Long-term tolerability and nonvascular safety of erenumab, a novel calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for prevention of migraine: A pooled analysis of four placebo-controlled trials with long-term extensions

Safety and tolerability of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine: a post hoc analysis of pooled data from four clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Conventional, non-specific preventive migraine treatments often demonstrate low rates of treatment persistence due to poor efficacy or tolerability. Effective, well-tolerated preventive treatments are needed to reduce migraine symptoms, improve function, and enhance quality of life. Atogepant is a migraine-specific oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that is indicated for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. This analysis evaluated the safety and tolerability profile of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine, including adverse events (AEs) of interest, such as constipation, nausea, hepatic safety, weight changes, and cardiac disorders.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis was performed using data pooled from 2 (12-week) randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 (40- and 52-week) open-label long-term safety (LTS) trials of oral atogepant for episodic migraine (EM).

RESULTS

The safety population included 1550 participants from the pooled RCTs (atogepant, n = 1142; placebo, n = 408) and 1424 participants from the pooled LTS trials (atogepant, n = 1228; standard care [SC], n = 196). In total, 643/1142 (56.3%) atogepant participants and 218/408 (53.4%) placebo participants experienced ≥ 1 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) in the RCTs. In the LTS trials, 792/1228 (64.5%) of atogepant participants and 154/196 (78.6%) of SC participants experienced ≥ 1 TEAEs. The most commonly reported TEAEs (≥ 5%) in participants who received atogepant once daily were upper respiratory tract infection (5.3% in RCTs, 7.7% in LTS trials), constipation (6.1% in RCTs, 5.0% in LTS trials), nausea (6.6% in RCTs, 4.6% in LTS trials), and urinary tract infection (3.4% in RCTs, 5.2% in LTS trials). Additionally, weight loss appeared to be dose- and duration-dependent. Most TEAEs were considered unrelated to study drug and few led to discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, atogepant is safe and well tolerated in pooled RCTs and LTS trials for the preventive treatment of EM in adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02848326 (MD-01), NCT03777059 (ADVANCE), NCT03700320 (study 302), NCT03939312 (study 309).

One-year prospective real-world assessment of effectiveness and safety of erenumab in migraine prevention: results of the French FHU INOVPAIN registry study

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated efficacy and safety of erenumab. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of erenumab in a real-world setting in French patients with migraine associated with extreme unmet needs.

METHODS

This is a one year-prospective real-word study with enrolment of all consecutive adult patients included in the FHU InovPain registry who participated in a compassionate erenumab use program.

RESULTS

Of 144 patients included, 140 patients (82.1% female / mean age of 50.9 ± 11.4) received at least one dose of erenumab and were concerned by effectiveness and safety assessment. All patients had failed 11 oral preventive treatments. Most of them suffered from chronic migraine (88.6%) and presented a medication overuse (90.7%) at baseline. Thirty-eight (27.1%) discontinued treatment during the 12-month follow-up, with 22 (15.7%), 11 (7.9%) and 5 (3.6%) patients before 3, 6 or 9 months of treatment. The proportion of ≥ 50% responders at M3, M6, M9 and M12 was 74/140 (52.9%), 69/118 (58.5%), 61/107 (57.0%) and 60/102 (58.8%) respectively. At M3, the rate of reversion from chronic migraine to episodic migraine was 57.3% and the rate of transition from medication overuse to non-overuse was 46.5%. For monthly migraine days, the median (IQR) was 18.0 (13.0-26.0), 9.0 (5.0-17.0), 7.5 (5.0-14.0), 8.0 (5.0-12.5) and 8.0 (5.0-12.0) at M0, M3, M6, M9 and M12 respectively. For HIT-6 score, the median (IQR) was 68.0 (63.8-73.3), 60.0 (54.0-65.0), 60.0 (50.3-53.0), 59.0 (50.0-63.0) and 58.0 (50.0-62.9) at M0, M3, M6, M9 and M12 respectively. Fifty-three (37.9%) patients reported at least one of the following adverse events: cutaneous erythema and/or pain at the injection site for 42 (30%) patients, constipation for 22 (15.7%) patients, muscle spasm for 2 (1.4%) patients, alopecia for one (0.7%) patient and blood pressure increase in one (0.7%) patient. There was no serious adverse event. One female patient became pregnant after 5 months of exposure to erenumab with a safe evolution after treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

This first French real-world study related to migraine prevention with CGRP-mAbs confirms effectiveness and safety of erenumab in patients with extreme unmet needs.

The Role of Step Therapy in the Treatment of Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines recent evidence and applies bioethical principles to evaluate the benefits and risks of using step therapy in the treatment of migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

With the CGRP mAbs, gepants, and lasmiditan now on the market for up to 5 years, new research, including network meta-analyses and long-term use studies, can evaluate the comparative efficacy, tolerability, and adherence of these medications relative to older acute and preventive medications for the treatment of migraine. Deciding how medications are chosen for patients requires accounting for many factors including sustainability, efficacy, tolerability, and preference. Newer research can help give clarity on the appropriateness of gating certain treatment options behind others.

Mode and site of action of therapies targeting CGRP signaling

Targeting CGRP has proved to be efficacious, tolerable, and safe to treat migraine; however, many patients with migraine do not benefit from drugs that antagonize the CGRPergic system. Therefore, this review focuses on summarizing the general pharmacology of the different types of treatments currently available, which target directly or indirectly the CGRP receptor or its ligand. Moreover, the latest evidence regarding the selectivity and site of action of CGRP small molecule antagonists (gepants) and monoclonal antibodies is critically discussed. Finally, the reasons behind non-responders to anti-CGRP drugs and rationale for combining and/or switching between these therapies are addressed.

Open-label trials for CGRP-targeted drugs in migraine prevention: A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted drugs have proven safe and effective for migraine prevention in large randomized-controlled, double-blind trials with an average duration of six months. Open-label studies may provide additional information on the long-term safety and efficacy of these substances.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for open-label trials with calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies and calcitonin gene-related peptide-receptor antagonists. We summarized and critically analyzed the literature in a narrative way.

RESULTS

Overall, 13 open-label trials were included in this review (n = 4 for erenumab, n = 4 for galcanezumab, n = 3 for fremanezumab, n = 1 for eptinezumab, n = 1 for atogepant). Open-label trial duration ranged between 12 and 264 weeks. No safety concerns emerged, and the adverse events profile was similar to the double-blind study phase. Discontinuation rates were generally low with >75% of patients remaining in the trials after one year. Efficacy data showed a sustained reduction of migraine frequency throughout the trials, along with a lasting improvement in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The open-label study program for calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted migraine preventives confirms the favorable safety and efficacy profile of these drugs over time. Treatment adherence appears higher than with previous unspecific migraine preventives. Real-world data and post-marketing surveillance studies may corroborate and complement open-label results.

