Galcanezumab in chronic migraine: The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled REGAIN study

Assessment of Bone Mineral Density Over 1 Year in a Cross-Sectional Cohort of Migraine Patients Receiving Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), implicated in migraine pain, also possesses bone anabolic properties, which leads to the possibility that monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP (anti-CGRPs) might increase the risk of bone density abnormalities.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to explore bone mineral density abnormalities in a cohort of migraine patients treated with anti-CGRPs.

METHODS

This was a single-center, cross-sectional, cohort study including migraine patients who underwent a densitometry assessment during anti-CGRP treatment. We assessed the frequency of osteopenia or osteoporosis (OSTEO+ status), defined as a bone mineral density T-score of -1 to -2.5, and <-2.5 standard deviations from the young female adult mean, respectively. Additionally, the association of OSTEO+ status with anti-CGRP treatment duration and primary osteoporosis' risk factors was investigated using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Data from 51 patients (43 female, mean age 46 ± 13.9 years) were evaluated. The mean duration of anti-CGRP treatment was 15.7 (±11.8) months. Twenty-seven patients (53%) were OSTEO+ (n = 22 osteopenia; n = 5 osteoporosis). In the final model, menopause [odds ratio 11.641 (95% confidence interval 1.486-91.197), p = 0.019] and anti-seizure drug use [odds ratio 12.825 (95% confidence interval 1.162-141.569), p = 0.037] were associated with OSTEO+ status.

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort of migraine patients, no evidence of an association between anti-CGRP treatment duration and an increasing risk of bone mineral density abnormalities was found. However, these findings are preliminary and necessitate further longitudinal research with larger cohorts and extended follow-up to be validated.

The transition of medication overuse status by acute medication categories in episodic or chronic migraine patients to non-overuse status after receiving anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a systematic review and meta-analysis of phase 3 randomized control trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether patients with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM), who were treated with anti-CGRP antibodies, showed a reversal from medication overuse (MO) or medication overuse headache (MOH) status at their baseline to non-overuse status. Furthermore, this study aimed to establish which acute headache medication (AHM) categories responded more effectively to anti-CGRP antibodies.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed database for relevant studies from January 2013 to September 2023. We included phase three randomized controlled trials to examine the role of anti-CGRP antibodies in patients with EM or CM and their MO status. A meta-analysis was conducted to find the association between anti-CGRP antibodies and the number of EM and CM patients with MO or MOH at baseline that reverted to non-MO status or below the MOH threshold.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded a total of 345 studies. After removing duplicates and screening with inclusion criteria, 5 studies fulfilled our conditions. Each study reviewed the response to changes in the MO status of patients after receiving anti-CGRP antibodies, including eptinezumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and erenumab, compared to placebo. Our study analyzed three AHM categories: triptans, simple analgesics, and multiple drugs. The overall relative risk (RR) was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.31 to 1.59; p < 0.001). The RRs for triptans, simple analgesics, and multi-drug groups were 1.71 (95% CI, 1.53 to 1.91; p < 0.001), 1.10 (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.47; p = 0.5), and 1.29 (95%CI 1.14 to 1.46; p < 0.001) respectively.

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis has shown that anti-CGRP antibodies were statistically significant in transitioning from MO or MOH status to non-MO status or below the MOH threshold (RR = 1.44) for all included studies and all AHM categories except for simple analgesics. Patients from the triptan group had the highest RR of 1.71 with a p-value < 0.001, while the simple analgesics group had an RR of 1.10, however, with a p-value > 0.05. Interestingly, this analysis can be interpreted as that anti-CGRP antibodies might not be effective in reducing simple analgesics use in EM or CM patients. Further studies are needed to investigate these matters.

Effectiveness and safety of pharmacological prophylaxis for chronic migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) significantly impacts both the physical and mental health of patients. Current studies on the safety and effectiveness of different pharmacological prophylaxis interventions for CM are limited. To address this gap, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank the efficacy and safety of various drugs in preventing CM.

METHODS

Two independent researchers systematically searched four databases from their inception to August 1, 2023, to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Subsequently, they performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. A NMA was then performed. Continuous outcomes and binary outcomes were displayed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR), respectively, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank each intervention separately.

