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

Comprehensive approaches to preclinical evaluation of monoclonal antibodies and their next-generation derivatives

Biotherapeutics hold great promise for the treatment of several diseases and offer innovative possibilities for new treatments that target previously unaddressed medical needs. Despite successful transitions from preclinical to clinical stages and regulatory approval, there are instances where adverse reactions arise, resulting in product withdrawals. As a result, it is essential to conduct thorough evaluations of safety and effectiveness on an individual basis. This article explores current practices, challenges, and future approaches in conducting comprehensive preclinical assessments to ensure the safety and efficacy of biotherapeutics including monoclonal antibodies, toxin-conjugates, bispecific antibodies, single-chain antibodies, Fc-engineered antibodies, antibody mimetics, and siRNA-antibody/peptide conjugates.

Immunogenicity of erenumab: A pooled analysis of six placebo-controlled trials with long-term extensions

BACKGROUND

Immunogenicity of erenumab, a human anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor monoclonal antibody developed for migraine prevention, has been evaluated throughout clinical development.

METHODS

Integrated post hoc analysis assessing immunogenicity of erenumab across six clinical trials in patients with episodic and chronic migraine (N = 2985). Anti-erenumab antibody incidence and potential impact on pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety were evaluated in short-term (double-blind treatment phase 12-24 weeks) and long-term (double-blind treatment phase plus extensions of up to 5 years) analyses.

RESULTS

Anti-erenumab binding antibody incidence was low with few patients developing neutralizing antibodies. Antibody responses were mostly transient with low magnitude. Binding antibodies developed as early as 2-4 weeks after the first dose; the majority developed within the first 6 months and very few after the first year. Serum concentrations of erenumab in antibody-positive patients were generally lower than, but within the range of, antibody-negative patients. There was no impact of anti-erenumab antibodies on erenumab efficacy or safety with no differences between antibody-positive and antibody-negative patients in change in monthly migraine days or adverse event rates.

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis showed that immunogenicity had no meaningful clinical impact on efficacy or safety of erenumab in patients with migraine.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01952574; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02456740; Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02483585; Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02174861; Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02630459; Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03812224.

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

Objective

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

The Role of Galcanezumab in Migraine Prevention: Existing Data and Future Directions

Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway by targeting the CGRP. Data from four phase-3 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials showed that galcanezumab is superior to placebo in reducing migraine headaches, migraine-specific quality of life, and headache-related disability. Most of the adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate and did not affect trial completion rates significantly. Along with erenumab, fremanezumab, and eptinezumab, galcanezumab forms a novel class of anti-migraine preventative treatments that is disease-specific and mechanism-based, unlike the standard ones. In addition, galcanezumab has also been shown to be effective in cluster headache, though more clinical trials are required. Overall, galcanezumab is a promising emerging treatment in migraine prophylaxis. However, it needs to be tested in larger clinical trials focused on treatment-resistant migraine. Furthermore, its safety profile, especially its potential association with an increased cardiovascular risk, needs to be established through long-term, real-world data. This review aims to give an overview of its pharmacological properties as well as to report and discuss data from clinical trials and its potential place in headache therapeutics.

Monoclonal Antibodies as Neurological Therapeutics

Over the last 30 years the role of monoclonal antibodies in therapeutics has increased enormously, revolutionizing treatment in most medical specialties, including neurology. Monoclonal antibodies are key therapeutic agents for several neurological conditions with diverse pathophysiological mechanisms, including multiple sclerosis, migraines and neuromuscular disease. In addition, a great number of monoclonal antibodies against several targets are being investigated for many more neurological diseases, which reflects our advances in understanding the pathogenesis of these diseases. Untangling the molecular mechanisms of disease allows monoclonal antibodies to block disease pathways accurately and efficiently with exceptional target specificity, minimizing non-specific effects. On the other hand, accumulating experience shows that monoclonal antibodies may carry class-specific and target-associated risks. This article provides an overview of different types of monoclonal antibodies and their characteristics and reviews monoclonal antibodies currently in use or under development for neurological disease.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics and Drug-Drug Interactions of New Anti-Migraine Drugs-Lasmiditan, Gepants, and Calcitonin-Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Receptor Monoclonal Antibodies

In the last few years, there have been significant advances in migraine management and prevention. Lasmiditan, ubrogepant, rimegepant and monoclonal antibodies (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab) are new drugs that were launched on the US pharmaceutical market; some of them also in Europe. This publication reviews the available worldwide references on the safety of these anti-migraine drugs with a focus on the possible drug–drug (DDI) or drug–food interactions. As is known, bioavailability of a drug and, hence, its pharmacological efficacy depend on its pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, which may be altered by drug interactions. This paper discusses the interactions of gepants and lasmiditan with, i.a., serotonergic drugs, CYP3A4 inhibitors, and inducers or breast cancer resistant protein (BCRP) and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) inhibitors. In the case of monoclonal antibodies, the issue of pharmacodynamic interactions related to the modulation of the immune system functions was addressed. It also focuses on the effect of monoclonal antibodies on expression of class Fc gamma receptors (FcγR).

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%).