Long-Term Safety and Effectiveness of Erenumab in Patients with Migraine: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Several studies on use of erenumab for migraine treatment have been published over recent years. However, its long-term safety and effectiveness have not been consistently established in the literature yet. We aimed to perform a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the long-term safety and effectiveness of erenumab for the treatment of migraine headaches.

METHODS

Long-term follow-up was defined as ≥ 1 year. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from inception to 14 June 2022 for studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies, comprising 3574 patients, were included. The total follow-up period ranged from 48 to 268 weeks (i.e., 1 year to 5.6 years). Pooled estimate rates for all adverse events (AEs) were 63% (95% CI 46-78); for serious AEs, 3% (95% CI 1-7); and for AEs leading to discontinuation of erenumab, 3% (95% CI 2-5). Reduction in monthly migraine days (MMDs) was -6.98 (95% CI -8.90 to -5.05) and in migraine-specific medication days (MSMDs) was - 6.09 (95% CI - 9.43 to - 2.75). More than half (57%; 95% CI 51-63) and around one-third (35%; 95% CI 28-42) of patients presented with reductions of ≥ 50% and ≥ 75% in MMDs, respectively. Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) score was decreased by -9.68 points (95% CI - 12.03 to - 7.34). Nine studies were considered of poor methodological quality and five of fair quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Erenumab has a favorable safety profile, with a low incidence of serious AEs, and sustained efficacy over ≥1 year of follow-up in the treatment of migraine.

Application of a new biological pathogenetic therapy of migraine in clinical practice: expert consensus of the Russian Headache Research Society

This consensus reviewed the main current issues of clinical application and integration into everyday practice of a new targeted preventive therapy for migraine using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) to the calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) ligand or receptor. These recommendations are based on current scientific and clinical studies and an analysis of the results of several years of clinical use. The main purpose of the consensus is to assist practitioners in prescribing effective prophylactic treatment of migraine using anti-CGRP mAbs and to improve care for patients with various forms of the disease. 

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a key molecule released in acute migraine attacks-Successful translation of basic science to clinical practice

Migraine is a highly prevalent neurovascular disorder afflicting more than 15% of the global population. Nearly three times more females are afflicted by migraine in the 18-50 years age group, compared to males. Migraine attacks are most often sporadic, but a subgroup of individuals experience a gradual increase in frequency over time; among these, up to 1%-2% of the global population develop chronic migraine. Although migraine symptoms have been known for centuries, the underlying mechanisms remain largely unknown. Two theories have dominated the current thinking-a neurovascular theory and a central neuronal theory with the origin of the attacks in the hypothalamus. During the last decades, the understanding of migraine has markedly advanced. This is supported by the early seminal demonstration of the trigeminovascular reflex 35 years ago and the insight that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a key molecule released in acute migraine attacks. The more recent findings that gepants, small molecule CGRP receptor blockers, and monoclonal antibodies generated against CGRP, or its canonical receptor are useful for the treatment of migraine, are other important issues. CGRP has been established as a key molecule in the neurobiology of migraine. Moreover, monoclonal antibodies to CGRP or the CGRP receptor represent a breakthrough in the understanding of migraine pathophysiology and have emerged as an efficacious prophylactic treatment for patients with severe migraine with excellent tolerability. This review describes the progression of research to reach the clinical usefulness of a large group of molecules that have in common the interaction with CGRP mechanisms in the trigeminal system to alleviate the burden for individuals afflicted by migraine.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

A stated preference survey to explore patient preferences for novel preventive migraine treatments

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore patient preference for attributes of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors for the preventive treatment of migraine and to describe differences in treatment preferences between patients.

BACKGROUND

CGRP inhibitors are a novel class of migraine drugs specifically developed for the preventive treatment of migraine. Clinicians should understand patient preferences for CGRP inhibitors to inform and support prescribing choices.

METHODS

Patients with migraine in the US and Germany were recruited to participate in an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey, which presented hypothetical treatment choices using five attributes: mode of administration, side effects, migraine frequency, migraine severity, and consistency of treatment effectiveness. Attribute selection was informed by a literature review and semi-structured patient interviews (n = 35), and evaluated using patient cognitive debriefing interviews (n = 5).

RESULTS

Of 680 who consented to participate, 506 participants completed the survey and were included in the study (US = 257; Germany = 249). Overall, participants placed highest importance (preference weight, beta = 1.65, p < 0.001) on the treatment's ability to reduce the severity of migraine (mild vs. unchanged severity), followed by consistent treatment effectiveness (beta = 1.13, p < 0.001), and higher chance of reduced migraine frequency (beta = 1.00, p < 0.001). Participants preferred an oral tablet every other day (beta = 1.00, p < 0.001) over quarterly infusion, quarterly injections (p = 0.019), or monthly injection (p < 0.001). Preference for all treatment attributes were heterogeneous, and the subgroup analyses found that participants naïve to CGRP monoclonal antibody treatments had a stronger preference for oral therapy compared to those with such experience (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

In this DCE assessing CGRP inhibitors attributes, the main driver of patient choice was treatment effectiveness, specifically reduced migraine severity, and consistent treatment effectiveness. Further, patients exhibited an overall preference for an oral tablet every other day over injectables. Patients' experience with previous treatments informs the value they place on treatment characteristics.

Safety and tolerability of erenumab in individuals with episodic or chronic migraine across age groups: a pooled analysis of placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Erenumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, has demonstrated efficacy and safety in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. There exists an unmet need to establish the safety of erenumab in older individuals, in view of existing multiple comorbidities, polypharmacy, and age-related physiological changes. This pooled analysis of five large migraine-prevention studies examined the safety of erenumab stratified across age groups, particularly in older populations.

METHODS

Pooled and age-stratified analysis of safety data from the 12-week double-blind treatment phase (DBTP) of five randomized, placebo-controlled Phase 2 and 3 studies of erenumab in participants with episodic or chronic migraine across the age groups < 40 years, 40-49 years, 50-59 years, and ≥ 60 years was completed. The safety of erenumab across age groups was determined by assessing safety endpoints including treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and events leading to study drug discontinuation.

RESULTS

Overall, 3345 participants across five studies were randomized to receive either placebo (n = 1359), erenumab 70 mg (n = 1132) or erenumab 140 mg (n = 854); 3176 (94.9%) completed the DBTP, and 169 (5.1%) discontinued, mainly due to participant decision (110; 3.3%). Overall, 1349 (40.6%), 1122 (33.8%), and 850 (25.6%) participants received at least one dose of placebo, erenumab 70 mg, and erenumab 140 mg, respectively. Incidence of treatment-emergent AEs was similar across all age groups for both doses of erenumab (70 mg or 140 mg) and placebo (< 40 years, 44.0% vs 44.4%; 40-49 years, 42.5% vs 49.2%; 50-59 years, 46.5% vs 41.6%; ≥ 60 years, 43.8% vs 59.4%). Incidence of treatment-emergent serious AEs overall, and stratified by age groups for both doses and placebo was low (< 40 years, 0.9% vs 1.2%; 40-49 years, 1.7% vs 1.9%; and 50-59 years, 1.6% vs 1.1%), with no serious AEs reported in participants aged ≥ 60 years. No deaths were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Erenumab (70 mg or 140 mg) exhibited a similar safety profile compared with placebo across age groups in individuals with episodic or chronic migraine, with no increased emergence of events due to age. Erenumab was well tolerated in older participants with multiple comorbidities, polypharmacy, and age-related physiological changes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02066415, NCT02456740, NCT02483585, NCT03096834, NCT03333109.

