1
|
Raffaelli B, Do TP, Ashina H, Snellman J, Maio-Twofoot T, Ashina M. Induction of cGMP-mediated migraine attacks is independent of CGRP receptor activation. Cephalalgia 2024; 44:3331024241259489. [PMID: 38850034 DOI: 10.1177/03331024241259489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The cAMP and cGMP pathways are implicated in the initiation of migraine attacks, but their interactions remain unclear. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) triggers migraine attacks via cAMP, whereas the phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor sildenafil induces migraine attacks via cGMP. Our objective was to investigate whether sildenafil could induce migraine attacks in individuals with migraine pre-treated with the CGRP-receptor antibody erenumab. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study, adults with migraine without aura received a single subcutaneous injection of 140 mg erenumab on day 1. They were then randomized to receive sildenafil 100 mg or placebo on two experimental days, each separated by at least one week, between days 8 and 21. The primary endpoint was the difference in the incidence of migraine attacks between sildenafil and placebo during the 12-h observation period after administration. RESULTS In total, 16 participants completed the study. Ten participants (63%) experienced a migraine attack within 12 h after sildenafil administration compared to three (19%) after placebo (p = 0.016). The median headache intensity was higher after sildenafil than after placebo (area under the curve (AUC) for the 12-h observation period, p = 0.026). Furthermore, sildenafil induced a significant decrease in mean arterial blood pressure (AUC, p = 0.026) and a simultaneous increase in heart rate (AUC, p < 0.001) during the first hour after administration compared to placebo. CONCLUSION These findings provide evidence that migraine induction via the cGMP pathway can occur even under CGRP receptor blockade. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier NCT05889455.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bianca Raffaelli
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Clinician Scientist Program, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité (BIH), Berlin, Germany
| | - Thien Phu Do
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Håkan Ashina
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Translational Research Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | | | - Messoud Ashina
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lipton RB. Preventive Treatment of Migraine. Continuum (Minneap Minn) 2024; 30:364-378. [PMID: 38568488 DOI: 10.1212/con.0000000000001418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/05/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This article describes strategies for the preventive treatment of migraine including the emerging role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies and introduces novel paradigms for the preventive treatment of migraine. LATEST DEVELOPMENTS Multiple migraine medications targeting CGRP have been introduced since 2018, including injectable monoclonal antibodies (ie, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab) and oral small-molecule CGRP receptor antagonists (ie, ubrogepant, rimegepant, atogepant, and zavegepant). With the exceptions of ubrogepant and zavegepant, which are approved only as acute treatments, all of these agents have demonstrated efficacy in the preventive treatment of migraine; the monoclonal antibodies and atogepant have evidence of effectiveness in adults with either episodic or chronic migraine. The safety and tolerability profiles of CGRP-targeted therapies in migraine are favorable. ESSENTIAL POINTS The goals of preventive migraine therapy include reducing the frequency, severity, duration, and disability associated with attacks, reducing the need for acute treatment and the risk of medication overuse, enhancing self-efficacy and health-related quality of life, and reducing headache-related distress and interictal burden. Six drugs targeting CGRP (four monoclonal antibodies and two gepants) are now available for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. The efficacy of CGRP-targeted medications in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine, together with good safety and tolerability, has led to the emergence of new approaches to preventive treatment.
Collapse
|
3
|
Pozo-Rosich P, Poveda JL, Crespo C, Martínez M, Rodríguez JM, Irimia P. Is erenumab an efficient alternative for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in Spain? Results of a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Headache Pain 2024; 25:40. [PMID: 38491460 PMCID: PMC10943917 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-024-01747-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2023] [Accepted: 03/07/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The reimbursement of erenumab in Spain and other European countries is currently restricted because of the cost of this novel therapy to patients with migraine who have experienced previous failures to traditional preventive treatments. However, this reimbursement policy should be preferably based on cost-effectiveness studies, among other criteria. This study performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of erenumab versus topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine (EM) and versus placebo for chronic migraine (CM). METHODS A Markov model with a 10-year time horizon, from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System, was constructed based on data from responder and non-responder patients. A responder was defined as having a minimum 50% reduction in the number of monthly migraine days (MMD). A hypothetical cohort of patients with EM with one or more prior preventive treatment failures and patients with CM with more than two treatment failures was considered. The effectiveness score was measured as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost per migraine day (MD) avoided. Data from clinical outcomes and patient characteristics were obtained from erenumab clinical trials (NCT02066415, STRIVE, ARISE, LIBERTY and HER-MES). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to validate the robustness of the model. RESULTS After a 10-year follow-up, the estimated QALYs were 5.88 and 6.11 for patients with EM treated with topiramate and erenumab, respectively. Erenumab showed an incremental cost per patient of €4,420 vs topiramate. For CM patients, erenumab resulted in 0.756 QALYs gained vs placebo; and an incremental cost of €1,814. Patients treated with erenumab achieved reductions in MD for both EM and CM (172 and 568 MDs, respectively). The incremental cost per QALY gained with erenumab was below the Spanish threshold of €30,000/QALY for both health and societal perspectives (EM €19,122/QALY and CM €2,398/QALY). CONCLUSIONS Erenumab is cost-effective versus topiramate as a preventive treatment for EM and versus placebo for patients with CM from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia Pozo-Rosich
- Neurology Department, Headache Unit, Valld'Hebron University Hospital, Ps. Vall d'Hebron 119-12, 08035, Barcelona, Spain.
- Headache Research Group, Medicine Departament, VHIR, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
| | - José Luis Poveda
- Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitari I Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | - Carlos Crespo
- Axentiva Solutions, Barcelona, Spain
- G.M. Statistics Department, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | - Pablo Irimia
- Department of Neurology, Headache Unit, Clínica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lazaro-Hernandez C, Caronna E, Rosell-Mirmi J, Gallardo VJ, Alpuente A, Torres-Ferrus M, Pozo-Rosich P. Early and annual projected savings from anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prevention: a cost-benefit analysis in the working-age population. J Headache Pain 2024; 25:21. [PMID: 38347485 PMCID: PMC10860274 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-024-01727-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Accepted: 01/28/2024] [Indexed: 02/15/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Migraine is one of the main causes of disability worldwide. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have proven to be safe and efficacious as preventive migraine treatments. However, their use is restricted in many countries due to their apparently high cost. Cost-benefit studies are needed. OBJECTIVE To study the cost-benefit of anti-CGRP MAbs in working-age patients with migraine. METHODS This is a prospective cohort study of consecutive migraine patients treated with anti-CGRP MAbs (erenumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab) following National reimbursement policy in a specialized headache clinic. Migraine characteristics and the work impact scale (WPAI) were compared between baseline (M0) and after 3 (M3) and 6 months (M6) of treatment. Using WPAI and the municipal average hourly wage, we calculated indirect costs (absenteeism and presenteeism) at each time point. Direct costs (emergency visits, acute medication use) were also analysed. A cost-benefit study was performed considering the different costs and savings of treating with MAbs. Based on these data an annual projection was conducted. RESULTS From 256 treated working-age patients, 148 were employed (89.2% women; mean age 48.0 ± 8.5 years), of which 41.2% (61/148) were responders (> 50% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD)). Statistically significant reductions between M0 and M3/M6 were found in absenteeism (p < 0.001) and presenteeism (p < 0.001). Average savings in indirect costs per patient at M3 were absenteeism 105.4 euros/month and presenteeism 394.3 euros/month, similar for M6. Considering the monthly cost of anti-CGRP MAbs, the cost-benefit analysis showed savings of 159.8 euros per patient at M3, with an annual projected savings of 639.2 euros/patient. Both responders and partial responders (30-50% reduction in MHD) presented a positive cost-benefit balance. The overall savings of the cohort at M3/M6 compensated the negative cost-benefit balance for non-responders (< 30% reduction in MHD). CONCLUSION Anti-CGRP MAbs have a positive impact in the workforce significantly reducing absenteeism and presenteeism. In Spain, this benefit overcomes the expenses derived from their use already at 3 months and is potentially sustainable at longer term; also in patients who are only partial responders, prompting reconsideration of current reimbursement criteria and motivating the extension of similar cost-benefit studies in other countries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Edoardo Caronna
- Headache Clinic, Neurology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Joana Rosell-Mirmi
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Victor J Gallardo
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Alicia Alpuente
- Headache Clinic, Neurology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marta Torres-Ferrus
- Headache Clinic, Neurology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Patricia Pozo-Rosich
- Headache Clinic, Neurology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bentivegna E, Galastri S, Onan D, Martelletti P. Unmet Needs in the Acute Treatment of Migraine. Adv Ther 2024; 41:1-13. [PMID: 37943442 PMCID: PMC10796525 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02650-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2023] [Accepted: 08/16/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
Migraine represents the most common neurologic disorder, ranking second among the world's causes of disability [expressed as years lived with disability (YLDs)]. Patients often do not receive the best therapy because of safety issues, tolerance, and prescription accessibility. General practitioners are not always educated about the disease, and specialists are few and often difficult to reach. Therapies are limited and have many side effects that can impede the prescription. Prophylactic therapy is recommended in case of four or more headaches a month, eight or more headache days a month, debilitating headaches, and medication-overuse headaches. The available therapeutic options are in constant development. The classic one consists of non-specific drugs: β-blockers, tricyclics, antiepileptics, and botulinum toxin. Monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene receptor (CGRP) peptide or its receptor are the only ones specifically designed to treat migraine. Their efficiency and convenient safety profile have been demonstrated in a number of trials versus both placebo and classic therapies. The treatment of acute migraine attack consists of medications designed to affect the painful symptoms. For over 30 years, the cornerstones of treatment in clinical practice have continued to be represented by triptans and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), with the well-know related adverse effects. Opioids are used inappropriately and overprescribed. Polytherapy is strongly not recommended but is still a common practice because treatment is not optimized and thus not efficient. Great promise comes from gepants, also targeting CGRP, and ditans, 5-HT1F receptor agonists. They seem to outweigh the risk of medication overuse headache because of their efficacy and rapid onset and have no cardiovascular contraindications. Nonetheless, these points remain to be confirmed. Although therapies have been implemented in the last years, significant unmet treatment needs remain a reality in patients' lives. This commentary aims to identify the most important unmet needs in the acute treatment of migraine, analyzing the current status of available therapies and their limits. We also analyzed some of the prophylactic therapies available, especially focusing on anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies, to better understand the importance of setting a therapeutic strategy that includes the two modes, both acute and prophylactic, to reach the best result. We hope that having an overview of the shortcomings will help to provide constructive ideas for improvement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enrico Bentivegna
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy.
