respectively, p = 0.031) and with onabotulinumtoxinA (56.5% vs. 28.3%, p = 0.005), and presented more medication overuse at baseline (55.7% vs. 44.3%, p = 0.003). However, no baseline characteristics were significantly associated with the Responder status in the multiple regression analysis. For T0 to T3, MAMs, MIDAS, ASC-12 and mTOQ-6 reduced (p ≤ 0.001 consistently), and MSQ role-function restriction increased (p = 0.026), whereas HIT-6 and MIBS-4 did not change. Only seven subjects (7/106, 6.6%) dropped out of atogepant treatment: four for lack of effectiveness and three for adverse events or poor tolerability.ConclusionsThe STAR study demonstrates the effectiveness and tolerability of atogepant 60 mg at 12 weeks in a real-world setting. Previous ineffective anti-CGRP mAbs were not a relevant prognostic factor.Trial RegistrationThe study was preregistered on clinicaltrial.gov, NCT06414044.

Health care resource utilization and direct costs incurred over 12 months by patients with migraine initiating self-injectable calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies: A US real-world study

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) are approved for migraine prevention. Limited information is available comparing the health care resource utilization (HCRU) and direct costs associated with initiating different CGRP mAbs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare all-cause and migraine-related HCRU and direct costs in US patients with migraine initiating the self-injectable CGRP mAbs, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, or erenumab.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from Merative Marketscan Commercial and Medicare Databases. Adults with at least 1 claim (first claim=index) for the above CGRP mAbs between May 2018 and September 2020 (index period), with continuous enrollment for 12 months pre-index (baseline [BL]) and post-index (follow-up [FU]) were included. Patients with a claim for index drug during BL were excluded. Mean HCRU and mean total costs (inpatient, outpatient, and outpatient pharmacy costs) were evaluated over 12 months post-index. Propensity score matching was used to balance the galcanezumab vs fremanezumab (2:1) and galcanezumab vs erenumab (1:1) cohorts. P values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

After matching, patient demographics and clinical characteristics were similar between galcanezumab vs fremanezumab (n=2,674 sets) and galcanezumab vs erenumab (n=3,503 sets) cohorts. Relative to BL, numerically lower all-cause and migraine-related HCRU (inpatient and outpatient visits) were observed in all cohorts over the 12-month post-index period, whereas outpatient pharmacy HCRU was numerically higher. All-cause and migraine-related total costs (mean) were higher over the FU period in all cohorts (all P < 0.001). Mean all-cause and migraine-related cost increases were numerically similar for galcanezumab vs fremanezumab ($503 vs $518 [P=0.825] and $467 vs $468 [P=0.990]), and for galcanezumab vs erenumab ($504 vs $499 [P=0.934] and $462 vs $443 [P=0.375]). Outpatient pharmacy costs contributed greatly to migraine-related costs, whereas all-cause costs were greatly driven by outpatient costs.

CONCLUSIONS

HCRU and direct cost differences observed at 12 months following initiation of self-injectable CGRP mAbs for migraine prevention were numerically similar across cohorts for patients treated with galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and erenumab. More work should be done to learn if these drugs perform differently with respect to other important factors not examined here.

Quickest way to less headache days: an operational research model and its implementation for chronic migraine

OBJECTIVE

Choosing migraine prevention medications often involves trial and error. Operations research methodologies, however, allow us to derive a mathematically optimum way to conduct such trial and error processes.

BACKGROUND

Given probability of success (defined as 50% reduction in headache days) and adverse events as a function of time, we seek to develop and solve an operations research model, applicable to any arbitrary patient, minimizing time until discovery of an effective migraine prevention medication. We then seek to apply our model to real life data for chronic migraine prevention.

METHODS

An operations research model is developed and then solved for the optimum solution, taking into account the likelihood of reaching 50% headache day reduction as a function of time. We then estimate key variables using FORWARD study by Rothrock et al. as well as erenumab data published by Barbanti et al. at International Headache Congress 2019.

RESULTS

The solution for our model is to order the medications in decreasing order by probability of efficacy per unit time. This result can be generalized through calculation of Gittins index. In the case of chronic migraine the optimum sequence of chronic migraine prevention medication is a trial of erenumab for 12 weeks, followed by a trial of onabotulinumtoxinA for 32 weeks, followed by a trial of topiramate for 32 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose an optimal sequence for preventive medication trial for patients with chronic migraine. Since our model makes limited assumptions on the characteristics of disease, it can be readily applied also to episodic migraine, given the appropriate data as input. Indeed, our model can be applied to other scenarios so long as probability of success/adverse event as a function of time can be estimated. As such, we believe our model may have implications beyond our sub-specialty.

Glutamate as a Therapeutic Substrate in Migraine

Recurrent and intense headache is a well appreciated cardinal feature of migraine, a common and incapacitating neurological disorder. Often, there are associated canonical sensory abnormalities, such as light and sound sensitivity, as well as associated nausea. Given this phenotype of disordered sensory processing and, in a third of patients, the phenomenon called aura accompanying migraine attacks, it has been suggested that the pathophysiology of migraine is likely to involve glutamate, the main excitatory neurotransmitter in the central nervous system (CNS). Glutamate plays a role in nociception, central sensitization, and cortical spreading depression (CSD), three processes that are deemed important in migraine biology. With an emphasis on the therapeutic potential of targeting various glutamate receptors in migraine, this review will discuss the currently available literature and emerging findings on the role of targeting glutamatergic pathways for the treatment of migraine. A thorough literature review was carried out on the functions of both metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs), and the ionotropic glutamate receptors (NMDA, AMPA, and kainate) in migraine pathogenesis. The ever-present need for new treatments, the role of glutamate in the migraine aura phenomenon, and the consequences of monogenic migraine mutations on mediating prolonged, complex, or permanent aura are all discussed, culminating in a suggestion that glutamatergic targeting may hold particular promise in the management of migraine aura. There are plausible roles for metabotropic receptors in regulating pain processing in important migraine-related brain structures, like the thalamus and trigeminal nucleus. Similarly, ionotropic receptors contribute to excitatory neurotransmission and neuronal hyperexcitability. Recent studies have shown preclinical and early clinical results for treatments targeting these receptors, but there are still significant issues with treatment response, including drug transport, side effects, and efficacy. With ongoing and emerging discoveries in the field, there is increasing promise of new migraine medications targeting glutamate receptors. For bench to bedside translation in this area, continued study of the molecular basis of migraine, receptor subtypes, and exploration of potential drug delivery methods are needed.

Highly Sensitive Assays for detection of headache inducing neuropeptides, Pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) and Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)

Background

Migraine is one of the most disabling diseases that continues to pose a significant societal burden. Although there are now treatment options for people with migraine, it remains challenging to identify them as clinical features are diverse and complex, and there are no validated diagnostic or treatment prediction biomarkers. Identification is based on either diagnostic coding or the use of certain acute headache abortive treatments. However, socioeconomic disparities can contribute to under-diagnosis and under-treatment of migraine. Thus, efforts to find biomarkers to identify individuals with migraine and which variables could explain migraine-related chronification and disability are warranted. We aimed to investigate the levels of migraine inducing neuropeptides; calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) in peripheral blood samples as potential biomarkers of migraine.