Reducing the Burden of Migraine: Safety and Efficacy of CGRP Pathway-Targeted Preventive Treatments

Migraine is a highly disabling and often chronic neurological disease that affects more than one billion people globally. Preventive migraine treatment is recommended for individuals who have frequent and/or disabling attacks; however, many of the medications used for migraine prevention (e.g., antiepileptics, antidepressants, antihypertensives) were not specifically developed for migraine, and often have limited efficacy or poor tolerability. Four monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway, which is believed to play a crucial role in the pathophysiology of migraine, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. All four migraine-specific treatments have demonstrated efficacy based on reductions in monthly days with migraine for patients with both episodic and chronic migraine, including those with comorbidities. They have also demonstrated favorable safety and tolerability profiles. Based on these accounts, CGRP pathway-targeted monoclonal antibodies have the potential to revolutionize preventive treatment for patients with migraine.

CGRP Targeting Therapy for Chronic Migraine-Evidence from Clinical Trials and Real-world Studies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor have become part of the standard treatment for migraine in clinical practice. The current review focuses on the clinical evidence of CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients with chronic migraine (CM), including more challenging cases.

RECENT FINDINGS

CGRP monoclonal antibodies were more effective than placebo in reducing the number of monthly migraine days (MMDs), and the change relative to placebo in the treatment group was between - 1.2 and - 2.7 days at 3 months. CGRP monoclonal antibodies resulted in ≥ 50% response in 27.5 to 61.4% of patients, and doubled the odds for having ≥ 50% response. The findings were generally consistent in patients with coexisting medication overuse or with treatment failures to multiple preventive medications, including onabotulinumtoxinA. The results from real-world studies (RWS) were similar to those seen in clinical trials, and the changes from baseline in the number of MMDs and the response rates largely fell within the ranges of those reported in the treatment group in pivotal trials. The therapeutic effects typically started within a few days, and remained steady after regular treatment for up to 1 year. These agents were generally well tolerated, and the discontinuation rates due to adverse events in clinical trials and in many RWS were < 4.5%. CGRP monoclonal antibodies are effective and safe in the treatment of patients with CM, including clinical challenging cases. However, the role of CGRP monoclonal antibodies in a number of conditions, such as cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases, pregnancy, and overuse of opioids or barbiturates, needs to be further clarified.

Patient-reported outcomes of migraine treatment with erenumab: results from a national patient survey

BACKGROUND

Despite development of new therapies, migraine remains an undertreated illness. It is important to understand patients' preferences and perceptions of using a certain therapy. We present data from a nationwide Lithuanian survey of patients' experience using erenumab for the treatment of high frequency episodic and chronic migraine.

METHODS

An anonymous internet survey was distributed on February-March 2021 to the members of Migraine Association of Lithuania. All adult respondents who reported using at least one dose of erenumab were included in the study.

RESULTS

Out of 145 respondents, 75.2% had chronic migraine, and 31.7% had medication overuse headache. Patients received an average of 6 (IQR 4-9) erenumab doses. 93.1% respondents found erenumab effective, and 72.6% experienced improvement during the first month. MHDs were reduced by 9.8 (SD 6.0) (P < 0.001), and MMDs by 7.2 (SD 5.2) days (P < 0.001). 78.6% respondents achieved ≥ 50% reduction and 47.6% achieved ≥ 75% reduction of MMDs. 13.8% patients indicated a wearing-off effect during the treatment course, and 37.8% - some wearing-off between injections. Constipation was the most frequent adverse event (32.6%). 47.2% of patients who had a positive erenumab effect and discontinued treatment experienced migraine rebound in 6 (SD 2.0) weeks.

CONCLUSION

Erenumab is perceived as an effective and safe treatment. Further studies are needed to investigate a post-cessation deterioration of achieved improvement.

HIGHLIGHTS

• Vast majority of patients experience stable or increasing effect of erenumab. • Erenumab efficacy usually becomes evident during the first month of treatment. • Erenumab is perceived significantly better than non-specific preventive medications. • Almost 40% of patients experienced some wearing-off between injections. • Almost half of patients experience migraine rebounds after treatment cessation.

It is time anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies be considered first-line prophylaxis for migraine

The result of more than thirty years of research, anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies are currently the state of the art for migraine preventive therapy. Their efficacy and safety, supported by an already large and growing body of evidence, are added by many other advantages: an early onset of action, favorable posology, negligible pharmacological interaction, and a broad-reaching efficacy in many challenging clinical contexts. When compared to standard prophylactics, these novel medications seem at least as efficacious, clearly more tolerable and, consequently, with a superior adherence profile. Furthermore, recently published analyses indicate that they are cost-effective, especially among those with chronic migraine. Yet, current guidelines endorse their use only after multiple other preventives have failed or have been deemed not tolerable. Although this recommendation may have been sensible at first, the now available data strongly point that time has come for anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies to be acknowledged as first-line treatments for migraine patients with severe disability. For these individuals, delaying treatment until several other alternatives have failed incurs in significant losses, both economically and to many relevant aspects of their lives.

Effect of Xiongmatang Extract on Behavioral and TRPV1-CGRP/CGRP-R Pathway in Rats With Migraine

Migraine is a complex neurovascular disease, which seriously affects the quality of life in patients. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of Xiongmatang (XMT) extract on rats with migraine induced by inflammatory soup and the underlying mechanisms. First, 1 week after dural catheterization, inflammatory soup was injected through a microsyringe to stimulate the dura of rats for 6 times (12 days), once every 2 days, 10 μL each time, to establish a migraine model. According to pain threshold analysis, behavioral change detection, and pathological analysis, the effects of XMT extract on rats with migraine were evaluated. The positive, mRNA and protein expression of related factors were detected by immunohistochemistry, RT-QPCR, and Western blot analysis to elucidate the underlying mechanism. XMT extract improved the behavioral performance of rats, and improve the pathological changes in the trigeminal nerve in rats. Further experimental results show that XMT extract regulated the expression of migraine-related factors in the trigeminal nerve, manifested as transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1), calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP), calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CRLR), and receptor activity-modifying protein 1 (RAMP1) positive expression, mRNA expression, and protein expression reduction. XMT extract can significantly improved the behavioral performance of rats with migraine, and its mechanism of action might involve regulating the activity of TRPV1-CGRP/CGRP-R pathway.