| | - Silvia Galastri
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy
| | - Dilara Onan
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy
- Back and Neck Health Unit, Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Paolo Martelletti
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Via di Grottarossa 1035-1039, 00189, Rome, Italy
- Regional Referral Headache Centre, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Alsaadi T, Kayed DM, Al-Madani A, Hassan AM, Terruzzi A, Krieger D, Riachi N, Sarathchandran P, Al-Rukn S. Consensus-Based Recommendations on the Use of CGRP-Based Therapies for Migraine Prevention in the UAE. Neurol Ther 2023; 12:1845-1865. [PMID: 37792218 PMCID: PMC10630270 DOI: 10.1007/s40120-023-00550-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 09/19/2023] [Indexed: 10/05/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Migraine is a common debilitating neurological disorder affecting a large proportion of the general population. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a 37-amino acid neuropeptide, plays a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine, and the development of therapies targeting the anti-CGRP pathway has revolutionized the field of migraine treatment. METHODS An expert task force of neurologists in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) developed and critically assessed recommendations on the use of CGRP-based therapies in migraine treatment and management in the UAE, based on available published literature. A consensus was reached for each statement by means of an open-voting process, based on a predefined agreement level of at least 60%. RESULTS The consensus recommendations advocate the need for guidelines for the appropriate use of CGRP-based therapies by defining patient cohorts and appropriate monitoring of therapeutic response as well as standardizing the initiation, assessment, and cessation of treatment. The consensus recommendations were primarily formulated on the basis of international studies, because of the limited availability of regional and local data. As such, they may also act as guidelines for global healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS These are the first consensus recommendations for the UAE that address the use of CGRP-based therapies in the treatment and management of migraine, integrating both clinical evidence and medical expertise to enhance clinical judgment and decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Taoufik Alsaadi
- Department of Neurology, American Center for Psychiatry and Neurology, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
| | - Deeb M Kayed
- Neurology Department, Mediclinic City Hospital, Dubai, UAE
| | | | | | | | - Derk Krieger
- Neurology Department, Mediclinic Parkview Hospital, Dubai, UAE
| | - Naji Riachi
- Sheikh Shakhbout Medical City, Khalifa University College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Abu Dhabi, UAE
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Do TP, Deligianni C, Amirguliyev S, Snellman J, Lopez CL, Al-Karagholi MAM, Guo S, Ashina M. Second messenger signalling bypasses CGRP receptor blockade to provoke migraine attacks in humans. Brain 2023; 146:5224-5234. [PMID: 37540009 PMCID: PMC10690017 DOI: 10.1093/brain/awad261] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2023] [Revised: 06/25/2023] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 08/05/2023] Open
Abstract
There are several endogenous molecules that can trigger migraine attacks when administered to humans. Notably, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been identified as a key player in a signalling cascade involved in migraine attacks, acting through the second messenger cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) in various cells, including intracranial vascular smooth muscle cells. However, it remains unclear whether intracellular cAMP signalling requires CGRP receptor activation during a migraine attack in humans. To address this question, we conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel trial using a human provocation model involving the administration of CGRP and cilostazol in individuals with migraine pretreated with erenumab or placebo. Our study revealed that migraine attacks can be provoked in patients by cAMP-mediated mechanisms using cilostazol, even when the CGRP receptor is blocked by erenumab. Furthermore, the dilation of cranial arteries induced by cilostazol was not influenced by the CGRP receptor blockade. These findings provide clinical evidence that cAMP-evoked migraine attacks do not require CGRP receptor activation. This discovery opens up new possibilities for the development of mechanism-based drugs for the treatment of migraine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thien Phu Do
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital—Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Christina Deligianni
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital—Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Sarkhan Amirguliyev
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital—Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | - Cristina Lopez Lopez
- Roche Innovation Center Basel, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., 4070 Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Song Guo
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital—Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Messoud Ashina
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital—Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bagherzadeh-Fard M, Amin Yazdanifar M, Sadeghalvad M, Rezaei N. Erenumab efficacy in migraine headache prophylaxis: A systematic review. Int Immunopharmacol 2023; 117:109366. [PMID: 37012858 DOI: 10.1016/j.intimp.2022.109366] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2022] [Revised: 09/25/2022] [Accepted: 10/15/2022] [Indexed: 03/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This systematic review aims to show the efficiency of Erenumab in the preventive therapy of episodic and chronic migraine, which is still under research. BACKGROUND Migraine is a chronic neurovascular disorder that causes disability and a social burden. There are various medications used for migraine prevention regimens, most of which have unwanted side effects and aren't often quite effective. Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide receptors and was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for migraine prevention. METHODS For this systematic review, we searched through Scopus and PubMed databases using "Erenumab" or "AMG 334" and "migraine" as keywords, and all the studies from 2016 to March 18, 2022, were included. Original English articles assessing any outcomes referring to the efficacy of Erenumab in migraine headache treatment were included in this study. RESULTS We found 53 out of 605 papers eligible to be investigated. Erenumab in both dosages of 70 mg and 140 mg could decrease the mean of monthly migraine days and monthly acute migraine-specific medication days. Erenumab also has a higher rate of ≥ 50 %, ≥ 75 %, and 100 % reduction in monthly migraine days from the baseline in different regions. The efficacy of Erenumab was initiated in the first week of administration and sustained throughout and after treatment. Erenumab was also potent in the treatment of migraine with allodynia, aura, prior preventive therapy failure, medication overuse headache, and menstrual migraine. Erenumab also had favorable outcomes in combination therapy with other preventive drugs like Onabotulinumtoxin-A. CONCLUSION Erenumab had remarkable efficacy in the short and long-term treatment of episodic and chronic migraine, notably the patients with difficult-to-treat migraine headaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mahsa Bagherzadeh-Fard
- Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran; Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Expert Group (SRMEG), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Tehran, Iran
| | - Mohammad Amin Yazdanifar
- Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran; Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Expert Group (SRMEG), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Tehran, Iran
| | - Mona Sadeghalvad
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Expert Group (SRMEG), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Tehran, Iran; Department of Immunology, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Nima Rezaei
- Department of Immunology, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; Network of Immunity in Infection, Malignancy and Autoimmunity (NIIMA), Universal Scientific Education and Research Network (USERN), Tehran,Iran; Research Center for Immunodeficiencies, Children's Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Giffin NJ. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies for migraine. Pract Neurol 2023; 23:200-207. [PMID: 36754606 DOI: 10.1136/pn-2022-003592] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/18/2023] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
The introduction of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies represents a step forward in preventive migraine treatment as the first agents to target the underlying pathogenesis of migraine. In trials they act more quickly, have better long-term adherence and appear to be better tolerated than other treatments. Major disadvantages are their high cost and unknown safety in pregnancy and in cardiovascular disease. To mitigate these concerns, they should be used according to guidance produced by professional bodies, with defined starting and stopping criteria. We do not yet know whether they are more effective than standard care; many patients may still be better treated by other means, in particular addressing lifestyle factors and medication-overuse headache.
Collapse
|
10
|
Schwedt TJ, Martin A, Kymes S, Talon B, Lee XY, Cady R, Asher D, Karnik-Henry M, Mulvihill E, Bates D, Beusterien K. Patient preferences for attributes of injected or infused preventive migraine medications: Findings from a discrete choice experiment. Headache 2023; 63:484-493. [PMID: 36753057 DOI: 10.1111/head.14476] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Revised: 11/16/2022] [Accepted: 01/04/2023] [Indexed: 02/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess preferences among adults with migraine for differentiating attributes of injected or infused preventive treatment options and evaluate their importance in determining a treatment choice. BACKGROUND Adults with migraine and health-care providers consider many factors when making treatment decisions. Injected or infused preventive migraine treatment options differ in several attributes, including mode of administration and dosing frequency, which may be preferentially selected or avoided by patients. Understanding a patient's preference is important for clinicians as they advise on various treatment options. METHODS A total of 604 US adults diagnosed with migraine participated in an online survey that captured information on demographics, migraine history, and treatment preferences. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used to evaluate participants' preferences for specific attributes of injected/infused preventive migraine therapies. The DCE data were utilized to estimate attribute importance (expressed as a percentage) and identify subgroups that had different distributions of preferences. RESULTS In the overall migraine population, mode of administration (28.8%), durability of effectiveness (27.0%), and speed of onset (25.5%) had the highest relative importance, whereas administration setting (9.9%) and dosing frequency (8.8%) had the lowest. Four distinct subgroups were identified: Group 1 (n = 128) preferred self-injection administration and durability of effectiveness; Group 2 (n = 189) expressed aversion to cranial injections; Group 3 (n = 158) prioritized rapid speed of onset; and Group 4 (n = 129) favored health-care provider administration and durability of effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS Speed of onset, durability of effectiveness, and mode of administration are key moderators of treatment preference among US adults with migraine. Certain segments of the migraine population prioritize specific treatment attributes over others, with intravenous infusion not considered a barrier in three of four identified segments. Clinicians can best help their patients find the right medication if they understand which medication attributes are most and least important to them.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Roger Cady
- Lundbeck LLC, Deerfield, Illinois, USA.,RK Consults, Ozark, Missouri, USA.,Missouri State University, Springfield, Missouri, USA
| | | | | | | | - Dawn Bates
- Cerner Enviza, Kansas City, Missouri, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Aditya S, Rattan A. Advances in CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies as Migraine Therapy: A Narrative Review. SAUDI JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & MEDICAL SCIENCES 2023; 11:11-18. [PMID: 36909005 PMCID: PMC9997852 DOI: 10.4103/sjmms.sjmms_95_22] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Revised: 12/01/2022] [Accepted: 12/21/2022] [Indexed: 03/14/2023]
Abstract
Migraine is a potentially disabling disorder, yet it remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. The release of the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in the trigemino-cerebrovascular system plays a vital role in the evolution of migraine. It enhances peripheral sensitization by mediating neurogenic inflammation and also influences central sensitization. The majority of the drug classes available for migraine prophylaxis are nonspecific and associated with numerous side effects and drug interactions. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAb) are an innovative therapeutic class that fulfills the need for more efficacious and tolerable preventive therapy. While erenumab is a mAb to the CGRP receptor, eptinezumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab bind to the CGRP molecule. They decrease the number of headache days and improve disability. Upper respiratory tract infection, nausea, constipation, pain at the site of injection, and fatigue are the associated side effects. CGRP mAbs are an excellent advancement in translational research and are a promising addition in migraine therapy. This article discusses the recent advances in the development of the CGRP mAbs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suruchi Aditya
- Department of Pharmacology, Dr. Harvansh Singh Judge Institute of Dental Sciences, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
| | - Aditya Rattan
- Cardiology Clinic, Heart Line, Panchkula, Haryana, India
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ehrlich M, Hentschke C, Sieder C, Maier-Peuschel M, Reuter U. Erenumab versus topiramate: post hoc efficacy analysis from the HER-MES study. J Headache Pain 2022; 23:141. [PMID: 36380284 PMCID: PMC9664641 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01511-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2022] [Accepted: 10/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE HER-MES was the first head-to-head, phase 4 trial to assess the tolerability and effectiveness of erenumab against standard of care treatment (topiramate). This post hoc analysis compared the efficacy of erenumab with topiramate in patients who completed the trial on study medication. METHODS Post hoc sensitivity analysis was performed using the full analysis set. Outcomes assessed included the proportion of patients with a ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) from baseline (50% responder rate), over the last 3 months (months 4, 5, and 6) of the double-blind treatment phase (DBTP), the 50% responder rate during the first month of the DBTP, and change from baseline in MMD during the DBTP. Multiple imputation was done for efficacy values of patients who discontinued study treatment. RESULTS Patients (N = 777) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 70 or 140 mg/month erenumab (N = 389) or 50-100 mg/day topiramate (N = 388). Of these, 334 patients (85.9%) receiving erenumab, and 231 patients (59.5%) receiving topiramate completed the DBTP on study medication. Patients on study medication until the end of the DBTP received a mean dose of 119 mg/month for erenumab and 92 mg/day for topiramate. At month 1, a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving erenumab (39.2%) reported ≥50% reduction in MMD from baseline compared with those receiving topiramate (24.0%; p < 0.001). In the last 3 months, a significantly larger proportion of patients receiving erenumab (60.3%) achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD from baseline compared with those receiving topiramate (43.3%; p < 0.001). Patients receiving erenumab demonstrated significantly greater reductions in MMD during the last 3 months from baseline versus those receiving topiramate (- 6.13 vs - 4.90; 95% CI: - 1.87 to - 0.61; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS This post hoc analysis demonstrated significantly superior efficacy of erenumab versus topiramate in achieving a ≥50% reduction in MMD with an early onset of efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03828539 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Uwe Reuter
- Department of Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
- Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Abstract