Methods

We developed highly sensitive assays for CGRP and PACAP on the MSD S-PLEX assay platform and used them for bioanalysis of preclinical and clinical samples. Wildtype and neuropeptide challenged mice and rats were profiled using the developed assay. To follow-up, commercially obtained plasma samples from healthy controls and migraineurs were initially profiled. Subsequently, we profiled plasma samples from people with migraine (during and after a headache attack and healthy controls. Both MSD S-PLEX assays were transferred to Celerion where they were validated for analysis of clinical samples.

Results

Using the highly sensitive PACAP assay, we were able to reliably measure circulating levels of endogenous and administrated PACAP38in mouse and rat plasma. Additionally, using the highly sensitive CGRP assay, we were able to reliably measure circulating levels of endogenous and administrated CGRP in mouse and rat plasma. Furthermore, in the initial human samples, circulating CGRP and PACAP levels were not significantly different in healthy controls compared to people with migraine patients. However, ≥50% people with migraine showed increased circulating CGRP and PACAP levels during their attack period compared to post attack. Overall, people with migraine showed a 3 - 396% increase in one or both neuropeptides during their attack period compared to post attack. Circulating plasma CGRP and PACAP levels in healthy control subjects were consistent with previously measured levels.

Conclusion

Our highly sensitive PACAP and CGRP assays were successful in measuring circulating levels of endogenous PACAP38 and CGRP in mouse and rat plasma. Our highly sensitive PACAP and CGRP assays were qualified for measurement of human CGRP and PACAP in healthy control and migraine samples. Plasma CGRP and PACAP levels are elevated in migraineurs during an attack period, and the increased plasma neuropeptide levels during an attack may help the differentiation of migraineurs from non-Migraineurs, or amongst people with migraines to help identify the best treatment for each patient.

Effectiveness and safety of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies for migraine in patients over 65 years: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Migraine patients over 65 years have been excluded from pivotal anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody trials leaving limited real-life data on effectiveness and safety in this population. This review aims to summarize available evidence on treatment response and safety for older patients.

METHODS

A PubMed and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) search identified studies on anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients with migraine over 65 up to October 2024. The review focuses on headache outcomes like reduction in monthly migraine days or monthly headache days, response rates (30%, 50%, 75%) and adverse effects of this specific population and/or against placebo, standard care, or younger patients. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool.

RESULTS

All eligible studies were included, along with additional articles presented narratively. Data from clinical trials and post-hoc analyses show comparable efficacy and safety between older and younger patients. Similarly, early real-life studies support the use of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients over 65 years, showing similar response rates, reductions in monthly migraine days and adverse effects.

DISCUSSION

Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies should likely be offered to patients over 65 although available evidence remains limited. Further studies analyzing specific data from this subgroup are necessary.

Headache Care

Primary headache disorders are common within the pediatric population and often lead to disruption in multiple areas of life. It is important to systematically approach patients presenting for the evaluation of headaches to determine if the symptoms originate from a primary or secondary headache disorder. Once a diagnosis is established, patients should be offered treatment to adequately address the headache disorder. Over the last 6 years, multiple new treatment options have emerged, with growing selections available for children and adolescents. In this review, we discuss the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment approach to primary headache disorders.

Evidence-based review and frontiers of migraine therapy

BACKGROUND

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is identified as one of the "episodic syndromes that may be associated with migraine," along with benign paroxysmal torticollis, benign paroxysmal vertigo, and abdominal migraine. It has been proposed that CVS and migraine may share pathophysiologic mechanisms of hypothalamic activation and altered dopaminergic signaling, and impaired sensorimotor intrinsic connectivity. The past decade has brought groundbreaking advances in the treatment of migraine and other headache disorders. While many of these therapies have yet to be studied in episodic syndromes associated with migraine including CVS and abdominal migraine, the potential shared pathophysiology among these conditions suggests that use of migraine-specific treatments may have a beneficial role even in those for whom headache is not the primary symptom.

PURPOSE

This manuscript highlights newer therapies in migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and its relation to migraine pathophysiology and the therapies that target the CGRP pathway, as well as a 5HT1F receptor agonist and neuromodulation devices used to treat migraine are briefly discussed as they may potentially prove to be useful in the future treatment of CVS.

Network meta-analysis comparing efficacy of different strategies on medication-overuse headache

BACKGROUND

Medication-overuse headache (MOH) is the most common secondary headache disorder, resulting from or leading to the frequent use of acute headache medications. Despite the availability of various treatment strategies, the optimal approach remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy of different strategies for managing MOH, focusing on reducing monthly headache days.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing withdrawal strategies, including bridging therapies, the use of concurrent migraine prevention drugs, and additional education, in adult patients diagnosed with MOH. The primary outcome was the reduction in monthly headache days. Eligible studies were analyzed using a random-effects NMA model, integrating both direct and indirect evidence. Treatments were ranked using p-scores, and risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2.0.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs involving 3,000 participants were included. Compared to control, combination therapies, such as abrupt withdrawal with oral prevention and greater occipital nerve block and restriction of overused acute medication with oral prevention and Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) therapies, demonstrated the greatest efficacy, with reductions in monthly headache days of -10.6 (95% CI: [-15.03; -6.16]) and -8.47 (95% CI: [-12.78; -4.15]), respectively. Headache prevention strategies, including oral prevention (P), anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (receptor) (CGRP(R)) therapies (A), and botulinum toxin (B) showed significant in reduction of monthly headache days, but no single initial prevention strategy demonstrates superior efficacy over the others. In contrast, abrupt withdrawal alone (W) showed no significant efficacy, with a mean difference of -2.77 (95% CI: [-5.74; 0.20]).

CONCLUSION

Combination therapies, including anti-CGRP(R) therapies and nerve blocks, appear to be the most effective strategies for MOH management, highlighting their potential as initial treatment options. While headache prevention strategies demonstrated similar efficacy, abrupt withdrawal alone was insufficient. The observed reduction in headache frequency after treatment suggests that strategies with greater efficacy may help lower the likelihood of MOH relapse.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD 42024620487.

Review: An Update on CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies for the Preventive Treatment of Episodic Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

CGRP targeting therapies have revolutionized the migraine preventive space, introducing novel migraine-specific therapies to improve headache care. Four monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are approved for use in prevention of episodic migraines. Erenumab (AMG334), fremanezumab (TEV48125), and galcanezumab (LY2951742) are monthly subcutaneous injections, while eptinezumab (ALD403) provides an intravenous infusion option. This review aims to examine the clinical evidence for the safety and efficacy of CGRP-targeted mAbs in the prevention of episodic migraines with a focus on recent studies (2023-2024).