Migraine

Migraine is a common, chronic, disorder that is typically characterized by recurrent disabling attacks of headache and accompanying symptoms, including aura. The aetiology is multifactorial with rare monogenic variants. Depression, epilepsy, stroke and myocardial infarction are comorbid diseases. Spreading depolarization probably causes aura and possibly also triggers trigeminal sensory activation, the underlying mechanism for the headache. Despite earlier beliefs, vasodilation is only a secondary phenomenon and vasoconstriction is not essential for antimigraine efficacy. Management includes analgesics or NSAIDs for mild attacks, and, for moderate or severe attacks, triptans or 5HT_1B/1D receptor agonists. Because of cardiovascular safety concerns, unreliable efficacy and tolerability issues, use of ergots to abort attacks has nearly vanished in most countries. CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) and lasmiditan, a selective 5HT1_F receptor agonist, have emerged as effective acute treatments. Intramuscular onabotulinumtoxinA may be helpful in chronic migraine (migraine on ≥15 days per month) and monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor, as well as two gepants, have proven effective and well tolerated for the preventive treatment of migraine. Several neuromodulation modalities have been approved for acute and/or preventive migraine treatment. The emergence of new treatment targets and therapies illustrates the bright future for migraine management.

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

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

Optimal dose of erenumab for preventive treatment of episodic migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Erenumab is a novel monoclonal calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antibody that is used for the preventive treatment of migraine.

Objectives:

This study aimed to evaluate the overall safety, efficacy, and dose-response relationship of erenumab in patients with episodic migraine and patients with prior migraine treatment failures.

Methods:

We searched randomized clinical trials on PUBMED, EMBASE database, and Cochrane Library database. A pair-wise meta-analysis and Bayesian network analysis were performed.

Results:

For efficacy outcomes, the network meta-analysis suggests that in comparison to erenumab 70 mg, participants who received erenumab 140 mg reported a significant decrease in monthly acute Migraine-Specific Medication Days (MSMD) and 50% increase in response rate, and erenumab was most likely to be ranked first for Monthly Migraine Days (MMD), MSMD, and 50% response rate. For safety outcomes, the network meta-analysis has found no significant difference between the 70 mg group and the 140 mg group measured by adverse events and serious adverse events. In the 140 mg erenumab group, a significant decreased in MMD and MSMD and 50% and 75% increased in response rate were reported in patients with ≥ 2 treatment failures compared to placebo. For safety outcomes, no significant difference was found between the 140 mg erenumab group and the placebo group.

Conclusion:

Erenumab was effective in patients with episodic migraine. A total of 140 mg erenumab was associated with better efficacy outcomes without any increased risk for developing adverse events compared to 70 mg erenumab. Furthermore, 140 mg erenumab was effective in patients with prior migraine treatment failures.

Reduction in migraine pain intensity in patients treated with erenumab: A post hoc analysis of two pivotal randomized studies

BACKGROUND

Erenumab (erenumab-aooe in the US) effectively reduces monthly migraine days in episodic and chronic migraine. This traditional outcome does not capture the intensity of headache pain on days with migraine.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis of two pivotal randomized, placebo-controlled studies in patients with episodic migraine and chronic migraine examined the effect of erenumab 70 and 140 mg on migraine pain. Cumulative monthly migraine pain intensity is the sum of the peak pain intensity scores (0 = no migraine to 3 = migraine day with severe pain) on migraine days. Change from baseline in cumulative monthly migraine pain and average monthly pain intensity was assessed over months 4 to 6 for episodic migraine and month 3 for chronic migraine; change in average monthly pain intensity was assessed among monthly migraine days responders/non-responders.

RESULTS

Efficacy analysis included 946 patients for the episodic migraine study and 656 patients for the chronic migraine study. Cumulative monthly migraine pain decreased significantly with erenumab versus placebo (p < 0.001, for episodic migraine and chronic migraine). In addition, monthly average migraine pain intensity decreased significantly with erenumab versus placebo for episodic migraine (p < 0.01); decreases were non-significant for chronic migraine. In comparison with placebo-treated patients, a greater proportion of erenumab-treated patients were pain intensity responders regardless of threshold used. Episodic migraine and chronic migraine patients with a ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days (responders) had a greater reduction in monthly average pain intensity than non-responders.

CONCLUSIONS

Erenumab reduced cumulative monthly migraine pain in episodic migraine and chronic migraine patients and significantly reduced monthly average migraine pain in episodic migraine, demonstrating treatment benefit beyond reduction in migraine frequency.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02456740; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02066415.

Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting CGRP: From Clinical Studies to Real-World Evidence-What Do We Know So Far?

Now more than ever is the time of monoclonal antibody use in neurology. In headaches, disease-specific and mechanism-based treatments existed only for symptomatic management of migraines (i.e., triptans), while the standard prophylactic anti-migraine treatments consist of non-specific and repurposed drugs that share limited safety profiles and high risk for interactions with other medications, resulting in rundown adherence rates. Recent advances in headache science have increased our understanding of the role of calcitonin gene relate peptide (CGRP) and pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) pathways in cephalic pain neurotransmission and peripheral or central sensitization, leading to the development of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or small molecules targeting these neuropeptides or their receptors. Large scale randomized clinical trials confirmed that inhibition of the CGRP system attenuates migraine, while the PACAP mediated nociception is still under scientific and clinical investigation. In this review, we provide the latest clinical evidence for the use of anti-CGRP in migraine prevention with emphasis on efficacy and safety outcomes from Phase III and real-world studies.

MAB-MIG: registry of the spanish neurological society of erenumab for migraine prevention

BACKGROUND

Erenumab was approved in Europe for migraine prevention in patients with ≥ 4 monthly migraine days (MMDs). In Spain, Novartis started a personalized managed access program, which allowed free access to erenumab before official reimbursement. The Spanish Neurological Society started a prospective registry to evaluate real-world effectiveness and tolerability, and all Spanish headache experts were invited to participate. We present their first results.

METHODS

Patients fulfilled the ICHD-3 criteria for migraine and had ≥ 4 MMDs. Sociodemographic and clinical data were registered as well as MMDs, monthly headache days, MHDs, prior and concomitant preventive treatment, medication overuse headache (MOH), migraine evolution, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs): headache impact test (HIT-6), migraine disability assessment questionnaire (MIDAS), and patient global improvement change (PGIC). A > 50% reduction of MMDs after 12 weeks was considered as a response.