Chronic migraine is a neurologic disorder associated with considerable disability, lost productivity, and a profound economic burden worldwide. The past five years have seen a dramatic expansion in new treatments for this often challenging condition, among them calcitonin gene related peptide antagonists and neuromodulatory devices. This review outlines the epidemiology of and diagnostic criteria and risk factors for chronic migraine. It discusses evidence based drug and non-drug treatments, their advantages and disadvantages, and the principles of patient centered care for adults with chronic migraine, with attention to differential diagnosis and comorbidities, clinical reasoning, initiation and monitoring, cost, and availability. It discusses the international guidelines on drug treatment for chronic migraine and evaluates non-drug treatments including behavioral and complementary therapies and lifestyle modifications. Finally, it discusses the management of chronic migraine in special populations, including pediatrics, pregnancy, and older people, and considers future questions and emerging research in the field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Julie Roth
- Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Switzer MP, Robinson JE, Joyner KR, Morgan KW. Atogepant for the prevention of episodic migraine in adults. SAGE Open Med 2022; 10:20503121221128688. [PMID: 36226229 PMCID: PMC9549103 DOI: 10.1177/20503121221128688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Accepted: 09/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective Atogepant is a newly approved medication for the prevention of migraine. This review aims to discuss the efficacy, safety, cost, and place in therapy of atogepant. Methods The authors performed a systematic search for sources, including articles, abstracts, and poster presentations. Queried databases were the National Institute of Health, US National Library of Medicine Clinical Trials, PubMed, European PMC, and the Cochrane Library. Search terms included atogepant, QULIPTA™, AGN-241689, MK-803, and N02CD07. Full-text, English language, randomized-controlled trials from 1 February 2012 to 1 February 2022 were included in the review. Additional relevant prescribing information, abstracts, and articles identified through the search were considered for inclusion in this review. A total of 193 database entries were evaluated for inclusion in this narrative review. Three articles representing two randomized controlled trials were reviewed. Results and conclusions Atogepant, a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, is a daily oral treatment for migraine prevention. In placebo-controlled clinical trials, atogepant decreased mean monthly migraine days (MMD) over 12 weeks in patients with episodic migraine. Major treatment-related adverse effects include nausea and constipation. Long-term placebo-controlled efficacy and safety studies, chronic migraine studies, and studies in patients that failed more than two classes of preventive therapies are still pending. Atogepant represents one of many novel therapies for the prevention of migraine. To date, no head-to-head comparisons of atogepant versus other agents indicated for migraine prevention have been published. Atogepant offers patients an alternative therapy to injectable or infusion monoclonal antibody treatments and offers an alternative to non-specific migraine medications that are associated with poor tolerability. Due to its high cost and narrower therapeutic indications, atogepant may be reserved for a small subset of migraineurs who prefer oral therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Kayla Rena Joyner
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Bernard J. Dunn School of Pharmacy, Shenandoah University, Winchester, VA, USA
- Valley Health Winchester Medical Center, Winchester, VA, USA
| | - Kelsey Woods Morgan
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Bernard J. Dunn School of Pharmacy, Shenandoah University, Winchester, VA, USA
- Valley Health Winchester Medical Center, Winchester, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Kung D, Rodriguez G, Evans R. Chronic Migraine. Neurol Clin 2022; 41:141-159. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2022.05.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
|
16
|
Ornello R, Baraldi C, Ahmed F, Negro A, Miscio AM, Santoro A, Alpuente A, Russo A, Silvestro M, Cevoli S, Brunelli N, Vernieri F, Grazzi L, Pani L, Andreou A, Lambru G, Frattale I, Kamm K, Ruscheweyh R, Russo M, Torelli P, Filatova E, Latysheva N, Gryglas-Dworak A, Straburzyński M, Butera C, Colombo B, Filippi M, Pozo-Rosich P, Martelletti P, Guerzoni S, Sacco S. Excellent Response to OnabotulinumtoxinA: Different Definitions, Different Predictors. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:ijerph191710975. [PMID: 36078699 PMCID: PMC9518492 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191710975] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2022] [Revised: 08/30/2022] [Accepted: 08/31/2022] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
The identification of patients who can benefit the most from the available preventive treatments is important in chronic migraine. We explored the rate of excellent responders to onabotulinumtoxinA in a multicenter European study and explored the predictors of such response, according to different definitions. A pooled analysis on chronic migraineurs treated with onabotulinumtoxinA and followed-up for, at least, 9 months was performed. Excellent responders were defined either as patients with a ≥75% decrease in monthly headache days (percent-based excellent responders) or as patients with <4 monthly headache days (frequency-based excellent responders). The characteristics of excellent responders at the baseline were compared with the ones of patients with a <30% decrease in monthly headache days. Percent-based excellent responders represented about 10% of the sample, whilst frequency-based excellent responders were about 5% of the sample. Compared with non-responders, percent-based excellent responders had a higher prevalence of medication overuse and a higher excellent response rate even after the 1st and the 2nd injection. Females were less like to be frequency-based excellent responders. Chronic migraine sufferers without medication overuse and of female sex may find fewer benefits with onabotulinumtoxinA. Additionally, the excellent response status is identifiable after the first cycle.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Raffaele Ornello
- Neuroscience Section, Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, Via Vetoio 1 Coppito, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy
| | - Carlo Baraldi
- Digital and Predictive Medicine, Pharmacology and Clinical Metabolic Toxicology-Headache Center and Drug Abuse-Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacogenomics, Department of Specialist Medicines, AOU Policlinico di Modena, 41125 Modena, Italy
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-0594222104
| | - Fayyaz Ahmed
- Department of Neurosciences, Hull University Teaching Hospitals, Hull HU3 2JZ, UK
| | - Andrea Negro
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Psychology, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, 00189 Rome, Italy
| | - Anna Maria Miscio
- Headache Center, Unit of Neurology, Fondazione IRCCS “Casa Sollievo Della Sofferenza”, 71013 San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy
| | - Antonio Santoro
- Headache Center, Unit of Neurology, Fondazione IRCCS “Casa Sollievo Della Sofferenza”, 71013 San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy
| | - Alicia Alpuente
- Headache Unit, Department of Neurology, Vall D’Hebron University, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall D’Hebron Institute of Research (VHIR), Department of Medicine, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Antonio Russo
- Headache Center, Department of Medical, Surgical, Neurological, Metabolic and Aging Sciences, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81100 Naples, Italy
| | - Marcello Silvestro
- Headache Center, Department of Medical, Surgical, Neurological, Metabolic and Aging Sciences, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 81100 Naples, Italy
| | - Sabina Cevoli
- IRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna, 40139 Bologna, Italy
| | - Nicoletta Brunelli
- Headache and Neurosonology Unit, Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Fabrizio Vernieri
- Headache and Neurosonology Unit, Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital, 00128 Rome, Italy
| | - Licia Grazzi
- Headache Center, Neuroalgology Department, IRCCS Foundation “Carlo Besta” Neurological Institute, Via Celoria, 11, 20133 Milan, Italy
| | - Luca Pani
- Digital and Predictive Medicine, Pharmacology and Clinical Metabolic Toxicology-Headache Center and Drug Abuse-Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacogenomics, Department of Specialist Medicines, AOU Policlinico di Modena, 41125 Modena, Italy
- Pharmacology Unit, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, 41121 Modena, Italy
- Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33146, USA
- VeraSci, Durham, NC 27707, USA
| | - Anna Andreou
- Headache Service, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK
| | - Giorgio Lambru
- Headache Service, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH, UK
| | - Ilaria Frattale
- Child Neurology and Psychiatry Unit, Systems Medicine Department, Tor Vergata University, 00133 Rome, Italy
| | - Katharina Kamm
- Department of Neurology, Ludwig Maximilians University München, 80539 Munich, Germany
| | - Ruth Ruscheweyh
- Department of Neurology, Ludwig Maximilians University München, 80539 Munich, Germany
| | - Marco Russo
- Headache Center, Neurology Unit, Neuromotor and Rehabilitation Department, Azienda USL-IRCCS Di Reggio Emilia, 42122 Reggio Emilia, Italy
| | - Paola Torelli
- Headache Center, University of Parma, 43121 Parma, Italy
| | - Elena Filatova
- Department of Neurology, Institute for Postgraduate Education, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 119435 Moscow, Russia
| | - Nina Latysheva
- Department of Neurology, Institute for Postgraduate Education, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), 119435 Moscow, Russia
| | | | - Marcin Straburzyński
- Department of Family Medicine and Infectious Diseases, University of Warmia and Mazury, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland
| | - Calogera Butera
- Neurophysiology Service, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 71013 Milan, Italy
| | - Bruno Colombo
- Neurology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 71013 Milan, Italy
| | - Massimo Filippi
- Neurophysiology Service, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 71013 Milan, Italy
- Neurology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 71013 Milan, Italy
- Neurorehabilitation Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, 71013 Milan, Italy
| | - Patricia Pozo-Rosich
- Headache Unit, Department of Neurology, Vall D’Hebron University, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall D’Hebron Institute of Research (VHIR), Department of Medicine, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
| | - Paolo Martelletti
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Psychology, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, 00189 Rome, Italy
| | - Simona Guerzoni
- Digital and Predictive Medicine, Pharmacology and Clinical Metabolic Toxicology-Headache Center and Drug Abuse-Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacogenomics, Department of Specialist Medicines, AOU Policlinico di Modena, 41125 Modena, Italy
| | - Simona Sacco
- Neuroscience Section, Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, Via Vetoio 1 Coppito, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Schott Andersen AS, Maarbjerg S, Noory N, Heinskou TB, Forman JL, Cruccu G, Ashina M, Bendtsen L. Safety and efficacy of erenumab in patients with trigeminal neuralgia in Denmark: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept study. Lancet Neurol 2022; 21:994-1003. [DOI: 10.1016/s1474-4422(22)00294-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2022] [Revised: 07/04/2022] [Accepted: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
|
18
|
Bentivegna E, Luciani M, Ferrari V, Galastri S, Baldari F, Scarso F, Lamberti PA, Martelletti P. Recently approved and emerging drug options for migraine prophylaxis. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2022; 23:1325-1335. [PMID: 35850597 DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2022.2102420] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION : Migraine occupies the first position regarding to the disability caused in female working population (15-49 years). Research in the field of prophylaxis of this pathology has made enormous strides in recent years. AREAS COVERED In this narrative review we retrace the most important scientific evidence regarding recently approved and emerging drug for prophylactic treatment of migraine. The purpose of this article is in fact to evaluate currently approved or emerging pharmacological agents for migraine prophylaxis. This review is based on literature published in peer review journal obtained through PubMed, Cochrane library, Clinicaltrials.gov and US FDA. EXPERT OPINION : Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target the calcitonin gene-related peptide signalling pathway (CGRP) have marked an innovation in prophylactic migraine therapy. The combination of Onabotulinumtoxin-A (OBTA) and mAbs appears to be an effective, but costly, therapeutic option for resistant cases. New classes of molecules like gepants and ditans seem to give exceptional results. In addition, new prophylactic drugs are emerging with several targets: the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP), ion channels, several receptors coupled to G proteins, orexin, and glutamate. All these therapies will implement and improve migraine management, as well as personalized medicine for each patient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enrico Bentivegna
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Valeria Ferrari
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Silvia Galastri
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Baldari
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesco Scarso
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Piera A Lamberti
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Paolo Martelletti
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.,Regional Referral Headache Centre, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Cameron Smail R, Ng K. Cautious optimism for the future of migraine treatment. Intern Med J 2022; 52:1112-1114. [PMID: 35879238 DOI: 10.1111/imj.15844] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2022] [Accepted: 05/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Ruaridh Cameron Smail
- Sydney North Neurology and Neurophysiology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Department of Stroke Medicine, Charing Cross Hospital, London, UK
| | - Karl Ng
- Sydney North Neurology and Neurophysiology, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.,University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Atogepant for the Prevention of Episodic Migraine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety. Neurol Ther 2022; 11:1235-1252. [PMID: 35705886 PMCID: PMC9338214 DOI: 10.1007/s40120-022-00370-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2022] [Accepted: 05/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction The inhibition of the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway has attracted interest in pharmacological research on migraine. Atogepant is a potent, selective, orally available antagonist of the CGRP receptor approved as a preventive treatment of episodic migraine. This systematic review with meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atogepant for the prevention of episodic migraine in adult patients. Methods Randomized, placebo-controlled, single or double-blinded trials were identified through a systematic literature search (December week 4, 2021). Main outcomes included the changes from baseline in monthly migraine days and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and treatment withdrawal due to AEs. Mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated. Results Two trials were included, overall enrolling 1550 patients. A total of 408 participants were randomized to placebo, 314 to atogepant 10 mg, 411 to atogepant 30 mg, and 417 to atogepant 60 mg once daily. The mean age of the patients was 41.0 years and 87.7% were women. The reduction in the mean number of migraine days from baseline across the 12-week treatment period was significantly greater among patients treated with atogepant at either the daily dose of 10 mg (MD − 1.16, 95% CI − 1.60 to − 0.73, p < 0.001), 30 mg (MD − 1.15, 95% CI − 1.54 to − 0.76, p < 0.001), or 60 mg (MD − 1.20, 95% CI − 2.18 to − 0.22, p = 0.016) than with placebo. There were no differences in the occurrence of AEs and drug withdrawal due to AEs between atogepant and placebo groups. Constipation was more commonly observed in patients treated with atogepant at 30 mg/day than placebo (RR 5.19, 95% CI 2.00–13.46; p = 0.001). Treatment with atogepant at the daily dose of 60 mg was associated with a higher risk of constipation (RR 4.92, 95% CI 1.89–12.79; p = 0.001) and nausea (RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.47–5.06; p = 0.001) than placebo. Conclusion Atogepant is an efficacious and overall well-tolerated treatment for the prevention of episodic migraine in adults. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40120-022-00370-8.