RESULTS

24 RCTs involving 8789 patients were included. Compared to placebo, Botulinum toxin A demonstrated the most significant effect in reducing the monthly migraine days for CM patients (MD = 3.88, 95% CI 0.48, 7.28); in terms of improving the response rate by a 50% reduction in monthly migraine days, Topiramate (RR = 50.06, 95% CI 3.18, 787.30) was the most effective; there was no statistically significant difference between all preventive drugs and placebo in improving the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score; in terms of the incidence of adverse events, Eptinezumab (RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.8, 1.54) exhibited the highest safety profile.

CONCLUSION

Among all the drugs for the preventive drugs for CM, Botulinum toxin A has the best efficacy and safety profile, closely followed by calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs).

Comparative effectiveness and tolerability of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies and onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine: A multicenter, real-world study in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE

To compare the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine (CM) patients.

METHODS

This multicenter study involved retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of CM patients treated with CGRP mAbs or onabotulinumtoxinA, including difficult-to-treat (DTT) patients (i.e., ≥3 preventive failures). Treatment outcomes were determined at 6 months based on prospective headache diaries and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS).

RESULTS

The study included 316 (55 M/261F, mean age 44.4 ± 13.5 years) and 333 (61 M/272F, mean age 47.9 ± 13.4 years) CM patients treated with CGRP mAbs or onabotulinbumtoxinA, respectively. At 6 months, CGRP mAb treatment was associated with a greater decrease in monthly migraine days (MMDs) (-13.0 vs. -8.7 days/month, p < 0.001) and a higher ≥50% responder rate (RR) (74.7% vs. 50.7%, p < 0.001) compared with onabotulinumtoxinA injections. The findings were consistent in DTT patients (-13.0 vs. -9.1 MMDs, p < 0.001; ≥50% RR: 73.9% vs. 50.3%, p < 0.001) or those with medication-overuse headache (MOH) (-13.3 vs. -9.0 MMDs, p < 0.001; ≥50% RR: 79.0% vs. 51.6%, p < 0.001). Besides, patients receiving CGRP mAbs had greater improvement (-42.2 vs. -11.8, p < 0.001) and a higher ≥50% RR (62.0% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.001) in MIDAS scores and a lower rate of adverse events (AEs) (6.0% vs. 21.0%, p < 0.001). However, none of the patients discontinued treatment due to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

In this multicenter, real-world study, CGRP mAbs were more effective than onabotulinumtoxinA in CM patients, even in DTT or MOH patients. All of these injectables were well tolerated. Further prospective studies are needed to verify these findings.

Evidence-based review and frontiers of migraine therapy

BACKGROUND

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

PURPOSE

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

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Inhibitors in the Treatment of Migraine in the Pediatric and Adolescent Populations: A Review

There are limited well-studied treatments for migraine in the pediatric population. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors are an established safe and effective treatment in adults, and use may be appropriate for pediatric patients in certain clinical situations. We describe migraine pathophysiology as it relates to CGRP, provide an overview of available medications, and discuss clinical usage in this population.

Effectiveness of Anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Medication in Vestibular Migraine: A Retrospective Cohort Study in an Asian Population

BACKGROUND

Migraine and dizziness often coexist, with vestibular migraine (VM) presenting with vestibular symptoms and headaches. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) may be involved in motion-induced symptoms; however, studies on the use of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for the treatment of VM have yielded conflicting results. This study aimed to clarify the effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs in VM treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective observational cohort study, conducted between 1 January 2021 and 31 March 2023, assessed 12 Japanese patients with VM who were treated with anti-CGRP mAbs (CGRP group) for 6 months and 11 Japanese patients who received standard of care for VM and served as controls. Clinical questionnaires and equilibrium tests were administered, with primary outcomes including changes in Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) scores compared with baseline values. Objective variables included the DHI score and explanatory variables included demographic data, balance test results, head-up tilt (HUT) test results, vestibular test results and questionnaire survey results. Analysis of variance was used to assess the treatment effects of anti-CGRP mAbs, and multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify mAb responders.

RESULTS

After 6 months, the CGRP group showed significant improvements in DHI scores [0 versus 6 months, odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 22.01 (0.13-43.88)] and number of vertigo/dizziness attacks per month [0 versus 6 months: 10.28 (2.80-17.76)]. No significant difference was observed in the control group [DHI scores, 0 versus 6 months: 0.65 (-26.84 to 28.14); number of vertigo/dizziness attacks per month, 0 versus 6 months: - 8.07 (- 23.77 to 7.62)]. Multivariate regression analysis showed that autonomic function at baseline was associated with mAb response in patients [β estimates (95% confidence interval): 3.63 (0.21-7.06)].