RECENT FINDINGS

Long-term studies reveal ongoing safety and efficacy in recent literature for all 4 monoclonal antibodies. These investigations have built evidence for earlier access to CGRP treatment as they increase quality of life and reduce monthly migraine days while being better tolerated than non-specific migraine preventative therapies. These studies support the recent 2024 AHS consensus statement recommending CGRP monoclonal antibodies be considered as first-line preventive treatment in episodic migraine.

Health Technology Assessment: Evaluation of 8 CGRP-Targeted Therapy Drugs for the Treatment of Migraine

Purpose

In order to scientifically evaluate the clinical value of the comprehensive attributes of Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitor drugs, a comprehensive literature-based clinical evaluation of CGRP-targeted therapy drugs was conducted using the drug evaluation method modified by expert discussion in the Rapid Guide for Drug Evaluation and Selection in Chinese Medical Institutions (Second Edition).

Methods

Based on evidence-based data and the relevant elements and weighting in the "Selection Guidelines" quantification record form for drug evaluation and selection in medical institutions, adjustments were made according to the characteristics of CGRP-targeted therapy drugs. We systematically evaluated erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, eptinezumab, rimegepant, ubrogepant, atogepant, zavegepant for safety, efficacy, economy, and pharmacological properties.

Results

The final assessment result scores from highest to lowest were rimegepant (84.5 points), erenumab (75.78 points), galcanezumab (74.02 points), fremanezumab (73.93 points), atogepant (72.64 points), eptinezumab (71.69 points), ubrogepant (70.37 points), zavegepant (56.44 points).

Conclusion

Rimegepant, erenumab, fremanezumab, atogepant, galcanezumab, eptinezumab, ubrogepant can be entered into the medication list of medical institutions as strongly recommended drugs.

Real-World Lessons with Fremanezumab as the Third Available CGRP Monoclonal Antibody in a Third-Level Hospital: Focus on the Factors Predicting Response

Background: Fremanezumab was the third CGRP antibody available in our hospital. This examination of our experience with fremanezumab is focused on identifying the predictors of response. Methods: This was a prospective observational study in which we included high-frequency episodic/chronic migraine (HF/CM) patients who were prescribed fremanezumab during the year 2023. Our research involved collecting data on their demographic details, diagnoses made, treatments received, prophylactic measures taken in the past, and any comorbid conditions present. The number of headaches was documented for one quarter prior to and after the initiation of fremanezumab. Results: Eighty-nine patients received fremanezumab (86.5% female, 45.8 ± 12.5 years old, 70.1% naive). The headache days decreased from 21.1 ± 7.6 to 12.4 ± 11.2 days during the initial three months of the treatment, and a total of 55 patients (61.8%) exhibited a response rate of ≥50%. Six out of ten patients refractory to erenumab for at least 6 months responded to fremanezumab. Totals of 17 and 26 patients had been treated at least with galcanezumab or erenumab. The elements influencing non-response were as follows: prior failure to respond to both erenumab and galcanezumab (p < 0.0001), HF/CM length (11.9 ± 7.1 years in non-responders vs. 5.8 ± 4.8 in responders; p < 0.001), the presence of fibromyalgia (p < 0.001), anxiety-depression (p < 0.001), an almost daily headache baseline (>28 days/month) (p < 0.0001), and analgesic overuse (p < 0.0001). The response rate was unaffected by age and experience. After a multivariate logistic analysis, almost daily headaches (p < 0.001), a length of HF/CM > 6 years (p = 0.015), and anxiety-depression (p = 0.017) remained significant. Fremanezumab showed excellent tolerance. Conclusions: These real-life results confirm the efficacy of fremanezumab. The main factors associated with a lack of response were almost daily/daily headaches and a disease duration > 6 years. Half of the patients who failed to respond to erenumab improved on fremanezumab, making it sensible to switch to a treatment with a different mechanism of action, but trying a third anti-CGRP treatment in patients with no response to both a receptor-targeted and a ligand-targeted CGRP antibody hardly seems justifiable from our experience.

Switching between anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

When a first anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody (anti-CGRP mAb) fails, switching to a different anti-CGRP mAb is an option often considered, despite the fact that this approach is not yet systemically studied.

METHODS

We present the findings of a systematic review conducted according to the PRISMA recommendations on published studies - of any design - investigating the clinical outcomes after switching for any reason to different anti-CGRP mAbs.

RESULTS

The literature search retrieved 76 records, while 19 papers were eventually reviewed. Most studies were retrospective and/or had a small sample size. A significant proportion of participants experienced an improved treatment response after switching between different anti-CGRP mAbs. Specifically, according to prospective studies' results, the median MMDs were reduced by 12.8 days after 6 months of switching, while up to 48% of episodic and 36% of the chronic migraine patients achieved a >50% response rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching between different anti-CGRP mAbs may be beneficial, at least for some patients, and should be considered when therapy with a first anti-CGRP mAb fails for any reason. Larger prospective studies, employing standardized protocols for switching or comparative effectiveness trials between mAbs, are anticipated to elucidate this issue further.

Shift from chronic to episodic migraine frequency in a long-term phase 3 study of galcanezumab

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) is a highly disabling form of migraine in which patients have ≥ 15 headache days per month, of which at least 8 have the features of migraine. Galcanezumab is a monoclonal antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide which is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. Ability to convert patients from chronic migraine frequency to episodic migraine (EM) frequency is a clinically relevant and desirable outcome when prescribing preventive treatments to patients with CM.

METHODS

Patients aged 18-65 years with an ICHD-3β diagnosis of CM were randomized 2:1:1 to receive monthly injections of placebo (N = 558), galcanezumab 120 mg with a 240-mg loading dose (N = 278), or galcanezumab 240 mg (N = 277) during a 3-month double-blind period of the phase 3 REGAIN trial. Patients could subsequently enter a 9-month open-label extension in which they received galcanezumab 120 mg or 240 mg/month per investigator's discretion. In this post-hoc analysis, we assessed the percentages of patients who shifted to EM (< 8 migraine headache days or < 15 headache days/month), low frequency EM (LFEM; <8 migraine headache days/month), and very low frequency EM (VLFEM; <4 migraine headache days/month) for at least 3 consecutive months. Double-blind percentage comparisons versus placebo represent modeled estimates from raw rates.

RESULTS

At baseline, patients had a mean of 19.4 migraine headache days per month (SD = 4.5) and 21.4 headache days per month (SD = 4.1). During the 3-month double-blind treatment period, a greater percentage of galcanezumab-treated patients shifted to EM frequency and maintained it across all 3 months (31.5%) than did placebo-treated patients (19.8%, p < 0.001). Among galcanezumab-treated patients across the entire 12-month trial, 65.1% shifted from CM to EM frequency, with 44.2% shifting to LFEM and 21.5% shifting to VLFEM for ≥ 3 consecutive months. Proportions of patients shifting from CM to EM frequency for ≥ 3 consecutive months and until last patient visit were: 55.0% to EM; 33.4% to LFEM; 13.9% to VLFEM.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that galcanezumab helped a majority of patients convert from chronic to episodic migraine frequency over the course of this 12-month study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02614261, first registered November 25, 2015.