Collapse
|
21
|
Sacco S, Amin FM, Ashina M, Bendtsen L, Deligianni CI, Gil-Gouveia R, Katsarava Z, MaassenVanDenBrink A, Martelletti P, Mitsikostas DD, Ornello R, Reuter U, Sanchez-Del-Rio M, Sinclair AJ, Terwindt G, Uluduz D, Versijpt J, Lampl C. European Headache Federation guideline on the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide pathway for migraine prevention - 2022 update. J Headache Pain 2022; 23:67. [PMID: 35690723 PMCID: PMC9188162 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01431-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 142] [Impact Index Per Article: 71.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Accepted: 04/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background A previous European Headache Federation (EHF) guideline addressed the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway to prevent migraine. Since then, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and real-world evidence have expanded the evidence and knowledge for those treatments. Therefore, the EHF panel decided to provide an updated guideline on the use of those treatments. Methods The guideline was developed following the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The working group identified relevant questions, performed a systematic review and an analysis of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote recommendations. Where the GRADE approach was not applicable, expert opinion was provided. Results We found moderate to high quality of evidence to recommend eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in individuals with episodic and chronic migraine. For several important clinical questions, we found not enough evidence to provide evidence-based recommendations and guidance relied on experts’ opinion. Nevertheless, we provided updated suggestions regarding the long-term management of those treatments and their place with respect to the other migraine preventatives. Conclusion Monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway are recommended for migraine prevention as they are effective and safe also in the long-term. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01431-x.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simona Sacco
- Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences - University of L'Aquila, Via Vetoio 1, L'Aquila, Italy.
| | - Faisal Mohammad Amin
- Danish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.,Department of Neurorehabilitation/Traumatic Brain Injury, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Messoud Ashina
- Danish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Lars Bendtsen
- Danish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Christina I Deligianni
- Danish Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet Glostrup, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Raquel Gil-Gouveia
- Hospital da Luz Headache Center, Neurology Department, Hospital da Luz Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.,Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Health, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisbon, Portugal
| | - Zaza Katsarava
- Christian Hospital Unna, Unna, Germany.,University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | | | - Paolo Martelletti
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Dimos-Dimitrios Mitsikostas
- 1st Department of Neurology, Aeginition Hospital, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Raffaele Ornello
- Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences - University of L'Aquila, Via Vetoio 1, L'Aquila, Italy
| | - Uwe Reuter
- Department of Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.,Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
| | | | - Alexandra J Sinclair
- Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.,Department of Neurology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, B15 2WB, UK
| | - Gisela Terwindt
- Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Derya Uluduz
- Department of Neurology Istanbul Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Jan Versijpt
- Department of Neurology, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair, Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Christian Lampl
- Department of Neurology, Headache Medical Center at the Konventhospital BHB Linz, Linz, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Gottschalk C, Buse DC, Marmura MJ, Torphy B, Pavlovic JM, Dumas PK, Lalvani N, Blumenfeld A. The importance of an early onset of migraine prevention: an evidence-based, hypothesis-driven scoping literature review. Ther Adv Neurol Disord 2022; 15:17562864221095902. [PMID: 35662957 PMCID: PMC9160905 DOI: 10.1177/17562864221095902] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2022] [Accepted: 03/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Recently approved migraine preventive therapies facilitate rapid control of migraine activity, potentially improving patients’ lives and minimizing the societal burden of migraine. This review synthesizes available evidence on rates and timing of early onset of migraine prevention and identifies patient-level outcomes related to early onset prevention. This evidence-based scoping review identified all available clinical trial evidence regarding the early onset of prevention of migraine, under the hypothesis ‘Patients with migraine (episodic or chronic) report additional benefits when receiving an approved migraine preventive treatment that demonstrates an early onset of prevention’. Early onset of prevention was defined as migraine preventive benefits within 30 days post-administration. PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched for publications between 1988 and 2020. Overall, 16 publications described 18 studies. All studies were conducted in approved treatments [four anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies and one chemodenervation agent] in patients with episodic/chronic migraine; no publications were identified for traditional oral agents for early migraine prevention. Compared to placebo, erenumab (three studies) reduced weekly migraine days within 1 week; fremanezumab (six studies) increased reports of no headache of at least moderate severity on Day 1 and significantly reduced migraine frequency within 1 week; galcanezumab (three studies) significantly reduced the mean number of patients with migraine beginning Day 1 and each day of the first week; eptinezumab (four studies) significantly reduced migraine attack likelihood on Day 1 by > 50% versus baseline; and onabotulinumtoxinA (two studies) reduced headache and migraine days within 1 week. Four publications described function, disability, and quality of life improvements as early as Week 4; none reported cost–benefit. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab) and a chemodenervation agent (onabotulinumtoxinA) provide clinically relevant benefits during the first treatment week. Literature describing clinically relevant benefits regarding early onset of prevention in patients with migraine is limited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Gottschalk
- Division of General Neurology, Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, Yale Physicians Building, 800 Howard Avenue, Ste Lower Level, New Haven, CT 06519, USA
| | - Dawn C Buse
- Montefiore Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | - Michael J Marmura
- Jefferson Headache Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Bradley Torphy
- Chicago Headache Center and Research Institute, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jelena M Pavlovic
- Montefiore Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | | | - Nim Lalvani
- American Migraine Foundation, Mount Royal, NJ, USA
| | - Andrew Blumenfeld
- Headache Center of Southern California, The Neurology Center of Southern California, Carlsbad, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Wang YF, Wang SJ. CGRP Targeting Therapy for Chronic Migraine-Evidence from Clinical Trials and Real-world Studies. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2022; 26:543-554. [PMID: 35567661 DOI: 10.1007/s11916-022-01056-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/18/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yen-Feng Wang
- Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, No. 201, Sec. 2, Shi-Pai Road, Bei-Tou District, Taipei, 11217, Taiwan. .,College of Medicine National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan. .,Brain Research Center, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan.