RESULTS

We included 210 patients (female 86.7%, mean age 46.4 years old) from 22 Spanish hospitals from February 2019 to June 2020. Most patients (89.5%) suffered from chronic migraine with a mean evolution of 8.6 years. MOH was present in 70% of patients, and 17.1% had migraine with aura. Patients had failed a mean of 7.8 preventive treatments at baseline (botulinum toxin type A-BoNT/A-had been used by 95.2% of patients). Most patients (67.6%) started with erenumab 70 mg. Sixty-one percent of patients were also simultaneously taking oral preventive drugs and 27.6% were getting simultaneous BoNT/A. Responder rate was 37.1% and the mean reduction of MMDs and MHDs was -6.28 and -8.6, respectively. Changes in PROs were: MIDAS: -35 points, HIT-6: -11.6 points, PIGC: 4.7 points. Predictors of good response were prior HIT-6 score < 80 points (p = 0.01), ≤ 5 prior preventive treatment failures (p = 0.026), absence of MOH (p = 0.039), and simultaneous BoNT/A treatment (p < 0.001). Twenty percent of patients had an adverse event, but only two of them were severe (0.9%), which led to treatment discontinuation. Mild constipation was the most frequent adverse event (8.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In real-life, in a personalized managed access program, erenumab shows a good effectiveness profile and an excellent tolerability in migraine prevention in our cohort of refractory patients.

The American Headache Society Consensus Statement: Update on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To incorporate recent research findings, expert consensus, and patient perspectives into updated guidance on the use of new acute and preventive treatments for migraine in adults.

BACKGROUND

The American Headache Society previously published a Consensus Statement on the use of newly introduced treatments for adults with migraine. This update, which is based on the expanded evidence base and emerging expert consensus concerning postapproval usage, provides practical recommendations in the absence of a formal guideline.

METHODS

This update involved four steps: (1) review of data about the efficacy, safety, and clinical use of migraine treatments introduced since the previous Statement was published; (2) incorporation of these data into a proposed update; (3) review and commentary by the Board of Directors of the American Headache Society and patients and advocates associated with the American Migraine Foundation; (4) consideration of these collective insights and integration into an updated Consensus Statement.

RESULTS

Since the last Consensus Statement, no evidence has emerged to alter the established principles of either acute or preventive treatment. Newly introduced acute treatments include two small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (ubrogepant, rimegepant); a serotonin (5-HT1F ) agonist (lasmiditan); a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (celecoxib oral solution); and a neuromodulatory device (remote electrical neuromodulation). New preventive treatments include an intravenous anti-CGRP ligand monoclonal antibody (eptinezumab). Several modalities, including neuromodulation (electrical trigeminal nerve stimulation, noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation) and biobehavioral therapy (cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, relaxation therapies, mindfulness-based therapies, acceptance and commitment therapy) may be appropriate for either acute and/or preventive treatment; a neuromodulation device may be appropriate for acute migraine treatment only (remote electrical neuromodulation).

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of new treatments into clinical practice should be informed by the potential for benefit relative to established therapies, as well as by the characteristics and preferences of individual patients.

Safety and tolerability of preventive treatment options for chronic migraine

INTRODUCTION

Relative to migraine generally, chronic migraine (CM) imposes greater disability, healthcare utilization and socioeconomic burden. Six therapies currently possess a credible evidence base for prevention/suppression of CM. This review is intended to provide an assessment of their relative utility, defined as a blend of safety, tolerability and efficacy, focusing in particular on their safety and tolerability.Areas Covered: We discuss all six medications currently FDA-approved for migraine prevention which also specifically possess credible evidence of efficacy in treating CM. While we do address the efficacy of each, our primary emphasis involves assessment of safety and tolerability data derived from clinical trials and post-marketing experience.Expert Opinion: Recent research involving CM has led to the identification of highly targeted and typically well-tolerated therapies. For patients who experience obstacles to accessing these newer therapies, topiramate is available as an evidence-based alternative, but contraindications, drug-drug interactions and poor tolerability may limit or prevent its use. Although data to support such intervention presently is limited, clinically challenging CM cases may benefit from combination therapy. 'Real world' studies are needed to evaluate such polytherapy, along with studies intended to assess the long-term safety of the individual therapies and their use during pregnancy and breast-feeding.

Patient Perspectives and Experiences of Preventive Treatments and Self-Injectable Devices for Migraine: A Focus Group Study

BACKGROUND

Although several self-injectable preventive treatments for migraine have become available, they are not yet widely used. Thus, understanding patients' perceptions towards them is limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to inform the design of a preference-elicitation instrument, which is being developed to quantify preventive treatment preferences of people with migraine.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study involving nine in-person focus groups (three per country) in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany. Participants were adults (n = 47) with episodic or chronic migraine who were currently using or had used a prescription preventive treatment for migraine within the previous 5 years. During the focus groups, participants described their experiences of migraine and preventive treatments; handled and simulated self-injection using five different unbranded, fired demonstration auto-injectors and prefilled syringes; and ranked different aspects of preventive treatments by importance. Focus groups were analyzed with a focus on themes that would be feasible or meaningful to include in a subsequent preference-elicitation instrument.

RESULTS

Reducing the frequency and severity of migraine attacks was consistently ranked as the most important aspect of preventive treatment. Participants expressed dissatisfaction with available daily oral preventive treatments for migraine they had previously used because they were ineffective or caused intolerable adverse events. Many participants were willing to self-inject a treatment that was effective and tolerable. When presented with devices for self-injecting a preventive treatment for migraine, participants generally preferred autoinjectors over prefilled syringes. Participants especially valued safety features such as the unlocking step and automated needle insertion, and audible and visual dose confirmation increased confidence in autoinjector use. Autoinjector needle protection mechanisms were also appreciated, especially by participants averse to needles, as the needles are not visible.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the fact that many people with migraine still lack access to a preventive treatment that is effective and tolerable. In addition to efficacy and safety considerations, treatment decisions may be guided by the mode of administration. In the case of self-injectable preventive treatments, key device characteristics affecting these decisions may be ease of use, comfort, and confidence in self-injection. Insights gained from this study were used to help develop a preliminary set of attributes and levels for a preference-elicitation instrument.

Safety and tolerability of eptinezumab in patients with migraine: a pooled analysis of 5 clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The humanized anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody eptinezumab has been evaluated in five large-scale clinical trials conducted in patients with migraine. This integrated analysis was conducted to evaluate the comprehensive safety and tolerability of eptinezumab in patients with migraine across these studies.

METHODS

Data were pooled from four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies and the first year of one open-label study.