Healthcare Utilization, Costs, and Treatment Discontinuation in Adults with Episodic Migraine Initiating Galcanezumab Versus Rimegepant: A US Retrospective Claims Analysis

INTRODUCTION

To date, no study has compared the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and discontinuation of the two calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, galcanezumab (monoclonal antibody subcutaneously injected monthly) and rimegepant (oral gepant taken every other day), for migraine prevention. This study aimed to assess all-cause and migraine-related HCRU, costs, and treatment discontinuation at 12 months following treatment initiation in commercial/Medicare beneficiaries with episodic migraine who received galcanezumab versus rimegepant as preventive migraine treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective study used the Merative™ MarketScan® Research Databases (June 2020-June 2023). Adults with episodic migraine were grouped into the galcanezumab (≥ 1 claim) or rimegepant cohort (≥ 1 claim with quantity ≥ 15 during the index period). Changes from baseline in all-cause and migraine-related HCRU and cost between the propensity score-matched cohorts were determined using Wilcoxon signed rank test and chi-square test. Treatment discontinuation was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

All-cause and migraine-related HCRU and costs increased over the 12-month follow-up in both cohorts. The galcanezumab cohort had a significantly lower increase in mean all-cause total medical + pharmacy costs (21% lower) and migraine-related total medical + pharmacy costs (76% lower) than the rimegepant cohort at the 12-month follow-up (p < 0.0001 for both assessments). Mean (standard deviation) number of days from initiation to discontinuation (> 60-day gap) was 244.6 (135.3) for galcanezumab cohort and 178.1 (141.1) for rimegepant cohort (p < 0.0001). Treatment discontinuation rate was 1.8 times less likely in the galcanezumab cohort than the rimegepant cohort (hazard ratio = 1.81, 95% confidence interval = 1.56-2.10). Similar trends were observed using a 30-day gap.

CONCLUSION

Among matched patients, both cohorts of patients with episodic migraine showed all-cause and migraine-related total cost increases over 12 months. However, the magnitude of the increases was significantly lower for the galcanezumab cohort than for the rimegepant cohort. Treatment discontinuation rate was significantly lower in the galcanezumab versus the rimegepant cohort.

Prevalence, Treatment, and Unmet Needs of Migraine in the Middle East: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a debilitating neurological disorder characterized by recurrent throbbing, moderate-to-severe headaches that disrupt daily chores, leisure, and social activities of patients, impacting their overall quality of life (QoL). Despite the high disease burden, there is a scarcity of data on migraines within the Middle East (ME) region. Thus, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to examine epidemiological data, treatment patterns, QoL, and unmet needs regarding migraines in the ME region.

METHODS

Electronic searches were carried out using the MEDLINE® and Embase® databases via the OvidSP® platform for articles published prior to April 2024. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for the selection of studies were based on the Patients, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, and Study design framework, which identified 42 studies.

RESULTS

The prevalence of migraines reported from the region ranged between 2.6 and 32%, and the average age of patients with migraines reported in these studies ranged from 27 to 37.5 years. The data indicated a gender disparity in migraine prevalence, with women exhibiting a 2- to 2.5-fold higher prevalence. Common comorbidities reported were depression, anxiety, and irritable bowel disease. Migraines significantly impact patients' physical and emotional well-being, leading to disabilities and loss of productivity. The most common triggers of migraines were sleep disorders, dietary habits, and stress. The current treatment landscape for acute migraines encompasses anti-inflammatory agents, analgesics, triptans, ditans, calcitonin-gene-related peptides, and antiemetics. However, migraines in the region are often underestimated, underreported, and undertreated. Several unmet needs persist in the region, including delayed referral along with delayed diagnosis, misdiagnosis, poor treatment adherence, limited accessibility to treatments, and a lack of awareness among health care providers and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The SLR highlights knowledge gaps in clinical aspects and the treatment of migraines and enables clinicians to make informed decisions to ensure optimal patient outcomes in diverse clinical settings.

One-Year Compliance After Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Migraine Patients in a Real-World Setting: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) are a breakthrough migraine treatment, but long-term compliance under limited public insurance coverage has not been well known. This study explores one-year treatment patterns and outcomes of CGRP mAbs using real-world data. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included migraine patients treated with CGRP monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) from July 2022 to June 2023. Treatment discontinuation was defined as a gap of over 60 days between injections. Among patients with 12 months of follow-up, adherence was measured using the Proportion of Days Covered (PDC), calculated as the ratio of days covered to the follow-up duration, with PDC ≥ 80% indicating good adherence. Efficacy was also assessed, defined as a ≥50% reduction in monthly headache days and acute medication use. Results: The study included 140 patients (mean age 44.6 ± 12.1 years; 82.9% female). Migraine without aura was predominant (93.6%), and 65.0% had chronic migraine. CGRP mAbs discontinuation occurred in 71.4% of patients, primarily due to headache improvement (22.9%) or lack of efficacy (15.0%). Among 81 patients with 12 months of follow-up, good adherence was observed in 40.7% of patients. Among these patients, 60.6% achieved a ≥50% reduction in monthly headache days, and 51.9% showed a ≥50% reduction in monthly acute medication use. Conclusions: More than two-thirds of patients discontinued the CGRP mAb within 1 year, so these findings emphasize the need for strategies to improve adherence and optimize follow-up plans to enhance patient support.

Medication underuse in real-life practice: the impact of galcanezumab towards achieving very low frequency episodic migraine in a southeast Asian middle-income nation

BACKGROUND

Migraine progression, particularly from episodic to chronic migraine (CM), increases disease burden and healthcare costs. Understanding the new concept of "Medication Underuse Headache" should encourage the health care provider to consider early intervention with calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies. Galcanezumab given early in the course of the disease, may prevent migraine chronification and have a robust response, moreso than when initiated in later stages of migraine. We aimed to determine the efficacy of galcanezumab in achieving very low-frequency episodic migraine (VLFEM) among patients with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and CM in a real world-setting in Thailand.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective real-world, cohort study was conducted between 2023 and 2024. Adults aged 18 years or more who were diagnosed with HFEM or CM were included in this trial and categorized into two groups: galcanezumab and oral migraine preventive medication (OMPM). In the galcanezumab group, oral preventive medications were slowly tapered off within 3 months. The primary outcome was the differences in percentage of patients achieving VLFEM at months 3 and 6 between the two groups. Secondary outcomes included the differences in migraine class improvement, sustained response, and headache day reduction.