| | - Shuu-Jiun Wang
- Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, No. 201, Sec. 2, Shi-Pai Road, Bei-Tou District, Taipei, 11217, Taiwan.,College of Medicine National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan.,Brain Research Center, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Kubota GT. It is time anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies be considered first-line prophylaxis for migraine. ARQUIVOS DE NEURO-PSIQUIATRIA 2022; 80:218-226. [PMID: 35976302 PMCID: PMC9491437 DOI: 10.1590/0004-282x-anp-2022-s112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/18/2022] [Accepted: 04/29/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabriel Taricani Kubota
- Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina, Hospital das Clínicas, Departamento de Neurologia, São Paulo SP, Brazil
- Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, São Paulo SP, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
De Matteis E, Sacco S, Ornello R. Migraine Prevention with Erenumab: Focus on Patient Selection, Perspectives and Outcomes. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2022; 18:359-378. [PMID: 35411146 PMCID: PMC8994624 DOI: 10.2147/tcrm.s263825] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2021] [Accepted: 03/14/2022] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor suitable for episodic and chronic migraine prevention. Randomized clinical trials proved the superiority of erenumab to placebo in a strictly selected population, while real-world studies confirmed treatment efficacy in more severe forms of disease – most patients suffered from chronic migraine with medication overuse headache, had prior treatment failures, and long disease duration. According to guidelines, anti-CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies should be reserved to patients who failed or have contraindication to several classes of preventive treatments. However, their ease of use, tolerability and efficacy make these monoclonal antibodies ideally suitable for most patients with migraine; cost-effectiveness needs to be considered when looking at expanding current prescription criteria. Also, data from open label extensions of randomized control trials confirmed sustained benefits of prolonged treatment up to 5 consecutive years without significant risk of adverse events. Further studies will provide insights on optimal treatment duration to achieve migraine remission and predictors of treatment response. In the present work, we aimed at reviewing design and results of the main studies on erenumab and discussing treatment use in the current migraine prevention scenario; we also summarized the main ongoing research projects and provided clinical perspectives for the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eleonora De Matteis
- Neuroscience Section, Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy
| | - Simona Sacco
- Neuroscience Section, Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy
- Correspondence: Simona Sacco, Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, Via Vetoio, L’Aquila, 67100, Italy, Tel +39 0862433561; +39 0863499734, Email
| | - Raffaele Ornello
- Neuroscience Section, Department of Applied Clinical Sciences and Biotechnology, University of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Tepper SJ, Sheikh HU, Dougherty CO, Nahas SJ, Winner PK, Karanam AK, Blumenfeld AM, Abdrabboh A, Rasmussen S, Weiss JL, Ailani J. Erenumab dosage for migraine prevention: An evidence‐based narrative review with recommendations. Headache 2022; 62:420-435. [DOI: 10.1111/head.14266] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2021] [Revised: 12/28/2021] [Accepted: 12/31/2021] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Stewart J. Tepper
- Department of Neurology Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth Hanover New Hampshire USA
| | - Huma U. Sheikh
- Department of Neurology Mt. Sinai‐Icahn School of Medicine New York New York USA
| | - Carrie O. Dougherty
- Department of Neurology Medstar Georgetown University Hospital Washington DC USA
| | - Stephanie J. Nahas
- Department of Neurology Thomas Jefferson University, Jefferson Headache Center Philadelphia Pennsylvania USA
| | - Paul K. Winner
- Premiere Research Institute Nova Southeastern University West Palm Beach Florida USA
| | | | - Andrew M. Blumenfeld
- The Los Angeles Headache Center Los Angeles California USA
- The San Diego Headache Center San Diego California USA
| | - Ahmad Abdrabboh
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation East Hanover New Jersey USA
| | | | - Jamie L. Weiss
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation East Hanover New Jersey USA
| | - Jessica Ailani
- Department of Neurology Medstar Georgetown University Hospital Washington DC USA
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Datta A, Gupta S, Maryala S, Aggarwal V, Chopra P, Jain S. Erenumab for episodic migraine. Pain Manag 2022; 12:587-594. [PMID: 35313740 DOI: 10.2217/pmt-2021-0077] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
In this review, the authors provide an overview of erenumab, a monoclonal antibody used for the preventative treatment of episodic migraine by targeting the CGRP pathway. Randomized controlled trials have shown that erenumab is associated with a statistically significant decrease in monthly migraine days in patients with episodic migraine at monthly doses of 70 or 140 mg when given for a period of 9-12 weeks. Post hoc analyses have also shown long-term maintenance of efficacy. Clinical trials have found erenumab at doses of both 70 and 140 mg to have a favorable safety profile. Erenumab faces significant limitations because of its high financial cost. Additional long-term real-world data are needed to understand the role of erenumab in the treatment of migraine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sahil Gupta
- Southern Illinois Healthcare, Carbondale, IL 62901, USA
| | - Shashi Maryala
- Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500003, India
| | | | - Pooja Chopra
- Bux Pain Management, 217 3rd St., Danville, KY 40422, USA
| | - Sameer Jain
- Pain Treatment Centers of America, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Hirata K, Takeshima T, Sakai F, Imai N, Matsumori Y, Tatsuoka Y, Numachi Y, Yoshida R, Peng C, Mikol DD, Lima GPDS, Cheng S. Early onset of efficacy with erenumab for migraine prevention in Japanese patients: Analysis of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Brain Behav 2022; 12:e2526. [PMID: 35201674 PMCID: PMC8933787 DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 01/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE In two 24-week migraine prevention studies in Japan, erenumab was associated with significantly greater reductions in migraine frequency versus placebo over Weeks 13-24 (primary endpoint). This post hoc analysis evaluated the onset of efficacy within the first 4 weeks after the initiation of erenumab from the 24-week double-blind periods of these studies. METHODS Placebo-adjusted differences in least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in weekly migraine days (WMD) were assessed weekly in each study and by migraine type (episodic (EM]/chronic [CM]) (Study 20170609). RESULTS A total of 407 patients from Study 20120309 (70 mg: N = 135; 140 mg: N = 136; placebo: N = 136) and 261 patients from Study 20170609 ([EM] 70 mg: N = 78; placebo: N = 81; [CM] 70 mg: N = 52; placebo: N = 50) were included. For Study 20120309, onset of efficacy was observed as early as Week 1 in favor of erenumab versus placebo. Placebo-adjusted differences in LSM (95% confidence interval [CI]) change from baseline in WMD at Week 1 were -0.38 (-0.71 to -0.05; p = .022) and -0.49 (-0.82 to -0.16; p = .004) in favor of erenumab 70 and 140 mg, respectively. For Study 20170609, significant placebo-adjusted differences were observed with erenumab 70 mg at Week 1 in patients with EM (LSM [95% CI]: -0.55 [-0.97 to -0.12; p = .012]), and at Week 2 in patients with CM (LSM [95% CI]: -0.81 [-1.53 to -0.09; p = .028]) and for the overall population (LSM [95% CI]: -0.71 [-1.09 to -0.33; p < .001]). CONCLUSIONS Erenumab treatment significantly reduced WMD compared with placebo. Onset of erenumab efficacy occurred as early as Week 1 in patients with migraine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koichi Hirata
- Department of Neurology, Dokkyo Medical University, Tochigi, Japan
| | | | | | - Noboru Imai
- Department of Neurology, Japanese Red Cross Shizuoka Hospital, Shizuoka, Japan
| | | | | | | | | | - Cheng Peng
- Amgen Inc., Global Biostatistical Science, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| | - Daniel D Mikol
- Amgen Inc., Global Development, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| | | | - Sunfa Cheng
- Amgen Inc., Global Development, Thousand Oaks, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Effectiveness and safety of erenumab in chronic migraine: A Croatian real-world experience. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2022; 214:107169. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2022.107169] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
30
|
Chung CS, Schwedt TJ. The under-recognized but essential role of the limbic system in the migraine brain: a narrative review. PRECISION AND FUTURE MEDICINE 2022. [DOI: 10.23838/pfm.2020.00142] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
|
31
|
Buse DC, Winner PK, Charleston L, Hirman J, Cady R, Brevig T. Early response to eptinezumab indicates high likelihood of continued response in patients with chronic migraine. J Headache Pain 2022; 23:29. [PMID: 35189811 PMCID: PMC8903499 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01387-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/01/2021] [Accepted: 01/06/2022] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background A clinical ability to describe the response trajectory of patients receiving preventive migraine treatment could expedite and improve therapeutic management decisions. This post hoc analysis of the PROMISE-2 study evaluated the consistency and predictive power of Month 1 treatment response on later response in patients with chronic migraine. Methods PROMISE-2 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that randomized adults with chronic migraine to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo administered IV every 12 weeks for up to 24 weeks (2 infusions over 6 study months). Migraine responder rates (MRRs) were calculated from monthly migraine days over 4-week intervals compared with baseline. Patients were grouped by MRR during Month 1 (< 25%, 25–< 50%, 50–< 75%, and ≥ 75%), with the number of subsequent study months (Months 2–6) with ≥50% and ≥ 75% MRR calculated in each subgroup. A similar analysis was conducted using Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) rating to define Month 1 subgroups (very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, and no change/worse) and rates of very much improved or much improved PGIC during Months 2–6. Results In the eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, and placebo groups, respectively, 194/356 (54.5%), 212/350 (60.6%), and 132/366 (36.1%) patients were ≥ 50% migraine responders during Month 1. More eptinezumab-treated patients were ≥ 75% migraine responders (100 mg, 110/356 [30.9%]; 300 mg, 129/350 [36.9%]; placebo, 57/366 [15.6%]) and more placebo-treated patients were < 25% migraine responders (eptinezumab 100 mg, 103/356 [28.9%]; 300 mg, 80/350 [22.9%]; placebo, 153/366 [41.8%]). Among patients who achieved ≥75% migraine response in Month 1, more than one-third attained ≥75% migraine response for all 5 subsequent study months and more than two-thirds achieved ≥75% migraine response for ≥3 months. More than two-thirds of those in the very much improved (PGIC) subgroup at Month 1 were much or very much improved for all 5 subsequent months. Conclusions In this post hoc analysis of data from PROMISE-2, more eptinezumab-treated than placebo-treated patients were early (Month 1) responders, and most early responders went on to achieve a high level of response for at least half of the 24-week treatment period. Potential for later response in early non-responders was also observed. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02974153; registered November 23, 2016.
Collapse
|
32
|
Trigeminal sensory modulatory effects of galcanezumab and clinical response prediction. Pain 2022; 163:2194-2199. [PMID: 35170575 DOI: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002614] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2021] [Accepted: 02/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
ABSTRACT Galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody against calcitonin gene-related peptide, is an emerging migraine preventative. We hypothesized that the preventive effects are conveyed via modulation of somatosensory processing and that certain sensory profiles may hence be associated with different clinical responses. We recruited migraine patients (n=26), who underwent quantitative sensory tests (QST) over the right V1 dermatome and forearm at baseline (T0), 2-3 weeks (T1), and one year (T12) after monthly galcanezumab treatment. The clinical response was defined as a reduction of ≥30% in headache frequency based on the headache diary. Predictors for clinical response were calculated using binary logistical regression models. After galcanezumab (T1 vs. T0), the heat pain threshold (HPT) (°C, 44.9 ± 3.4 vs. 43.0 ± 3.3, p=0.013) and mechanical pain threshold (MPT) (log mN, 1.60 ± 0.31 vs. 1.45 ± 0.26, p=0.042) were increased exclusively in the V1 dermatome, but not the forearm. These changes were immediate, did not differ between responders and non-responders, and did not last in one year of follow-up (T12 vs. T0). However, baseline HPT (OR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.08-4.19, p = 0.029) on the forearm was a robust predictor for a clinical response three months later. In summary, our data demonstrated that galcanezumab modulates pain thresholds specifically in the V1 dermatome, but this modulation is short-lasting and irrelevant to clinical response. Instead, the clinical response may be determined by individual sensibility even before the administration of medication.
