Risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events and mortality in patients with migraine receiving prophylactic treatments: An observational cohort study

Clinical efficacy and safety of rimegepant in the treatment of migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of rimegepant for the treatment of migraine in adult patients using a meta-analysis.

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched up to March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated migraine and other comparator treatments in adult patients were included. The clinical response at the post-treatment evaluation, including acute pain free and relief effect, whereas the secondary outcomes were the risk of adverse events (AEs).

Results

A total of 4 RCTs involving 4,230 patients with episodic migraine were included. Outcome indicators for the number of pain free and relief patients at 2 h, 2-24 h, 2-48 h post-dose showed that rimegepant had better effects relative to the placebo [free at 2 h: OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.55, 2.18), P < 0.00001; relief at 2 h: OR = 1.80, 95% CI (1.59, 2.04), P < 0.00001]. And there was no significant difference between the occurrence of adverse events in the experimental and control groups [OR = 1.29, 95% CI (0.99, 1.67), P = 0.06].

Conclusion

Rimegepant has better therapeutic effects compared to placebo and no significant difference in adverse events.

Contribution of Migraine to Cardiovascular Disease Risk Prediction

BACKGROUND

Migraine with aura (MA) is associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) independently from traditional vascular risk factors. However, the importance of MA on CVD occurrence relative to existing cardiovascular prediction tools remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we sought to determine if adding MA status to 2 CVD risk prediction models improves risk prediction.

METHODS

Participants enrolled in the Women's Health Study self-reported MA status and were followed for incident CVD events. We included MA status as a covariable in the Reynolds Risk Score and the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) pooled cohort equation and assessed discrimination (Harrell c-index), continuous and categorical net reclassification improvement (NRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI).

RESULTS

MA status was significantly associated with CVD after including covariables in the Reynolds Risk Score (HR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.54-2.84) and the AHA/ACC score (HR: 2.10; 95% CI: 1.55-2.85). Adding information on MA status improved discrimination of the Reynolds Risk Score model (from 0.792 to 0.797; P = 0.02) and the AHA/ACC score model (from 0.793 to 0.798; P = 0.01). We observed a small but statistically significant improvement in the IDI and continuous NRI after adding MA status to both models. We did not, however, observe significant improvements in the categorical NRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding information on MA status to commonly used CVD risk prediction algorithms enhanced model fit but did not substantially improve risk stratification among women. Despite the strong association of migraine with CVD risk, the relatively low prevalence of MA compared with other CV risk factors limits its usefulness in improving risk classification at the population level.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Is There a Gender Difference in the Response to onabotulinumtoxinA in Chronic Migraine? Insights from a Real-Life European Multicenter Study on 2879 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is mostly a female disorder because of its lower prevalence in men. Less than 20% of patients included in the available studies on migraine treatments are men; hence, the evidence on migraine treatments might not apply to men. The aims of the present study were to provide reliable information on the effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) for chronic migraine in men and to compare clinical benefits between men and women.

METHODS

We performed a pooled patient-level gender-specific analysis of real-life data on BT-A for chronic migraine of patients followed-up to 9 months. We reported the 50% responder rates during each BT-A cycle, defined as percentage of reduction in monthly headache days (MHDs) compared to baseline, along with 75% and 30% responder rates. We also reported the mean decrease in MHDs and in days of acute medication use (DAMs) during each BT-A cycle as compared to baseline. We also evaluated the reasons for stopping the treatment within the third cycle.