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients (31 in each group) were included: median age was 36.5 (IQR: 29.0-48.0) and 82% were female. There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic features between the two groups. The cumulative incidence of patients achieving VLFEM was significantly higher among the galcanezumab group compared to OMPM group (45.2% vs. 19.4% at month 3 and 52.9% vs. 32.4% at month 6, p = 0.03). After 6 months of follow-up, patients with HFEM who received galcanezumab were significantly more likely to achieve any improvements in migraine class compared to those who received OMPM (92.9% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.01). Among 15 patients who achieved VLFEM at month 3, 81.8% (9/11) of those who received galcanezumab and 50.0% (2/4) of those who received OMPM were able to sustain VLFEM at month 6.

CONCLUSIONS

This study emphasizes the benefit of early anti-CGRP therapy initiation, especially in patients with fewer headache days, and highlights the need for accessible migraine-specific treatments in low- to middle-income countries.

Impact of duration of chronic migraine on long-term effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway-A real-world study

OBJECTIVE

We assessed whether the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway changes according to the duration of chronic migraine (CM) over 12 months.

BACKGROUND

In most patients, CM is a progressive disease starting with episodic migraine. Longer CM duration might be associated with more difficult treatment, probably because the mechanisms underlying chronicization are strengthened. Therefore, early treatment of CM could lead to better outcomes compared with later treatment.

METHODS

This cohort study included individuals with CM treated with anti-CGRP mAbs in two tertiary headache centers from April 2019 to May 2023. The primary outcome included a change in monthly migraine days (MMDs) from baseline to the third trimester of treatment, 10-12 months. Secondary outcomes established whether response to anti-CGRP mAbs has a more rapid onset in individuals with shorter CM duration compared with longer duration; they included change in MMDs, monthly headache days (MHDs), and days and number of intakes of acute medication during each trimester compared to baseline. Additional outcomes included persisting MMDs, MHDs, and days and number of intakes of acute medication during each trimester of treatment. Patients were compared across tertiles of the overall CM duration.

RESULTS

The study included 335 individuals with CM, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 48 (39-57) years; 270 (80.6%) were women. Patients in the highest tertile of CM duration (aged 18-60 years) were older than patients in the lower duration tertiles (0-7 years and 8-18 years, respectively), with a median (IQR) age of 56 (48-64) years compared with 42 (31-50) years, and 48 (39-56)years, respectively (p = 0.025); however, this difference was likely due to a correlation between age and disease duration. The change in MMDs from baseline to the last trimester of treatment (10-12 months) was comparable across tertiles of CM duration (median [IQR] -12 [-18 to -5] days, -12 [-17 to -6] days, and -12 [-18 to -4] days; p = 0.946). No difference emerged in secondary outcomes, suggesting a similar time to onset of anti-CGRP mAbs effect across all tertiles of CM duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data showed that anti-CGRP mAbs are effective and have a rapid onset of action in CM regardless of disease duration.

Impact of CGRP monoclonal antibody treatment on blood pressure in patients with migraine: A systematic review and potential clinical implications

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or the CGRP-receptor have revolutionized the prevention of migraine. Despite their effectiveness, worries have surfaced regarding potential unwanted cardiovascular effects linked to the vasodilation function of CGRP, suggesting a potential influence on blood pressure (BP).

METHODS

Studies were systematically retrieved from PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 1 May 2024. We focused on randomized controlled trials and observational cohort or case-control studies examining the impact of anti-CGRP(R)-monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) compared to control treatments on BP in patients with migraine. Two reviewers independently conducted study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 693 articles. After removing duplicates and conducting screening, 22 full-text articles were evaluated, with only four studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Among these, only one study had a low risk of bias and reported elevated BP following initiation of anti-CGRP(R)-mAb treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Although anti-CGRP(R)-mAbs offer substantial benefits for migraine prevention, the potential risk of increased BP requires attention. Despite the current limited evidence, clinicians are urged to monitor BP of migraine patients undergoing treatment with anti-CGRP(R)-mAbs and to remain aware of the increased risk of cardiovascular events in these patients.

Scoping Review: The Effects of Interrupted Onabotulinumtoxin A Treatment for Chronic Migraine Prevention During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective

To systematically examine the literature on the clinical consequences of inadvertent delays in scheduled onabotulinumtoxin A (OTA) therapy for chronic migraine during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess recommendations when access to OTA is limited.

Background

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic was unprecedented in its impact on the global medical community. Most healthcare institutions in the United States (US) and the world had begun significantly limiting elective procedures, undermining management of many debilitating chronic conditions. OTA injections, were similarly involuntarily postponed, leading to significant setbacks in symptom control.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted on databases of Medline and Embase with search timeframe defined as the point of database inception to March 1st, 2024, and the search was performed on March 2nd, 2024. The search strategy was independently formulated by two authors (QR and CR) and was reviewed and approved by all authors of the article after appropriate amendments.

Results

A total of nine articles met the defined inclusion criteria. They collectively demonstrated marked delays in OTA treatment with decline in migraine symptom control measured in the form of migraine intensity, frequency, as well as patient satisfaction in disease management. Quality of care in the form of follow-ups also appeared compromised. Alternative strategies of telemedicine and the administration of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAb) were adopted in place of conventional treatment.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic had caused marked clinical deterioration in the migraine patient populations across US, Europe, and the Middle East. Strategies employed to circumvent this limitation included the adoption of remote consultation via telemedicine as well as the use of pharmacological agents such as CGRP antagonists. In the event of a reoccurrence of a worldwide pandemic, strategies should be implemented to prevent the cessation of needed treatment for those suffering from chronic migraine.

Patient-reported outcomes related to migraine burden among patients treated with standard-of-care preventive medications or calcitonin gene-related monoclonal antibodies: a United States and Europe cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate quality of life, migraine disability, and work productivity and activity impairment in patients with migraine who received preventive treatment by comparing standard of care preventive medications and calcitonin gene-related monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs), including galcanezumab alone.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study conducted across the United States (US) and Europe used data from the Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme. Physicians completed record forms for consecutive patients, who then completed self-report forms assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as quality of life, migraine disability, and work productivity and activity impairment. T-tests, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test were used for analysis.

RESULTS

From May 2022 to June 2023, 557 physicians submitted data for 6723 patients. A total of 4036 patients (US 956; Europe 3080) with a history of preventive treatment were included (>60% female, >80% White, mean [standard deviation] age range, 38.7 [12.8] to 46.3 [12.1]). Patients who received 3+ lines of preventive therapy and were receiving CGRP mAbs (including galcanezumab alone) had enhanced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared to those who received standard of care. Similar findings were observed across Europe; however, in the US, there was no significant difference in any PROs.

CONCLUSION

Patients with migraine in the overall population and Europe who received 3+ lines of preventive migraine therapy and were receiving CGRP mAbs/galcanezumab demonstrated enhanced HRQoL compared to those who received standard of care.