Collapse
|
33
|
Takeshima T, Nakai M, Shibasaki Y, Ishida M, Kim BK, Ning X, Koga N. Early onset of efficacy with fremanezumab in patients with episodic and chronic migraine: subanalysis of two phase 2b/3 trials in Japanese and Korean patients. J Headache Pain 2022; 23:24. [PMID: 35139816 PMCID: PMC8903536 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-022-01393-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2021] [Accepted: 01/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Early onset of action has become recognized as an important efficacy feature of preventive migraine treatment, which can help overcome adherence issues commonly associated with older medications. Preventive treatments that target the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or the CGRP receptor have been previously shown to provide early onset of action. Methods This subanalysis of primary endpoints of two separate phase 2b/3 studies sought to determine the onset of action of fremanezumab in Japanese and Korean patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM). Results In EM patients (n = 357), both fremanezumab quarterly and fremanezumab monthly led to greater reductions in weekly migraine days (days/week) than placebo from the first week after the initial injection and thereafter during the remainder of the study period. Similarly, CM patients (n = 571) had a greater reduction in headache days of at least moderate severity (days/week) with fremanezumab (total) than placebo. The percentage of patients with a migraine day (EM) or headache day at least moderate severity (CM) was lower in those treated with fremanezumab than placebo and this effect was apparent from as early as Day 2 (1 day after first injection). Conclusions These results suggest that fremanezumab has an early onset of action, as noted in previous post hoc analyses of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT03303092, Registered 5 October 2017, NCT03303079, Registered 5 October 2017.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Takao Takeshima
- Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Tominaga Hospital, 1-4-48 Minatomachi Naniwa-ku, Osaka-shi, Osaka, 556-0017, Japan
| | - Masami Nakai
- Medical Affairs, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 3-2-27 Otedori, Chuo-ku, Osaka, 540-0021, Japan.
| | - Yoshiyuki Shibasaki
- Medical Affairs, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Shinagawa Grand Central Tower, 2-16-4 Konan, Minato-ku, Tokyo, 108-8242, Japan
| | - Miki Ishida
- Headquarters of Clinical Development, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 3-2-27 Otedori, Chuo-ku, Osaka, 540-0021, Japan
| | - Byung-Kun Kim
- Nowon Eulji Medical Center, Eulji University School of Medicine, 68 Hangeulbiseok-ro, Nowon-gu, Seoul, 01830, Republic of Korea
| | - Xiaoping Ning
- Speciality Clinical Development, Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc., 145 Brandywine Pkwy, West Chester, PA, 19380, USA
| | - Nobuyuki Koga
- Medical Affairs, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., 463-10 Kagasuno, Kawauchi-cho, Tokushima, 771-0192, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Hamann T, Rimmele F, Jürgens TP. [CGRP antibodies in migraine prophylaxis : The new standard in migraine treatment?]. Schmerz 2022; 36:59-72. [PMID: 35041064 DOI: 10.1007/s00482-021-00613-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Migraine is associated with a high individual level of suffering. Therefore, an effective preventive treatment is highly important. The spectrum of classical prophylactic drugs has now been expanded to include monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and its receptor. These antibodies have shown reliable efficacy compared to placebo and a rapid onset of action with a low rate of side effects and negligible interactions in pivotal studies. Recently, the efficacy of the antibody was shown in many studies even on drug-refractory migraine and migraine associated with medication overuse. Comprehensive head to head comparisons with previously established drugs and among the antibodies are not yet available; however, initial studies suggest better tolerability and efficacy compared to conventional drugs and other antibodies. The role of antibodies in established treatment cascades still needs to be clarified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Till Hamann
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie, Kopfschmerzzentrum Nord-Ost, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Gehlsheimer Straße 20, 18147, Rostock, Deutschland.
| | - Florian Rimmele
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie, Kopfschmerzzentrum Nord-Ost, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Gehlsheimer Straße 20, 18147, Rostock, Deutschland
| | - Tim Patrick Jürgens
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie, Kopfschmerzzentrum Nord-Ost, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Gehlsheimer Straße 20, 18147, Rostock, Deutschland.,Neurologisches Zentrum, Klinik für Neurologie, KMG Klinikum Güstrow, Güstrow, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Gottschalk C, Basu A, Blumenfeld A, Torphy B, Marmura MJ, Pavlovic JM, Dumas PK, Lalvani N, Buse DC. The importance of an early onset of migraine preventive disease control: A roundtable discussion. CEPHALALGIA REPORTS 2022. [DOI: 10.1177/25158163221134593] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Newly approved migraine preventive therapies have allowed for rapid control of migraine activity, offering potential to minimize the burden of migraine. This report summarizes a roundtable discussion convened to analyze evidence for early onset of prevention, ascertain its clinical relevance, and provide guidance for healthcare professionals in crafting goals and treatment expectations for patients with migraine initiating preventive therapy. Methods: A virtual roundtable meeting of migraine clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates convened in October 2020. Participants reviewed and discussed data summarizing patient and healthcare professional perceptions of migraine prevention and evidence from the peer-reviewed and gray literature to develop corresponding recommendations. Summary: Evidence from clinical studies of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab) and the chemodenervation agent onabotulinumtoxinA indicate that patients may experience reduction of migraine activity within 7 days of drug administration and early attainment of disease control is associated with improvements in clinically important outcomes. The roundtable of experts proposes that early onset be defined as demonstration of preventive benefits within 1 week of treatment initiation. We recommend focusing discussion with patients around “disease control” and potential benefits of early onset of prevention, so patients can set realistic preventive therapy goals and expectations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Anirban Basu
- The CHOICE Institute, School of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Andrew Blumenfeld
- Headache Center of Southern California, The Neurology Center, Carlsbad, CA, USA
| | - Bradley Torphy
- Chicago Headache Center and Research Institute, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Michael J Marmura
- Jefferson Headache Center, Department of Neurology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jelena M Pavlovic
- Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| | | | - Nim Lalvani
- American Migraine Foundation, Mount Royal, NJ, USA
| | - Dawn C Buse
- Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
McAllister PJ, Turner I, Reuter U, Wang A, Scanlon J, Klatt J, Chou DE, Paiva da Silva Lima G. Timing and durability of response to erenumab in patients with episodic migraine. Headache 2021; 61:1553-1561. [PMID: 34841526 DOI: 10.1111/head.14233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2021] [Revised: 08/02/2021] [Accepted: 09/13/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We sought to evaluate temporal response patterns to erenumab treatment in patients with episodic migraine. BACKGROUND Although many patients treated with erenumab experience onset of efficacy as early as 1 week, clinical benefits of migraine preventive therapies may accrue with continued treatment. Furthermore, details about the maintenance of clinical responses have not been reported. METHODS This was a post hoc analysis of a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study of erenumab for the prevention of episodic migraine. We analyzed temporal responses to erenumab using a threshold of ≥50% reduction from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMDs). RESULTS During the 6-month treatment period, 73.7% (230/312) and 79.6% (253/318) of patients in the erenumab 70 mg (n = 312) and 140 mg (n = 318) groups, respectively, achieved a response in at least 1 month. In this group of responders, at least half reached first monthly response (first month with ≥50% reduction from baseline in MMDs) by month 2 and at least 75% of them by month 3. The remainder responded in months 4-6. Of patients in the erenumab 70 and 140 mg groups, 35.3% (110/312) and 41.8% (133/318), respectively, responded over months 1-3 (mean response over first 3 months). Of these patients, 81.8% (90/110) and 81.9% (109/133) maintained this response over months 4-6 (mean response over last 3 months) in the 70 and 140 mg groups, respectively. Many patients who did not achieve an initial response (≥50% reduction from baseline in MMDs during month 1) responded later with continued treatment, with approximately one-half or more of initial nonresponders responding by months 4-6. CONCLUSIONS These results support guidelines recommending at least 3 months following the initiation of erenumab for migraine prevention before the assessment of response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter J McAllister
- New England Institute for Neurology and Headache, Stamford, Connecticut, USA
| | - Ira Turner
- Island Neurological Associates, Plainview, New York, USA
| | - Uwe Reuter
- Department of Neurology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
37
|
Straube A, Stude P, Gaul C, Schuh K, Koch M. Real-world evidence data on the monoclonal antibody erenumab in migraine prevention: perspectives of treating physicians in Germany. J Headache Pain 2021; 22:133. [PMID: 34742252 PMCID: PMC8572451 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-021-01344-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Erenumab, the first-in-class fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, was shown to be efficacious and safe for the prophylactic treatment of migraine in adults in randomized clinical trials. Large-scale, real-world evidence in multi-centre settings is still needed to confirm these results. Erenumab patient profiles outside clinical trials and physicians' treatment patterns, as well as data from patients treated in Germany, a severely impacted population, are not published yet. METHODS TELESCOPE was a multi-centre survey gathering real-world data from 45 German headache centres between July 2019 and December 2019. The project consisted of two parts. In the first part, treating physicians shared their experiences on current erenumab treatment with regard to patient profiles, treatment patterns and treatment responses. In the second part, a retrospective chart review was conducted of 542 migraine patients treated with erenumab for at least three months. Treatment responses focused on various aspects of patients' quality of life. RESULTS The analysis of 542 patients' charts revealed that three-month treatment with erenumab significantly reduced monthly headaches, migraine and acute medication days. Furthermore, headache intensity and frequency were reduced in over 75 % and accompanying aura in 35 % of patients. The clinical global impression scale revealed a general improvement in 91 % of patients. According to the treating physicians' professional judgement, 83 % of patients responded to erenumab and 80 % were satisfied with the treatment. Physicians evaluated restricted quality of life, the number of monthly migraine days and previous, prophylactic treatments as the main components of the current patient profile for monoclonal antibody recipients. Based on the assessment of physicians, erenumab reduced migraine symptoms in 65 % and increased quality of life in more than 75 % of their patients. CONCLUSIONS TELESCOPE confirms positive treatment responses with erenumab shown in clinical trials in a real-world multi-centre setting. The results show consistently positive experiences of physicians utilizing erenumab in clinical practice and underline that therapy with this monoclonal antibody is effective in migraine patients, particular in those, who have failed several prophylactic therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andreas Straube
- Department of Neurology, University Hospital LMU, Ludwig-Maximillians-University, 81377, Munich, Germany
| | | | - Charly Gaul
- Headache Center Frankfurt, Frankfurt a. Main, Germany
| | - Katrin Schuh
- Clinical Research Neuroscience, Novartis Pharma GmbH, Roonstrasse 25, 90429, Nürnberg, Germany.