RESULTS

We included an overall cohort of 2879 patients, 522 of whom (18.1%) were men. In men, 50% responder rates were 27.7% during the first BT-A cycle, 29.2% during the second, and 35.6% during the third cycle; in women, the corresponding rates were 26.6%, 33.5%, and 41.0%. In the overall cohort, responder rates did not differ between men and women during the first two cycles; during the third cycle, the distribution was different (P < 0.001) mostly because of higher rates of treatment stopping and non-responders in men. In the propensity score matched cohort, the trend was maintained but lost its statistical significance. Both men and women had a significant decrease in MHDs and in DAMs with BT-A treatment (P < 0.001). There were no gender differences in those changes with the only exception of MHD decrease which, during the third cycle, was lower in men than in women (7.4 vs 8.2 days, P = 0.016 in the overall cohort and 9.1 vs 12.5 days, P = 0.009 in the propensity score matched cohort). At the end of follow-up, 152 men and 485 women stopped BT-A treatment (29.1% vs 20.6%; P < 0.001). The relative proportion of patients stopping treatment because of inadequate response (less than 30% decrease in MHDs from baseline) was higher in men than in women (42.8% vs 39.6%), while the proportion of patients stopping because of adverse events was higher in women than in men (5.6% vs 0%; P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Our pooled analysis suggests that the response to BT-A is significant in both men and women with a small gender difference in favor of women. Men tended to stop the treatment more frequently than women. We emphasize the need for more gender-specific data on migraine treatments from randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

Rates of Vascular Events in Patients With Migraine: A MarketScan® Database Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective

To estimate the baseline rates of vascular events among people with migraine.

Background

Several novel medications that target the calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) pathway are approved to treat people with migraine. Given that the CGRP pathway also plays a role in maintaining cardiovascular homeostasis, determining the baseline rates of vascular events among people with migraine will help inform the safety of these novel medications.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, patients 18‐ to 64‐year‐old patients with migraine were identified from the MarketScan^® database (January 2013‐December 2017) and were categorized into 4 vascular risk categories: migraine with aura; and high, medium, and low vascular risk. Event rates (per 1000 person‐years [PY]) for 19 vascular events were estimated overall, by risk category, and by baseline characteristics.

Results

Among 1,195,696 patients with migraine, 4.8% (57,853/1,195,696) had migraine with aura, and 2.8% (33,949/1,195,696), 15.5% (184,782/1,195,696), and 77.9% (931,059/1,195,696) were at high, medium, and low risk of vascular events, respectively. Rates of ischemic stroke (per 1000 PY) were 5.1 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.0, 5.2) overall, 8.6 (95% CI: 8.1, 9.1) for patients with migraine aura, 47.2 (95% CI: 45.3, 49.0) in the high‐risk group, 9.4 (95% CI: 9.1, 9.7) in the medium‐risk group, and 2.9 (95% CI: 2.9, 3.0) in the low‐risk group. Rates of acute myocardial infarction (per 1000 PY) were 1.8 (95% CI: 1.8, 1.9) overall, 1.9 (95% CI: 1.7, 2.2) for patients with migraine aura, 14.0 (95% CI: 13.0, 14.9) in the high‐risk group, 3.9 (95% CI: 3.7, 4.1) in the medium‐risk group, and 1.1 (95% CI: 1.0, 1.1) in the low‐risk group. High‐risk patients had the highest rates of each of 19 evaluated vascular events, and rates were higher for men, older age groups, and those with higher comorbidity scores, medication usage, and medical utilization.

Conclusion

Our findings provide recent rates of vascular disease in patients with migraine. In the future, this information will be useful to help inform clinical risk:benefit decision making when assessing the use of therapies such as CGRP antagonists for migraine.

Migraine and risk of stroke

Migraine and stroke are two common and heterogeneous neurovascular disorders responsible for a significant burden for those affected and a great economic cost for the society. There is growing evidence that migraine increases the overall risk of cerebrovascular diseases. In this review, based on available literature through a PubMed search, we found that ischaemic stroke in people with migraine is strongly associated with migraine with aura, young age, female sex, use of oral contraceptives and smoking habits. The risk of transient ischaemic attack also seems to be increased in people with migraine, although this issue has not been extensively investigated. Although migraine appears to be associated with haemorrhagic stroke, the migraine aura status has a small influence on this relationship. Neuroimaging studies have revealed a higher prevalence of asymptomatic structural brain lesions in people with migraine. They are also more likely to have unfavourable vascular risk factors; however, the increased risk of stroke seems to be more apparent among people with migraine without traditional risk factors. The mechanism behind the migraine-stroke association is unknown. In light of the higher risk of stroke in people with migraine with aura, it is important to identify and modify any vascular risk factor. There is currently no direct evidence to support that a migraine prophylactic treatment can reduce future stroke in people with migraine.