RESULTS

The pooled population comprised 2867 adults with migraine: eptinezumab, n = 2076 (4797 infusions); placebo, n = 791 (1675 infusions). A total of 1137/2076 (54.8%) patients who received eptinezumab and 414/791 (52.3%) patients who received placebo experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); rates were similar across eptinezumab dose groups (10-1000 mg). For most patients with TEAEs, the events were mild or moderate in severity and considered unrelated to study drug by the investigators. Thirty infusion-site AEs occurred in 27/2076 (1.3%) patients who received eptinezumab and 7 in 7/791 (0.9%) patients who received placebo. Infusion-site AEs led to infusion interruption in 19/2076 (0.9%) and 5/791 (0.6%) patients in the eptinezumab and placebo groups, respectively. Nasopharyngitis occurred in ≥2% of patients in the eptinezumab 300-mg group and with an incidence of at least 2 percentage points greater than in the placebo group; however, in most patients (eptinezumab, 139/140; placebo 40/41), its occurrence was considered not related to study treatment. Adverse events coded to hypersensitivity occurred for 23/2076 (1.1%) patients treated with eptinezumab and no patients in the placebo group. If additional TEAE terms that could indicate hypersensitivity are considered (e.g., urticaria, flushing/hot flush, rash, and pruritus), hypersensitivity reactions in the two pivotal placebo-controlled phase 3 studies occurred in ≥2% of patients in the eptinezumab 100-mg and 300-mg groups, and the incidence was at least 2 percentage points greater in either of these groups than in the placebo group. Most hypersensitivity reactions were not serious and resolved with standard medical treatment or observation without treatment, usually within 1 day.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with migraine, the intravenous administration of eptinezumab every 12 weeks demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifiers: NCT01772524 , NCT02275117 , NCT02559895 , NCT02974153 , NCT02985398 ).

Long-term efficacy and safety during open-label erenumab treatment in Japanese patients with episodic migraine

Objective

To assess long‐term (up to 2 years) efficacy, tolerability, and safety of erenumab for the prevention of episodic migraine (EM) in Japanese patients.

Background

Previously published results from the double‐blind treatment phase (DBTP) of a phase 2 clinical study have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of erenumab in Japanese patients with EM.

Methods

Patients completing the 24‐week placebo‐controlled DBTP could continue into the 76‐week open‐label treatment phase (OLTP), receiving erenumab 70 mg or 140 mg subcutaneously once monthly. The initial dose in the OLTP was erenumab 70 mg monthly, which was later changed to 140 mg. After study completion, the following were assessed: change from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMD), change from baseline in monthly acute migraine‐specific medication days (MSMD), percentage of patients achieving ≥50% and ≥75% reduction in MMD, change from baseline in the 6‐item Headache Impact Test (HIT‐6™) score, and safety (exposure‐adjusted patient‐incidence of adverse events [AEs], calculated as number of patients per 100 patient‐years).

Results

Of 475 patients enrolled in the DBTP, 459 (96.6%) continued in the OLTP. The mean (SD) MMD was 7.9 (2.3) at baseline with the overall change from baseline at week 100 of –2.9 (4.1) days. The monthly acute MSMD was 5.7 (2.8) at baseline with change from baseline at week 100 of −1.7 (3.7) days. The proportion of patients who achieved ≥50% and ≥75% reduction in MMD from baseline at week 100 was 177/398 (44.5%) and 94/398 (23.6%), respectively. The HIT‐6™ score was 58.4 (5.4) at baseline with a change of −6.4 (8.2) at week 100. The exposure‐adjusted patient‐incidence of AEs during the OLTP was 207.1/100 patient‐years for the combined erenumab group, similar to that observed for either erenumab (271.0/100 patient‐years) or placebo (257.3/100 patient‐years) during the DBTP, and no new safety signals were detected during the OLTP.

Conclusion

Long‐term erenumab treatment in Japanese patients with EM demonstrated sustained efficacy for up to 2 years, with a safety profile similar to previous studies, supporting erenumab as a potential new therapy for EM prevention in Japan.

Cost-Effectiveness of Erenumab for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine in Patients with Prior Treatment Failures in Sweden

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common neurological disease that disproportionately affects females and has a peak incidence during productive years, resulting in significant burden.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the cost effectiveness of erenumab for the preventive treatment of migraine.

METHODS

A hybrid decision-tree plus Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of erenumab as a migraine treatment compared with best supportive care only for patients experiencing at least 4 monthly migraine days for whom at least two prior preventive treatments had failed. Clinical efficacy data were based on results from four randomized controlled trials of erenumab against placebo. The primary outcomes were costs, migraine days, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated as the cost per QALY gained. The cost per migraine day avoided was also estimated, as were disaggregated direct and indirect costs. The analysis was conducted from Swedish societal and healthcare system perspectives based on total migraine, chronic migraine and episodic migraine populations, using a discount rate of 3% applied to both costs and health benefits and using year 2019 values.

RESULTS

In the base-case deterministic analyses, erenumab treatment resulted in ICERs of Swedish krona (SEK) 34,696 (€3310) and SEK301,565 (€28,769) per QALY gained in the total migraine and episodic migraine populations, respectively. Erenumab was dominant in the chronic migraine population. In the total migraine population, the use of erenumab resulted in a net benefit to society of SEK81,739 (€7773) per patient, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of SEK300,000 (€28,528) per QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that erenumab is a cost-effective treatment for migraine with a willingness-to-pay threshold of SEK300,000 per QALY.

New Insight on the Safety of Erenumab: An Analysis of Spontaneous Reports of Adverse Events Recorded in the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System Database

AIM

The aim of this article was to provide an overview of adverse events reported for erenumab in post-marketing through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and perform a disproportionality analysis with other drugs used for acute or preventative treatment of migraine as controls.

METHODS

FAERS was screened from the first quarter of 2018 to the second quarter of 2020 (latest data update 30 June 2020). Clinical and demographic characteristics of cases were described along with the seriousness and outcome of adverse events. Disproportionality analyses were performed using the reporting odds ratio (ROR).

RESULTS

In total, 23,312 cases were reported during the study period, 67.0% by consumers. Cases in the age range 18-64 years (10,922 cases; 45.8%), in female sex (15,099 cases; 64.8%), and with adverse events that were classified as non-serious (19,626 cases; 84.2%) were the most prevalent in the database. After the exclusion of duplicates, 146 fatal cases were identified. A total of 1303 unlabeled adverse events were reported, of which 49 had statistically significant disproportionality of reporting in comparison with other drugs used for acute or preventative treatment of migraine. Identified disproportionality signals included alopecia, depression, anxiety, myocardial infarction, increased heart rate, pulmonary embolism, weight alteration, insomnia, tinnitus, and influenza-like symptoms. Injection-site reactions (labeled events) were co-reported with errors in administration procedures.

CONCLUSION

Adverse events reported during the first 2 years of post-marketing surveillance were mostly non-serious and with a favorable prognosis. However, new safety aspects emerged for which further studies are needed to confirm the associations, prioritizing unlabeled events with consistent disproportionality signals (e.g., emerging in at least 4 out of 6 analyses).

Long-term efficacy and safety of erenumab in migraine prevention: Results from a 5-year, open-label treatment phase of a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Although erenumab has demonstrated significant reduction in migraine frequency and improved quality of life in studies lasting 3 to 12 months, little is known about long-term therapy.