| | - Mirja Koch
- Global Medical Affairs Neuroscience, Novartis Pharma AG, Fabrikstrasse 2, 4056, Basel, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Schwedt TJ, Lipton RB, Ailani J, Silberstein SD, Tassorelli C, Guo H, Lu K, Dabruzzo B, Miceli R, Severt L, Finnegan M, Trugman JM. Time course of efficacy of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine: Results from the randomized, double-blind ADVANCE trial. Cephalalgia 2021; 42:3-11. [PMID: 34521260 PMCID: PMC8739573 DOI: 10.1177/03331024211042385] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
Background Atogepant is an oral, small-molecule, calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist for the preventive treatment of migraine. Methods In the double-blind, phase 3 ADVANCE trial, participants with 4–14 migraine days/month were randomized to atogepant 10 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg, or placebo once daily for 12 weeks. We evaluated the time course of efficacy of atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine. Analyses included change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days during each of the three 4-week treatment periods, change in weekly migraine days during weeks 1–4, and proportion of participants with a migraine on each day during the first week. Results We analyzed 873 participants (n = 214 atogepant 10 mg, n = 223 atogepant 30 mg, n = 222 atogepant 60 mg, n = 214 placebo). For weeks 1–4, mean change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days ranged from −3.1 to −3.9 across atogepant doses vs −1.6 for placebo (p < 0.0001). For weeks 5–8 and 9–12, reductions in mean monthly migraine days ranged from −3.7 to −4.2 for atogepant vs −2.9 for placebo (p ≤ 0.012) and −4.2 to −4.4 for atogepant vs −3.0 for placebo (p < 0.0002), respectively. Mean change from baseline in weekly migraine days in week 1 ranged from −0.77 to −1.03 for atogepant vs −0.29 with placebo (p < 0.0001). Percentages of participants reporting a migraine on post-dose day 1 ranged from 10.8% to 14.1% for atogepant vs 25.2% with placebo (p ≤ 0.0071). Conclusion Atogepant demonstrated treatment benefits as early as the first full day after treatment initiation, and sustained efficacy across each 4-week interval during the 12-week treatment period. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03777059
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jessica Ailani
- MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - Cristina Tassorelli
- IRCCS Mondino Foundation, Headache Science Center, Pavia, Italy.,Department of Neurology, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Hua Guo
- Neuroscience Development, AbbVie, Madison, NJ, USA
| | - Kaifeng Lu
- Neuroscience Development, AbbVie, Madison, NJ, USA
| | | | - Rosa Miceli
- Neuroscience Development, AbbVie, Madison, NJ, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Tepper SJ, Lucas S, Ashina M, Schwedt TJ, Ailani J, Scanlon J, Klatt J, Chou DE, Wang A, Paiva da Silva Lima G. Timing and durability of response to erenumab in patients with chronic migraine. Headache 2021; 61:1255-1263. [PMID: 34363708 PMCID: PMC8519048 DOI: 10.1111/head.14193] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2021] [Revised: 05/28/2021] [Accepted: 06/23/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Background Erenumab is a human anti‐calcitonin gene‐related peptide receptor monoclonal antibody approved for migraine prevention. We sought to further assess the temporal patterns of response to erenumab in patients with chronic migraine (CM), specifically the onset and sustainability of monthly migraine day (MMD) response. Methods This is a post hoc analysis of a 12‐week, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study of erenumab for migraine prevention in patients with CM (≥15 headache days/month, including ≥8 migraine days/month). Onset and sustainability were assessed according to MMD reduction from baseline, with the following response categories: responders (≥50% reduction), partial responders (≥30% and <50%), or nonresponders (<30%). Results Among the erenumab 140 mg group (n = 187), 54.0% (101/187) achieved a response at any month during the study with a median time to onset of monthly response of 1 month. This improvement was maintained in most patients with continued treatment. An initial response was achieved at Month 1 by 28.3% (53/187) of patients; 69.8% (37/53) of whom maintained a response at Months 2 and 3. Although many patients responded early, some patients required longer treatment to achieve a response; 79.4% (27/34) of initial partial responders and 21.0% (21/100) of initial nonresponders subsequently achieved a response. Similar findings were observed for the erenumab 70mg group (n = 188). Conclusion A majority of erenumab‐treated patients with CM who achieved an initial response at Month 1 sustained this benefit. Many patients responded later with continued treatment. Our data support recommendations to assess outcomes after ≥3 months of preventive treatment with erenumab in CM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Sylvia Lucas
- University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Messoud Ashina
- Danish Headache Center, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
40
|
Vélez-Jiménez MK, Chiquete-Anaya E, Orta DSJ, Villarreal-Careaga J, Amaya-Sánchez LE, Collado-Ortiz MÁ, Diaz-García ML, Gudiño-Castelazo M, Hernández-Aguilar J, Juárez-Jiménez H, León-Jiménez C, Loy-Gerala MDC, Marfil-Rivera A, Antonio Martínez-Gurrola M, Martínez-Mayorga AP, Munive-Báez L, Nuñez-Orozo L, Ojeda-Chavarría MH, Partida-Medina LR, Pérez-García JC, Quiñones-Aguilar S, Reyes-Álvarez MT, Rivera-Nava SC, Torres-Oliva B, Vargas-García RD, Vargas-Méndez R, Vega-Boada F, Vega-Gaxiola SB, Villegas-Peña H, Rodriguez-Leyva I. Comprehensive management of adults with chronic migraine: Clinical practice guidelines in Mexico. CEPHALALGIA REPORTS 2021. [DOI: 10.1177/25158163211033969] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Migraine is a polygenic multifactorial disorder with a neuronal initiation of a cascade of neurochemical processes leading to incapacitating headaches. Headaches are generally unilateral, throbbing, 4–72 h in duration, and associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and sonophobia. Chronic migraine (CM) is the presence of a headache at least 15 days per month for ≥3 months and has a high global impact on health and economy, and therapeutic guidelines are lacking. Methods: Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system, we conducted a search in MEDLINE and Cochrane to investigate the current evidence and generate recommendations of clinical practice on the identification of risk factors and treatment of CM in adults. Results: We recommend avoiding overmedication of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); ergotamine; caffeine; opioids; barbiturates; and initiating individualized prophylactic treatment with topiramate eptinezumab, galcanezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, or botulinum toxin. We highlight the necessity of managing comorbidities initially. In the acute management, we recommend NSAIDs, triptans, lasmiditan, and gepants alone or with metoclopramide if nausea or vomiting. Non-pharmacological measures include neurostimulation. Conclusions: We have identified the risk factors and treatments available for the management of CM based on a grading system, which facilitates selection for individualized management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Erwin Chiquete-Anaya
- Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, National Institute of Medical Science and Nutrition “Salvador Zubirán”, Mexico City, México
| | - Daniel San Juan Orta
- Department of Clinical Research of the National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery “Dr. Manuel Velazco Suárez”, Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | - Luis Enrique Amaya-Sánchez
- Department of Neurology, Hospital de Especialidades del Centro Médico Nacional SXXI Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Miguel Ángel Collado-Ortiz
- Staff physician of the hospital and the Neurological Center ABC (The American British Cowdray Hospital IAP, Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | | | - Juan Hernández-Aguilar
- Department of Neurology, Hospital Infantil de México. Federico Gómez, Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | - Carolina León-Jiménez
- Department of Neurology, ISSSTE Regional Hospital, “Dr. Valentin Gomez Farías”, Zapopan, Jalisco, Mexico
| | | | - Alejandro Marfil-Rivera
- Headache and Chronic Pain Clinic, Neurology Service, Hospital Univrsitario Autónoma de Nuevo Leon, Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | - Adriana Patricia Martínez-Mayorga
- Department of Neurology, Central Hospital “Dr. Ignacio Morones Prieto”, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosi, SLP, Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | - Lilia Nuñez-Orozo
- Department of Neurology, National Medical Center 20 de Noviembre, ISSSTE, Mexico City, Mexico
| | | | - Luis Roberto Partida-Medina
- Department of Neurology, Hospital de Especialidades, Centro Medico Nacional de Occidente, IMSS, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Felipe Vega-Boada
- Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, National Institute of Medical Science and Nutrition “Salvador Zubirán”, Mexico City, México
| | | | - Hilda Villegas-Peña
- Department of Pediatric Neurology, Clínica de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico
| | - Ildefonso Rodriguez-Leyva
- Department of Neurology, Central Hospital “Dr. Ignacio Morones Prieto”, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosi, SLP, Mexico City, Mexico
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Salem-Abdou H, Simonyan D, Puymirat J. Identification of predictors of response to Erenumab in a cohort of patients with migraine. CEPHALALGIA REPORTS 2021. [DOI: 10.1177/25158163211026646] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The migraine-specific monoclonal antibody Erenumab targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide receptor is an effective and well tolerated preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine. However, its price limits its use as a first line therapy against migraine. Therefore, identifying patients who will adequately respond to such treatment is paramount. Methods: In this retrospective, real-life cohort study, 172 adult patients with refractory episodic or chronic migraine treated with Erenumab were included. To identify the predictors of response to Erenumab, bivariate subgroup analysis of several potential factors was performed, and multivariate logistic regression modeling was done to obtain Odds Ratio (OR). Results: Of the 172 patients, 57.0% achieved a successful treatment response (reduction of monthly migraine days by ≥50%). Statistically significant predictors of a treatment response were the presence of chronic migraine, tension-type headache, and a positive response to triptan with an odd ratio of 0.473 (95% CI, 0.235–0.952), 0.485 (95% CI, 0.245–0.962) and 3.985 (95% CI, 1.811–8.770), respectively (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Successful Erenumab treatment response rate was 57.0% in this retrospective cohort. As chronic migraine and tension-type headache were negative predictors of Erenumab response while triptan response was a positive predictor, this data suggests the potential for Erenumab monotherapy without the need for traditional preventive treatment in refractory migraine sufferers improving side effect profile and treatment adherence for a cohort of patients difficult to treat.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Houssein Salem-Abdou
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
- Department of Neurology, LOEX, Québec, QC, Canada
| | - David Simonyan
- Clinical and Evaluative Research Platform, CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Centre, Québec, QC, Canada
| | - Jack Puymirat
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Neurology, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada
- Department of Neurology, LOEX, Québec, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Nagaraj K, Vandenbussche N, Goadsby PJ. Role of Monoclonal Antibodies against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) in Episodic Migraine Prevention: Where Do We Stand Today? Neurol India 2021; 69:S59-S66. [PMID: 34003149 DOI: 10.4103/0028-3886.315997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
Background Medications targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway are exciting and novel therapeutic options in the treatment of migraine. Objective In this article, we have reviewed the role of these CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients with episodic migraine. Materials and Methods We did an extensive literature search for all phase 2 and 3 studies involving CGRP monoclonal antibodies in episodic migraine. Results Erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab have all undergone phase 3 trials and have been found to be effective for episodic and chronic migraine. They have the advantage of being targeted therapies for migraine with very favorable adverse effect profiles comparable to placebo. Importantly, they are effective in subgroups of patients who have failed previous preventive therapies. Conclusion Increasing use of these medications will certainly revolutionize the treatment and outlook for patients with migraine all over the world.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karthik Nagaraj
- Department of Neurology, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bangalore, Karnataka, India
| | | | - Peter J Goadsby
- NIHR-Wellcome Trust King's Clinical Research Facility, SLaM Biomedical Research Centre, King's College London, UK, and Department of Neurology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW This article provides an overview of preventive interventions for migraine, including when to start and how to choose a treatment, pharmacologic options (both older oral treatments and new monoclonal antibodies to calcitonin gene-related peptide [CGRP] or its receptor), nonpharmacologic treatment such as neuromodulation, and preventive treatment of refractory migraine. RECENT FINDINGS The migraine preventive treatment landscape has been transformed by the development of monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor. These treatments, which are given subcutaneously or intravenously monthly or quarterly, have high efficacy and were well tolerated in clinical trials. Emerging real-world studies have found higher rates of adverse events than were seen in clinical trials. They are currently recommended for use if two traditional preventive therapies have proven inadequate. Since the commonly cited 2012 American Headache Society/American Academy of Neurology migraine prevention guidelines were released, clinical trials supporting the preventive use of lisinopril, candesartan, and memantine have been published. Neuromodulation devices, including external trigeminal nerve stimulation and single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation devices, have modest evidence to support preventive use. The American Headache Society/American Academy of Neurology guidelines for the preventive treatment of migraine are currently being updated. A new class of oral CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) is being tested for migraine prevention. SUMMARY Successful preventive treatment of migraine reduces disease burden and improves quality of life. Many pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options are available for the prevention of migraine, including newer therapies aimed at the CGRP pathway as well as older treatments with good evidence for efficacy. Multiple treatment trials may be required to find the best preventive for an individual patient.