Effect of preventive treatment with atogepant on quality of life, daily functioning, and headache impact across the spectrum of migraine: Findings from three double-blind, randomized, phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND

We aimed to assess the effects of preventive migraine treatment with atogepant vs. placebo on patient-reported quality of life and functioning.

METHODS

Analyses of patient-reported outcomes from three 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trials evaluating preventive migraine treatment with atogepant 60 mg once-daily: ADVANCE (low-frequency episodic migraine [LFEM], 4-8 monthly migraine days [MMDs] and high-frequency episodic migraine [HFEM], 8-14 MMDs), PROGRESS (chronic migraine, CM) and ELEVATE (episodic migraine in those previously failed by two to four classes of oral preventive treatments).

RESULTS

Least squares mean differences (95% confidence interval (CI)) in change from baseline were greater (p < 0.05) for atogepant vs. placebo for Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire Role Function-Restrictive domain scores at week 12 (ADVANCE: LFEM 12.0 (95% CI = 6.0-18.0), HFEM 9.9 (95% CI = 3.4-16.4); PROGRESS: 6.2 (95% CI = 2.5-9.8); ELEVATE: 17.7 (95% CI = 13.1-22.3)), for Headache Impact Test-6 total scores at week 12 (ADVANCE: LFEM -4.7 (95% CI = -6.7 to -2.7); HFEM -3.4 (95% CI = -5.5 to -1.2); PROGRESS: -2.8 (95% CI = -4.1 to -1.4); ELEVATE: -6.5 (95% CI = -8.3 to -4.7)) and for Activity Impairment in Migraine-Diary-Performance of Daily Activities scores across 12 weeks (ADVANCE: LFEM -2.3 (95% CI = -3.9 to -0.7), HFEM -4.5 (95% CI = -6.9 to -2.2); PROGRESS: -3.4 (95% CI = -5.3 to -1.5); ELEVATE: -4.7 (95% CI = -6.4 to -3.1)).

CONCLUSIONS

Preventive migraine treatment with atogepant 60 mg once-daily vs. placebo improved measures of migraine-related quality of life and functioning among participants with different headache frequencies and histories of previous treatment failure.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03777059 (ADVANCE); NCT03855137 (PROGRESS); NCT04740827 (ELEVATE).

A Discrete-Choice Experiment Assessing the Patient Preferences and Real-World Experiences of Patients with Migraine in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a debilitating headache disorder with a high prevalence in Japan that imposes significant societal burden. Although the Japanese Clinical Practice Guideline for Headache Disorders 2021 recommends both acute and preventive migraine treatments, the usage of preventive treatments is still limited. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the treatment preferences of patients with migraine pertaining to both acute and preventive treatments.

METHODS

A mixed-methods study including a discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted with Japanese patients with migraine (10 for the qualitative interviews, and 400 for the DCE) who were recruited from the Rakuten Insight panel. The DCE presented hypothetical treatment options including oral acute, oral preventive, and injectable preventive medications. Six attributes (method of delivery, reduction of pain, impact of headaches on daily routines, dosage adjustability, and temporary and persistent side effects) each with three levels were included in the survey. A hierarchical Bayesian model was used to estimate relative attribute importance scores (RAI) for all attributes.

RESULTS

For the 400 participants in the DCE, the most common age bracket was 40-49 years old, and the majority were female (66.75%). RAI estimates indicated that "method of delivery" was the most important attribute for patients (RAI 51.92, SD = 10.20), followed by "reduction of pain when experiencing a headache" (RAI 17.00, SD = 7.74). Oral preventive treatments were preferred over injectable preventive treatments. The qualitative interviews showed that patients prefer oral medications to injectable treatments, and a lack of awareness regarding preventive treatments.

CONCLUSION

This study found that the "method of delivery" was the most important driver of treatment preferences of patients with migraine in Japan, with oral acute medications being preferred. Oral preventive treatments were found to be preferred over injectable treatments. These results may indicate the need for increased education regarding preventive treatments, as well as the need for further development of these treatments.

Migraine treatment: Position paper of the French Headache Society

The French migraine management recommendations were published in 2021. However, in the last three years, new data have come to light and new drugs have been approved (eptinezumab, rimegepant and atogepant) by the European Medicines Agency that require us to take a position on their use and to update certain elements of the recommendations. The first important message concerns the position of the French Headache Society on the use of preventive treatments (monoclonal antibodies and gepants) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway. In terms of efficacy and safety, and as suggested by other national headache societies, these treatments can be offered as first-line treatment, although the scope defined by the French national health authority for possible reimbursement is limited to patients with severe migraine, at least eight headache days per month and for whom two previous preventive treatments have failed. Another important change concerns the position of topiramate as a preventive treatment for migraine in women of childbearing age. This treatment has been proposed as a first-line treatment for chronic migraine. However, recent pharmacovigilance data have highlighted a potential adverse effect on neurodevelopment in children exposed in utero. As a result, this treatment is formally contraindicated during pregnancy and must be used with extreme caution in women of childbearing age (effective contraception, no therapeutic alternative available and annual follow-up as with valproate). It can therefore no longer be offered as first-line treatment for women of childbearing age.

Rimegepant for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a narrative review of the evidence

INTRODUCTION

Rimegepant is an oral small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved in several countries for acute treatment of migraine and preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. This review summarizes the evidence, published to date, for the use of rimegepant as an acute or preventive treatment of migraine.

AREAS COVERED

A brief overview of migraine, the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant, and the mechanism of action of rimegepant are provided. Evidence evaluating rimegepant as an acute or preventive treatment of migraine is then summarized in more detail, based on a literature search for full-length publications related to clinical or real-world use of rimegepant.

EXPERT OPINION

Several clinical trials established rimegepant as a safe and effective treatment (acute and preventive) of migraine in adults. There are few head-to-head studies with other migraine treatments to determine relative efficacy. However, the favorable safety profile of rimegepant makes it appropriate for many patients, particularly those with contraindication, intolerance, or inadequate response to other classes of standard-of-care migraine treatments. Additional studies on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness relative to other treatments may further define the role of rimegepant in migraine treatment.

Patients' Experiences During the Long Journey Before Initiating Migraine Prevention with a Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Monoclonal Antibody (mAb)

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is under-diagnosed and under-treated. Many people with migraine do not seek medical care, and those who do may initially receive a different diagnosis and/or be dissatisfied with provided care on their journey before treatment with a CGRP-mAb (calcitonin-gene-related-peptide monoclonal antibody).

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional, self-reported, online survey of subjects in Lilly's Emgality® Patient Support Program in 2022. Questionnaires collected insights into subjects' prior experiences with migraine and interactions with healthcare professionals before receiving CGRP-mAbs.