METHODS

This study was an open-label, 5-year treatment phase following a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults with episodic migraine. Patients initially received open-label erenumab 70 mg, which increased to 140 mg following a protocol amendment. Efficacy analyses included change from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMDs), monthly acute migraine-specific medication (AMSM) days, and health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Of 383 patients enrolled, 250 switched to 140 mg; 215 (56.1%) completed open-label treatment. Mean (standard error) change in MMDs from baseline of 8.7 (0.2) days was -5.3 (0.3) days; an average reduction of 62.3% at year 5. Among patients using AMSM at baseline (6.3 [2.8] treatment days), mean change in monthly AMSM days was -4.4 (0.3) days at the end of 5 years. Patient-reported outcomes indicated stable improvements in disability, headache impact, and migraine-specific quality of life. Exposure-adjusted patient incidence rates of adverse events (AEs) were 123.0/100 patient-years; AEs were most frequently nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, and influenza. Serious AEs (SAEs) reported by 49 patients (3.8/100 patient-years) were mostly single occurrence. Two fatal adverse events were reported. There were no increases in incidence of AEs, SAEs, or AEs leading to treatment discontinuation over 5 years of exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with erenumab was associated with reductions in migraine frequency and improvements in health-related quality of life that were maintained for at least 5 years. No new safety signals were observed.

Immunogenicity of biologic therapies for migraine: a review of current evidence

Background

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway have been shown to be effective in migraine prevention. Eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumb have shown efficacy in clinical trials along with favorable safety and tolerability profiles. Although erenumab is a human mAb and the others have been humanized to varying degrees, they all have the capacity to provoke immune reactions. The present review article aims to discuss the current relationship between mAbs targeting the CGRP pathway (CGRP mAbs) and immunogenicity and their potential clinical implications.

Findings

The incidence of patients developing anti-drug antibodies (ADAs), their titer, and clinical significance are highly variable and depend on a variety of different drug and patient factors. Neutralizing ADAs (NAbs) bind to and inhibit or reduce the pharmacologic activity of the biologic drug molecule, whereas non-neutralizing antibodies (Non-NAbs) bind to the biologic drug molecule without affecting pharmacologic activity in an in vitro test, although pharmacokinetics and drug clearance may be affected. A direct comparison of immunogenicity data across clinical trials with different biologics is not possible due to a lack of standardized assays. Several phase 2, phase 3, and long-term studies evaluating CGRP mAbs for migraine prevention have reported immunogenicity data (5 studies each for eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab). Across these studies, prevalence of ADAs varied, ranging from < 1% to ~ 18%. Neutralizing ADAs were slightly less common, with a prevalence ranging from 0 to 12%. Adverse events related to ADA formation were rare.

Conclusions

As more CGRP mAb studies are conducted and more long-term follow-up data become available, evidence is increasing that immunogenicity rates of biologic therapies for migraine are low, and adverse events related to ADAs are rare. Taken together, these results add to the growing body of evidence for the safety and tolerability of this class of migraine medications.

Update on Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Antagonism in the Treatment of Migraine

The discovery of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and its role in migraine has promoted a new era in migraine treatment: CGRP antagonism. Two classes of medications are currently available: small molecules targeting the CGRP receptor and monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP receptor or CGRP ligand. The revolution of these medications is represented by blurring the borders between acute and preventive treatments, episodic and chronic migraine, naïve and refractory patients and even between migraine and other headache disorders.

Monoclonal antibodies blocking CGRP transmission: An update on their added value in migraine prevention

The avenue of effective migraine therapies blocking calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) transmission is the successful outcome of 35 years of translational research. Developed after short-acting, the small antagonists of the CGRP receptor (the "gepants"), the monoclonal antibodies blocking CGRP or its receptor (CGRP/rec mAbs) have changed the paradigm in migraine treatment. Contrary to the classical acute medications like triptans or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with a transient effect, they act for long durations exclusively in the peripheral portion of the trigeminovascular system and can thus be assimilated to a durable attack treatment, unlike the classical preventives that chiefly act upstream on the central facets of migraine pathophysiology. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) of eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab have included collectively several thousands of patients, making them the most extensively studied class of preventive migraine treatments. Their results clearly indicate that CGRP/rec mAbs are significantly superior to placebo and have been comprehensively reviewed by Dodick [Cephalalgia 2019;39(3):445-458]. In this review we will briefly summarize the placebo-subtracted outcomes and number-needed-to-treat (NNT) of these pivotal RCTs and analyze new and post-hoc studies published afterwards focusing on effect size, effect onset and sustainability, response in subgroups of patients, safety and tolerability, and cost-effectiveness. We will also summarize our limited real-world experience with one of the CGRP/rec mAbs. Although methodological differences and lack of direct comparative trials preclude any reliable comparison, the overall impression is that there are only minor differences in efficacy and tolerability profiles between the four monoclonals: the average placebo-subtracted 50% responder rates for reduction in migraine headaches are 21.4% in episodic migraine (NNTs: 4-5), 17.4% in chronic migraine (NNTs: 4-8). Patients with an improvement exceeding 50% are rare, chronic migraineurs with continuous headache are unlikely to be responders and migraine auras are not improved. The effect starts within the first week after administration and is quasi maximal at one month. It is sustained for long time periods and may last for several months after treatment termination. CGRP/rec mAbs are effective even after prior preventive treatment failures and in patients with medication overuse, but the effect size might be smaller. They significantly reduce disability and health care resource utilization. The adverse effect profile of CGRP/rec mAbs is close to that of placebo with few minor exceptions and despite concerns related to the safeguarding role of CGRP in ischemia, no treatment-related vascular adverse events have been reported to date. Putting the CGRP/rec mAbs in perspective with available preventive migraine drug treatments, their major advantage seems not to be chiefly their superior efficacy but their unprecedented efficacy over adverse event ratio. Regarding cost-effectiveness, preliminary pharmaco-economic analyses of erenumab suggest that it is cost-effective for chronic migraine compared to no treatment or to onabotulinumtoxinA, but likely not for episodic migraine unless attack frequency is high, indirect costs are considered and its price is lowered.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies as preventive and acute treatments for migraine-The monoclonal antibodies and gepants

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) plays a pivotal role in migraine pathophysiology. Two types of CGRP function-blocking modalities, monoclonal antibodies, and small molecules (gepants), have been developed to target the CGRP ligands and CGRP receptors. Four CGRP monoclonal antibodies have received FDA approval for the prevention of migraine: erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab. Two gepants have been approved by the FDA for the acute treatment of migraine: ubrogepant and rimegepant. Multiple clinical trials of the CGRP monoclonal antibodies and gepants, and now some open-label long-term extension data, established their efficacy, safety, and tolerability. In this chapter, we summarize the major clinical trials, pharmacokinetic insights, safety and tolerability profiles, and real-world data (if available) of the CGRP monoclonal antibodies and gepants.

Multidimensional assessment of the effects of erenumab in chronic migraine patients with previous unsuccessful preventive treatments: a comprehensive real-world experience

BACKGROUND

erenumab was safe and effective in clinical trials for the prevention of migraine. However, real-life data are still lacking. Here we report the clinical experience from an Italian real-world setting using erenumab in patients with chronic migraine experiencing previous unsuccessful preventive treatments.