Collapse
|
44
|
Lu J, Zhang Q, Guo X, Liu W, Xu C, Hu X, Ni J, Lu H, Zhao H. Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Versus Botulinum Toxin for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine: Evidence From Indirect Treatment Comparison. Front Pharmacol 2021; 12:631204. [PMID: 34012392 PMCID: PMC8126691 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2021.631204] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2020] [Accepted: 04/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The previously approved botulinum toxin and nowadays promising calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody have shown efficacy for preventing chronic migraine (CM). However, there is no direct evidence for their relative effectiveness and safety. In this study, we conducted an indirect treatment comparison to compare the efficacy and safety of CGRP monoclonal antibody with botulinum toxin for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. Methods: Up to August 31, 2020, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central). Weighted mean difference (WMD) and relative risk (RR) were used to evaluate clinical outcomes. Indirect treatment comparison (ITC) software was used to conduct indirect treatment comparison. Results: Ten studies were pooled with 6,325 patients in our meta-analysis. Both botulinum toxin and CGRP monoclonal antibody demonstrated favorable efficacy in the change of migraine days, headache days, HIT-6 score, and 50% migraine responder rate compared with placebo. In indirect treatment comparison, CGRP monoclonal antibody was superior to botulinum toxin in the frequency of acute analgesics intake (WMD = −1.31, 95% CI: −3.394 to 0.774, p = 0.02113), the rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) (RR = 0.664, 95% CI: 0.469 to 0.939, p = 0.04047), and the rate of treatment-related serious adverse events (RR = 0.505, 95% CI: 0.005 to 46.98, p < 0.001). Conclusion: For chronic migraine patients, CGRP monoclonal antibody was slightly better than botulinum toxin in terms of efficacy and safety. In the future, head-to-head trials would be better to evaluate the efficacy and safety between different medications in the prevention of chronic migraine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiajie Lu
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Quanquan Zhang
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Xiaoning Guo
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Wei Liu
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Chunyang Xu
- Department of Neurology, Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Kunshan, Kunshan, China
| | - Xiaowei Hu
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Jianqiang Ni
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Haifeng Lu
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| | - Hongru Zhao
- Department of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Treatment of migraine: a review of disease burden and an update on the therapeutic landscape for pharmacists. DRUGS & THERAPY PERSPECTIVES 2020. [DOI: 10.1007/s40267-020-00801-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
|
46
|
Dodick DW, Gottschalk C, Cady R, Hirman J, Smith J, Snapinn S. Eptinezumab Demonstrated Efficacy in Sustained Prevention of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Beginning on Day 1 After Dosing. Headache 2020; 60:2220-2231. [PMID: 33165938 PMCID: PMC7756794 DOI: 10.1111/head.14007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2020] [Revised: 09/29/2020] [Accepted: 10/11/2020] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
Objective To determine the onset of preventive efficacy with eptinezumab in patients with migraine. Background Eptinezumab is a monoclonal antibody inhibiting calcitonin gene‐related peptide approved as an intravenously administered treatment for the prevention of migraine. Methods Patients who received eptinezumab 100 mg, eptinezumab 300 mg, or placebo in PROMISE7‐1 (episodic migraine; 100 mg, n = 221; 300 mg, n = 222; placebo, n = 222) or PROMISE7‐2 (chronic migraine; 100 mg, n = 356; 300 mg, n = 350; placebo, n = 366) were included. Testing of the percentage of patients with a migraine on day 1 after dosing was prespecified and alpha‐controlled. In further exploration of this prespecified endpoint, a post hoc closed testing procedure, which controlled the false‐positive (type 1) error rate, provided a statistically rigorous evaluation of migraine prevention onset. The procedure involved up to 84 tests of significance, all of which were performed in sequence until the first nonsignificant result. Results For both studies, all tests for significance for eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg, from days 1‐84 through day 1 alone, achieved nominal significance (P < .05), indicating that eptinezumab was fully effective beginning on day 1. Over each interval, the treatment effect was comparable to the effect over weeks 1‐12. Mean changes from baseline in monthly migraine days for the primary endpoint period ranged from −3.9 to −4.9, −4.1 to −4.9, and −2.2 to −3.2 for eptinezumab 100, 300 mg, and placebo, respectively, in PROMISE7‐1 and from −7.2 to −8.0, −7.9 to −8.2, and −4.3 to −5.6, respectively, in PROMISE7‐2. The difference from placebo (95% confidence interval) in day 1 treatment effect was −2.2 (−4.1, −0.3) and −2.5 (−4.4, −0.6) days/month for eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg, respectively, in PROMISE7‐1, and was −3.8 (−5.6, −2.0) and −4.0 (−5.8, −2.1) days/month for 100 and 300 mg, respectively, in PROMISE7‐2. Conclusions The migraine preventive effect of eptinezumab is rapid and sustained in patients with episodic or chronic migraine, with onset of optimal preventive efficacy observed on the day following the initial dose.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David W Dodick
- Mayo Clinic Arizona, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, USA
| | | | - Roger Cady
- Lundbeck Seattle BioPharmaceuticals, Inc., Bothell, WA, USA
| | - Joe Hirman
- Pacific Northwest Statistical Consulting, Inc., Woodinville, WA, USA
| | - Jeff Smith
- Lundbeck Seattle BioPharmaceuticals, Inc., Bothell, WA, USA
| | - Steve Snapinn
- Lundbeck Seattle BioPharmaceuticals, Inc., Bothell, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Caronna E, Starling AJ. Update on Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Antagonism in the Treatment of Migraine. Neurol Clin 2020; 39:1-19. [PMID: 33223077 DOI: 10.1016/j.ncl.2020.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edoardo Caronna
- Department of Medicine, Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Research Institute, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Ps. Vall d'Hebron 119-129, Barcelona 08035, Spain. https://twitter.com/CaronnaEdoardo
| | - Amaal J Starling
- Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 13400 East Shea Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ 85259, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Shibata M. [Novel migraine treatment with CGRP-related monoclonal antibodies]. Rinsho Shinkeigaku 2020; 60:668-676. [PMID: 32893246 DOI: 10.5692/clinicalneurol.cn-001469] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
Migraine is a common and debilitating neurological disorder characterized by recurrent attacks of moderate to severe throbbing headache accompanied by nausea, vomiting and photophobia/phonophobia. Because of its high prevalence, migraine causes a considerable financial burden on the society as well as impaired quality of life in individual patients. Scientific evidence shows that migraine is a quite complex neurological disorder that involves not only the trigeminovascular and autonomic systems but also the hypothalamus and cerebral cortex. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) was originally discovered as a 37-amino acid neuropeptide derived from a calcitonin gene splicing variant. CGRP is found to be expressed in trigeminal ganglion neurons. Much attention has been attracted to this molecule since CGRP was found to be released from trigeminal terminals in animal migraine models. Subsequent studies demonstrated that CGRP administration induced migraine-like headache attacks specifically in migraineurs, thus highlighting a pivotal role of CGRP in the development of migraine attacks. Several CGRP receptor antagonists were shown to be efficacious for the treatment of acute migraine. Among them, telcagepant, was shown to exert a significant migraine prophylactic action as well. Nevertheless, the development of most of these agents were discontinued due to hepatotoxicity. Currently, newer CGRP receptor antagonists are being developed. On the other hand, monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP and its receptor showed consistent efficacy for migraine prophylaxis with excellent safety profiles in Phase III clinical trials. Furthermore, emerging data support the long-term safety and efficacy of these antibodies. In this review article, the development and perspective of anti-migraine therapeutic strategies using CGRP-related antibodies are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mamoru Shibata
- Department of Neurology, Tokyo Dental College Ichikawa General Hospital
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Ziegeler C, Mehnert J, Asmussen K, May A. Central effects of erenumab in migraine patients. Neurology 2020; 95:e2794-e2802. [DOI: 10.1212/wnl.0000000000010740] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2020] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
ObjectiveTo determine whether erenumab, a new monoclonal antibody to the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor, exerts functional central effects in migraineurs by performing functional imaging scans on patients treated with erenumab.MethodsWe conducted an fMRI study on 27 patients with migraine using a well-established trigeminal nociceptive paradigm, examining patients before and 2 weeks after administration of the CGRP receptor antibody erenumab 70 mg.ResultsComparing both visit days in all patients (n = 27) revealed that erenumab leads to a decrease in activation in the right thalamus (i.e., contralateral to the stimulated side), right middle temporal gyrus, right lingual gyrus, left operculum, and several clusters on both sides of the cerebellum. Furthermore, when responders (n = 9) and nonresponders (n = 8) of the respective same headache state were compared, we found a significant reduction of hypothalamic activation after the administration of erenumab in responders only (t = 4.78; contrast estimate 29.79 [90% confidence interval 19.53–40.05]). This finding of reduced hypothalamic activation was confirmed when absolute headache days was used as a regressor.InterpretationThese findings suggest that erenumab may not be an exclusively peripheral migraine treatment but has additional central effects. Whether this is due to secondary changes after peripheral modulation of sensory input or indeed represents a direct central mode of action is discussed.
Collapse
|
50
|
Ruscheweyh R, Broessner G, Goßrau G, Heinze-Kuhn K, Jürgens TP, Kaltseis K, Kamm K, Peikert A, Raffaelli B, Rimmele F, Evers S. Effect of calcitonin gene-related peptide (-receptor) antibodies in chronic cluster headache: Results from a retrospective case series support individual treatment attempts. Cephalalgia 2020; 40:1574-1584. [PMID: 32806953 PMCID: PMC7691634 DOI: 10.1177/0333102420949866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Objective To assess the efficacy of monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin
gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor in chronic cluster headache
(CCH) treatment under real world conditions. Background Calcitonin gene-related peptide has an important pathophysiological role in
cluster headache. Although the randomised controlled trial with the
calcitonin gene-related peptide antibody galcanezumab was negative, chronic
cluster headache patients with insufficient response to other preventive
treatments have been receiving individual off-label treatment attempts with
calcitonin gene-related peptide-(receptor) antibodies. Methods Data from 22 chronic cluster headache patients who received at least one dose
of a calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor) antibody and recorded attack
frequency in a headache diary were retrospectively collected at eight
headache centres. Results The number of previous preventive therapies was 6.5 ± 2.4 (mean ± standard
deviation, range: 2–11). The average number of attacks per week was
23.3 ± 16.4 at baseline and significantly decreased by −9.2 ± 9.7 in the
first month of treatment with a calcitonin gene-related peptide(-receptor)
antibody (p < 0.001). Fifty-five percent of the patients
were 50% responders and 36% were 75% responders with respect to attack
frequency. Significant reduction of attack frequency started at week 1
(−6.8 ± 2.8 attacks, p < 0.01). Results were
corroborated by significant decreases in weekly uses of acute headache
medication (−9.8 ± 7.6, p < 0.001) and pain intensity
during attacks (−1.2 ± 2.0, numerical rating scale (NRS) [0–10],
p < 0.01) in the first month. In months 2 (n = 14)
and 3 (n = 10), reduction of attack frequency from baseline was −8.0 ± 8.4
(p = 0.004) and −9.1 ± 10.0
(p = 0.024), respectively. Conclusion Under real-world conditions, individual treatment with calcitonin
gene-related peptide(-receptor) antibodies was effective in 55% of our
chronic cluster headache patients. This finding supports individual
off-label treatment attempts with calcitonin gene-related peptide-(receptor)
antibodies in chronic cluster headache patients insufficiently responding to
other therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Ruscheweyh
- Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany
| | - Gregor Broessner
- Headache Outpatient Clinic, Department of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Gudrun Goßrau
- Headache Outpatient Clinic, Interdisciplinary Pain Center, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | | | - Tim P Jürgens
- Headache Center North-East, Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Katharina Kaltseis
- Headache Outpatient Clinic, Department of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Katharina Kamm
- Ludwig Maximilians University Munich, Department of Neurology, Munich, Germany
| | - Andreas Peikert
- Neurologicum Bremen Outpatient Center for Neurology and Psychiatry, Bremen, Germany
| | - Bianca Raffaelli
- Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Department of Neurology, Berlin, Germany
| | - Florian Rimmele
- Headache Center North-East, Department of Neurology, University Medical Center Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Stefan Evers
- Department of Neurology, Krankenhaus Lindenbrunn, Coppenbrügge, Germany.,Faculty of Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| |
Collapse
|