RESULTS

Of the 250 participants with episodic and 250 with chronic migraine, 90% were female and white with a mean age of 26.2 years (± 11.9) at diagnosis and 40.6 (± 12.0) years at survey enrollment. Many participants (71%) suspected they had migraine before diagnosis, with 31% reluctant to seek help. Of these, approximately one-third were unaware of treatment, did not think that a physician could do anything more for migraine, would not take them seriously, or were reluctant due to a previous unhelpful experience. Participants mainly received information from friends/family (47%) or the internet (28%). Participants initially sought treatment due to an increase in migraine frequency (77%), attacks interfering with work or school (75%), or increased pain intensity (74%). Subjects saw a mean of 4.1 (± 4.3) healthcare providers before migraine diagnosis, and 20% of participants previously received a different diagnosis. Participants reported migraine causes included stress/anxiety/depression (42%), hormonal changes (30%), nutrition (20%), and weather (16%). Acute treatment of migraine included prescription (82%) and over-the-counter (50%) medications, changes in nutrition (62%), adjusting fluid intake (56%), and relaxation techniques (55%). Preventive medications included anticonvulsants (61%), antidepressants (44%), blood pressure-lowering medications (43%), and botulinum toxin A injections (17%). Most discontinuations were due to lack of efficacy or side effects.

CONCLUSION

People with migraine describe reluctance in seeking health care, and misunderstandings seem common especially in the beginning of their migraine journey. Graphical abstract available for this article.

Erenumab versus topiramate: migraine-related disability, impact and health-related quality of life

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

HER-MES was the first head-to-head study of erenumab against topiramate (standard of care). This post hoc analysis of the HER-MES study evaluated the effect of erenumab versus topiramate on patient-reported outcomes at week 24.

METHODS

Adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine (n = 777) were randomized (1:1) to monthly subcutaneous erenumab (n = 389) or daily oral topiramate (n = 388). Migraine-related disability, as measured by the Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6) and Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), was analysed in the entire study cohort and true completers.

RESULTS

In the erenumab group (vs. topiramate), significant improvements were reported in Headache Impact Test 6 total scores (composite populations, -10.88 vs. -7.72; true completers, -11.92 vs. -10.61) and a higher proportion of patients achieved a ≥5-point reduction from baseline with erenumab (composite populations, 72.2% vs. 53.9%; true completers, 79.64% vs. 71.43%). The adjusted mean change from baseline in the SF-36v2 score was greater with erenumab for both physical component summary (composite population, 5.48 vs. 3.63; true completers, 5.95 vs. 5.23) and mental component summary (composite populations, 1.00 vs. -1.18; true completers, 1.74 vs. -0.33). A higher proportion of patients on erenumab versus topiramate had a ≥5-point improvement in SF-36v2 for the physical component summary (composite populations, 47.7% vs. 37.4%; true completers, 52.1% vs. 48.9%) and mental component summary (composite populations, 25.3% vs. 16.8%; true completers, 27.3% vs. 17.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis demonstrated that patients treated with erenumab had significant improvements in headache impact and quality of life as measured by patient-reported outcomes versus patients treated with topiramate.

2023 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and U.S. Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Headache

DESCRIPTION

Headache medicine and therapeutics evidence have been rapidly expanding and evolving since the 2020 U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the management of headache. Therefore, the CPG was revised in 2023, earlier than the standard 5-year cycle. This article reviews the 2023 CPG recommendations relevant to primary care clinicians for treatment and prevention of migraine and tension-type headache (TTH).

METHODS

Subject experts from the VA and the DoD developed 12 key questions, which guided a systematic search using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. After reviewing evidence from 5 databases published between 6 March 2019 and 16 August 2022, the work group considered the strength and quality of the evidence, patient preferences, and benefits versus harms on critical outcomes before making consensus recommendations.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The revised CPG includes 52 recommendations on evaluation, pharmacotherapy, invasive interventions, and nonpharmacologic interventions for selected primary and secondary headache disorders. In addition to triptans and aspirin-acetaminophen-caffeine, newer calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors (gepants) are options for treatment of acute migraine. Medications to prevent episodic migraine (EM) include angiotensin-receptor blockers, lisinopril, magnesium, topiramate, valproate, memantine, the newer CGRP monoclonal antibodies, and atogepant. AbobotulinumtoxinA can be used for prevention of chronic migraine but not EM. Gabapentin is not recommended for prevention of EM. Ibuprofen (400 mg) and acetaminophen (1000 mg) can be used for treatment of TTH, and amitriptyline for prevention of chronic TTH. Physical therapy or aerobic exercise can be used in management of TTH and migraines.

Safety and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine in participants taking atogepant for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine: Results from the TANDEM study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine in participants taking atogepant for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine (EM).

BACKGROUND

Atogepant is an oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults and ubrogepant is an oral CGRP receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine in adults, with or without aura. The safety and tolerability of the concomitant use of ubrogepant and atogepant have not been previously evaluated in a clinical setting.

METHODS

The TANDEM study, a phase 4, two-period, multicenter, open-label study conducted in the United States, enrolled adults with migraine, with or without aura, and <15 headache days/month. In Treatment Period 1, participants took atogepant 60 mg once daily (QD) for 12 weeks and their own non-gepant acute headache medication for breakthrough migraine attacks. In Treatment Period 2, participants continued taking atogepant 60 mg QD and ubrogepant 100 mg was taken as needed (PRN) for the treatment of breakthrough migraine attacks (up to eight per 4-week interval) for 12 weeks. In Treatment Period 2, an optional second ubrogepant dose or the participant's own acute medication could be used to rescue headaches that did not resolve within 2-24 h post initial ubrogepant dose. The primary objective evaluated the safety and tolerability of the concomitant use of ubrogepant and atogepant.

RESULTS

Of 263 participants enrolled, 262 were treated in Treatment Period 1 (Safety Population 1) and 218 continued and were treated in Treatment Period 2 (Safety Population 2). The mean (standard deviation) number of ubrogepant use days in Treatment Period 2 was 6.6 (5.03) over the 12 weeks. In Treatment Periods 1 and 2, 49.6% and 43.1% of participants experienced a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), respectively. The most common TEAEs (≥5%) in Treatment Period 1 and Treatment Period 2 were COVID-19 (8.4%, 3.2%), fatigue (6.5%, 1.4%), nausea (6.1%, 0.9%), decreased appetite (5.7%, 0.9%), and constipation (5.3%, 0.9%). In Treatment Period 2, no increase in the incidence and types of TEAEs in relation to the number of ubrogepant use days or doses taken were identified. During the whole treatment period, 9.9% of participants discontinued atogepant or ubrogepant treatment due to TEAEs. There was one serious TEAE in Treatment Period 1 (ureterolithiasis) and one in Treatment Period 2 (cervical myelopathy), and both were considered not related to study treatment by the study investigators.

CONCLUSION

The use of atogepant 60 mg QD for the preventive treatment of EM and ubrogepant 100 mg PRN for the acute treatment of migraine over the 12-week open-label concomitant use treatment period was safe and well tolerated. The overall safety results were consistent with the known safety profiles of atogepant and ubrogepant when used alone and no new safety signals were identified.