METHODS

Seventy patients with chronic migraine and failure to ≥4 migraine preventive medication classes initially received monthly erenumab 70 mg s.c. Patients without a clinically meaningful improvement, considered as a > 30% reduction in headache days per month, after ≥3 months of therapy switched to monthly erenumab 140 mg. At the first administration and after 3 and 6 months, patients underwent extensive interviews to assess clinical parameters of disease severity and migraine-related disability and impact, and validated questionnaires to explore depression/anxiety, sleep, and quality of life (QoL). Finally, the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, Allodynia Symptom Checklist-12 and MIGraine attacks-Subjective COGnitive impairments scale (MIG-SCOG) were administered.

RESULTS

70% of patients were "responders" after the third administration of erenumab 70 mg, whereas 30% switched to erenumab 140 mg; 29% (6 pts) responded after the sixth administration. The headache-day frequency was reduced from 21.1 ± 0.7 to 11.4 ± 0.9 days after the third administration (p < 0.001) and to 8.9 ± 0.7 days after the sixth administration (p < 0.001). 53% and 70% of patients, respectively, showed a reduction of ≥50% of headache days/month after the third and the sixth administrations. Also improved were headache pain severity, migraine-related disability, and impact on daily living, QoL, pain catastrophizing and allodynia (all p < 0.001), quality of sleep, symptoms of depression or anxiety (p < 0.05) but not MIG-SCOG. There were no new adverse event signals.

CONCLUSION

These real-world data support monthly erenumab 70 or 140 mg s.c. as a safe and effective preventive treatment to reduce headache frequency and severity in chronic migraine patients experiencing previous unsuccessful preventive treatments.

Targeting CGRP for migraine treatment: mechanisms, antibodies, small molecules, perspectives

INTRODUCTION

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) has gradually emerged as a suitable therapeutic target to treat migraine. Considering the social and economic burden of migraine, it is fundamental to optimize the disease management with efficacious and safe treatments. In this scenario, drugs targeting GCRP, monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) and gepants, represent new therapeutic strategies.

AREAS COVERED

In the present work, the authors aim at appraising the main insights and implications of treatments targeting CGRP by reviewing pathophysiology and clinical information.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-CGRP MoAbs are the first migraine-specific preventive treatments representing a suitable option especially for difficult-to-treat patients. They can be safely administered for long periods even in association with preventatives acting on different targets. Gepants are a safe alternative to triptans for the acute management of migraine and are currently being tested for prevention, thus representing the first transitional molecules for disease therapy. In the future, it might be possible to adapt the treatment according to patients' characteristics and disease phenotype even combining the two treatments targeting the CGRP pathway.

Evaluation of injection-site-related adverse events with galcanezumab: a post hoc analysis of phase 3 studies in participants with migraine

BACKGROUND

Injection-site reactions have been reported with biologicals. In this post hoc analysis of Phase 3 studies in participants with migraine, we provide a comprehensive overview and detailed summary of injection-site reaction with galcanezumab.

METHODS

Data were obtained from two randomised clinical studies in participants with episodic migraine (EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2), one randomised study in participants with chronic migraine (REGAIN) and one open-label study (Study CGAJ) in participants with episodic or chronic migraine. The injection-site reactions were measured for two different cohorts: 1) six-month double-blind treatment phase in the EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2 studies and three-month double-blind treatment phase in the REGAIN study, where participants received placebo and galcanezumab (placebo-controlled analysis set); 2) three month double-blind (Month 0 to Month 3; 1:1:placebo:galcanezumab) + 9 months open-label extension phase (Month 3 to Month 12) of REGAIN and twelve month open-label phase of Study CGAJ, where participants received only galcanezumab (galcanezumab exposure analysis set).

RESULTS

A total of 477 participants in the placebo-controlled analysis set (galcanezumab 240 mg, 166/730 [22.7%]; galcanezumab 120 mg, 128/705 [18.2%]; placebo, 183/1451 [12.6%]) reported at least one injection-site reaction. Most of the injection-site reactions were reported as injection-site pain, unspecified injection-site reaction, injection-site erythema, and injection-site pruritus. The incidence of injection-site pain was highest among all reported injection-site reactions and were reported with similar frequency by participants receiving galcanezumab (galcanezumab 120 mg, 10.1%; galcanezumab 240 mg, 11.6%) and placebo (9.5%) and was the most common injection-site reaction reported within 60 min of injection (~ 86% of participants). The frequency of unspecified injection-site reaction, injection-site erythema and injection-site pruritus was significantly (P < 0.001) higher in participant receiving galcanezumab versus placebo. In the galcanezumab exposure analysis set participants received up to 12 doses and the frequency of injection-site reactions reported for both doses combined was 21.8%. The reporting of injection-site reactions did not increase with the number of doses received. No ISR-related serious adverse events were reported in both the placebo-controlled and galcanezumab exposure analysis sets.

CONCLUSIONS

The most common adverse event of galcanezumab is injection-site reactions. However, these events were generally mild-to-moderate in severity, non-serious, resolved spontaneously, and discontinuations due to injection-site reactions were low (1%).

Real-life data on the efficacy and safety of erenumab in the Abruzzo region, central Italy

Background

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of erenumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody inhibiting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRPr), for the prevention of migraine in a real-life setting.

Main body

We included in our observational study all patients with episodic or chronic migraine treated with erenumab during the year 2019 in the Abruzzo region, central Italy, and with a 6-month follow-up. We included 89 patients; 76 (85.4%) received 6 doses of erenumab, 11 (12.4%) autonomously withdrew the drug due to perceived inefficacy, and 2 (2.2%) due to adverse events. Seventy-eight patients (87.6%) were female, with a mean age of 46.8 ± 11.2 years; 84 (94.4%) had chronic migraine, and 64 (71.9%) medication overuse. All patients had ≥2 prior preventive treatment failures. Fifty-three patients (69.7%) had a 50% decrease in monthly migraine days (MMDs) within the first three doses; 46 (71.9%) of 64 patients withdrew medication overuse. In the 76 patients who completed a 6-dose treatment, erenumab decreased median MMDs from 19 (interquartile range [IQR] 12–27.5) to 4 (IQR 2–9.5; P < 0.001), median monthly days of analgesic use from 10 (IQR 4.5–20) to 2 IQR 0–5; P < 0.001), and median monthly days of triptan use from 5 (IQR 0–15.5) to 1 (IQR 0–4; P < 0.001). We recorded 27 adverse events in 20 (22.5%) patients, the most common being constipation (13.5%). One adverse event, i.e. allergic reaction, led to treatment discontinuation in one patient.

Conclusions

Our real-life data confirm the efficacy and tolerability of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in a difficult-to-treat population of patients with a high prevalence of chronic migraine and medication overuse.