Real-world experience of galcanezumab in the prevention of migraine in Spain: a systematic literature review

Introduction

In the context of migraine preventive therapy, new therapeutic modalities such as monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP) or ligand offer potential advantages over traditional preventive treatments.

Methods

This systematic literature review gathered recent real-world evidence from Spain on the use of galcanezumab, a CGRP-targeting treatment, in migraine patients. The review included observational studies in English or Spanish, published from August 2020 to August 2023, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines.

Results

A total of 29 publications involving 2,592 Spanish adult patients were identified, reporting relevant information on clinical outcomes (treatment effectiveness and safety), treatment persistence and patterns (switching from other therapies and time to discontinuation and restart), and patient-reported outcomes (including satisfaction with treatment). The most frequently reported variables were related to the clinical effectiveness of galcanezumab, demonstrating a significant reduction in monthly migraine days and monthly headache days. Additionally, adverse impact of headache per HIT-6 (Headache Impact Test-6) and disability per MIDAS (Migraine Disability Assessment) also improve. Studies also showed that up to 12-month persistence to galcanezumab ranged from 76.8 to 59.8%. Serious adverse events were rare. None of the publications included health-related quality of life data, either generic or migraine-specific. One study highlighted that galcanezumab treatment would offer high patient satisfaction for people with migraine.

Conclusion

The real-world evidence on the use of galcanezumab treatment among the Spanish population shows that its effectiveness, persistence, safety, and impact on health burden align with findings from clinical trials and observational studies conducted in other countries. Future studies should incorporate health-related quality of life data to gain a more holistic understanding of this treatment's impact.

Safety and Efficacy of Atogepant for the Preventive Treatment of Migraines in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Migraine is a common neurological condition marked by unilateral recurrent pulsating headaches, often associated with systemic signs and symptoms. Recently, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists, including atogepant, an oral CGRP receptor antagonist, have emerged as effective and safe treatments. The current study sought to assess the efficacy and safety of atogepant for preventing episodic migraines in adults. Methods: A comprehensive search, following PRISMA guidelines, was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials published up to June 2024. Results: The studies included adult participants with episodic migraine treated with atogepant. The primary outcomes assessed were changes in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs) and monthly headache days (MHDs) over 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included reduction in acute medication use, 50% responder rates, and adverse events. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was performed to evaluate efficacy and safety. Six trials with 4569 participants were included. Atogepant significantly reduced mean monthly migraine days (MMDs) and monthly headache days (MHDs) compared to placebo at all doses (10 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg), with the 60 mg dose showing the greatest reduction (mean difference: -1.48 days, p < 0.001). Significant reductions in acute medication use and improved 50% responder rates were also observed for all doses. The safety profile of atogepant was favorable, with common adverse events being mild to moderate, such as constipation and nausea. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events between the atogepant and placebo groups. Conclusions: Atogepant is an effective and well-tolerated option for preventing episodic migraines, showing significant reductions in migraine frequency and acute medication use. However, further studies are necessary to assess its long-term safety and efficacy, especially at higher doses, and to investigate its potential role in personalized treatment strategies for migraine prevention.

Cost per treatment responder analysis of atogepant compared to rimegepant for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the number needed to treat and cost per additional responder for atogepant and rimegepant versus placebo for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine (EM) in the United States.

BACKGROUND

Migraine has an enormous impact on a person's daily activities and quality of life, and results in significant clinical and economic burden to both individuals and society. It is important to understand the comparative efficacy and economic value of oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists (gepants) for preventive treatment of EM. Currently, atogepant and rimegepant are US Food and Drug Administration approved for preventive treatment of migraine (rimegepant for EM and atogepant for EM and for chronic migraine). In the absence of head-to-head trials, we utilized an indirect treatment comparison on efficacy data from clinical trials conducted for the preventive treatment of EM. We estimated number needed to treat, a valuable metric used in clinical practice to compare treatment efficacy, and cost per additional responder, which can be used to establish the cost effectiveness of a treatment.

METHODS

An indirect treatment comparison was conducted to compare the efficacy of atogepant 60 mg once daily and rimegepant 75 mg once every other day as preventive treatments for EM using published data from the registrational trials of atogepant (ADVANCE) and rimegepant (BHV3000-305). The efficacy outcome of interest was ≥50% reduction from baseline in mean monthly migraine/headache days (≥50% responder rate), which was variably defined for a base case and two scenario analyses. Number needed to treat and cost per additional responder versus placebo were calculated and compared between both treatments (weeks 9-12 in the base case analysis; weeks 1-12 and 9-12 for atogepant and during weeks 9-12 for rimegepant in the scenario analyses).

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, ≥50% responder rates were 64.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53.9-74.5) for atogepant and 51.8% (95% CI, 42.9-60.6) for rimegepant, compared to 44.1% (95% CI, 39.4-49.0) for placebo. The median number needed to treat versus placebo in the base case scenario was 4.8 (95% CI, 3.1-9.0) for atogepant compared to 13.0 (95% CI, 5.9-75.1) for rimegepant. The cost per additional responder versus placebo in the base case scenario was estimated to be $15,823 (95% CI, $11,079-$29,516) for atogepant compared to $73,029 (95% CI, $32,901-$422,104) for rimegepant. Results of the two scenario analyses were consistent with the base case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Atogepant had substantially lower numbers needed to treat and costs per additional responder versus placebo than rimegepant for the preventive treatment of EM across all evaluated scenarios. These analyses suggest that atogepant may be more cost effective than rimegepant for the preventive treatment of EM. Limitations include differences in inclusion/exclusion criteria and in reporting of the ≥50% responder rates between trials.

Menopause and its impact on the effectiveness of fremanezumab for migraine prophylaxis: post-hoc analysis of a prospective, real-world Greek registry

OBJECTIVE

This post-hoc analysis of data extracted from a prospective study aimed to explore for the first time if the efficacy of fremanezumab in preventing difficult-to-treat migraine, according to ICHD-III, would differ between pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women.

METHODS

A total of 171 (aged 18-70 years) fremanezumab-treated female migraine patients for six consecutive months were classified to those at pre-menopausal (n = 82) or post-menopausal (n = 89). Monthly headache days (MHD), disability, and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were assessed at baseline and at week 24 post-fremanezumab within subgroups and were then compared between them. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

In both groups, fremanezumab demonstrated significant reductions in MHDs, reduced disability, and higher QOL scores at week 24 post-treatment, compared to baseline. However, the between-subgroup comparison documented that pre-menopausal women and those at post-menopausal comparably benefited with significant reductions in overall MHDs (p = 0.883). Less disability, according to MIDAS (p = 0.696) and HIT-6 scores (p = 0.912), as well as higher QOL scores at week 24 post-fremanezumab, were also comparably evident in both groups. Safety was excellent across both subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Fremanezumab can be considered a very effective treatment option for preventing migraines in difficult-to-treat women, aged 18-70 years, regardless of their menopausal status.