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing migraine in patients with VM. While the identified factors associated with treatment responsiveness offer valuable insights into personalised treatment approaches, further prospective studies are warranted to validate the findings due to our study's retrospective design and limited sample size.

Management of Pain and Headache After Traumatic Brain Injury

This article will identify common causes of pain following traumatic brain injury (TBI), discuss current treatment strategies for these complaints, and help tailor treatments for both acute and chronic settings. We will also briefly discuss primary and secondary headache disorders, followed by common secondary pain disorders that may be related to trauma.

Anti‑CGRP monoclonal antibodies in resistant migraine: preliminary real-world effectiveness and clinical predictors of response at two years

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP mAbs) have shown clinical effectiveness and safety in randomized clinical studies. However, long-term studies in clinical practice remain limited.

AIM

To assess the long-term effectiveness, clinical predictors and safety of three anti-CGRP mAbs (erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab) in resistant migraine patients.

METHOD

A single-center retrospective study was conducted from December 2019 to June 2023 involving 120 resistant migraine patients who received at least a month of anti-CGRP mAbs treatment. Patients completed a headache diary that included monthly acute medication intake (MAM), monthly migraine days (MMD), adverse events as well as completed Patient-Reported Outcome questionnaires (MIDAS [Migraine Disability Assessment] and Headache Impact Test 6 [HIT-6]). The number of patients achieving a ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days was determined and classified as ≥ 50% responders, and baseline parameters and logistic regression between responders and non-responders were analyzed to identify potential predictors of response. Adverse events were registered in every follow-up.

RESULTS

Treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs led to reductions in MIDAS, HIT-6, MMD and MAM from baseline to 6-24 months. At 6-12 months, responders (61% and 57%, respectively) exhibited lower baseline MMD and MAM. Medication overuse  was associated with non-responders from 6 to 24 months and it was identified as a negative predictor of treatment effectiveness (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.74; p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Anti-CGRP mAbs prove effectiveness and safety over a 24-month period in a RM population. Patients with no medication overuse and lower basal MMDs and MAM may respond better to anti-CGRP mAbs.

[Anti-CGRP-based Migraine Medications: A Comprehensive Overview]

In the early 1990s, the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) was identified as a key messenger in the pathophysiology of migraine and emerged as a treatment target, fundamentally transforming our approach to migraine therapy. While previous prophylactic drugs were non-specific and often caused intolerable side effects, the discovery of CGRP marked the advent of a new era in migraine treatment. The two main classes of CGRP-specific migraine treatments are monoclonal antibodies that bind to CGRP or the CGRP receptor, and CGRP receptor antagonists, the so-called gepants. Extensive clinical trials have conclusively demonstrated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of monoclonal CGRP(-receptor) antibodies in the prophylactic treatment of both episodic and chronic migraine. The same positive results apply to the use of various gepants. They have proven to be not only an effective alternative to triptans in acute migraine therapy but also promising options for continuous use as prophylactic treatments. In this review, we aim to present the current state of research on CGRP-specific migraine therapy and insights in real-world data from the first years after their launch in clinical practice.

Revolutionizing migraine management: advances and challenges in CGRP-targeted therapies and their clinical implications

Migraine, a prevalent neurological disorder, affects approximately 14.1% of the global population and disproportionately impacts females. This debilitating condition significantly compromises quality of life, productivity, and incurs high healthcare costs, presenting a challenge not only to individuals but to societal structures as a whole. Despite advances in our understanding of migraine pathophysiology, treatment options remain limited, necessitating ongoing research into effective therapies. This review delves into the complexity of migraine management, examining the roles of genetic predisposition, environmental influences, personalized treatment approaches, comorbidities, efficacy and safety of existing acute and preventive treatments. It further explores the continuum between migraine and tension-type headaches and discusses the intricacies of treating various migraine subtypes, including those with and without aura. We emphasize the recent paradigm shift toward trigeminovascular activation and the release of vasoactive substances, such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which offer novel therapeutic targets. We assess groundbreaking clinical trials, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic perspectives, safety, tolerability, and the real-world application of CGRP monoclonal antibodies and gepants. In the face of persisting treatment barriers such as misdiagnosis, medication overuse headaches, and limited access to specialist care, we discuss innovative CGRP-targeted strategies, the high cost and scarcity of long-term efficacy data, and suggest comprehensive solutions tailored to Turkiye and developing countries. The review offers strategic recommendations including the formulation of primary care guidelines, establishment of specialized outpatient clinics, updating physicians on novel treatments, enhancing global accessibility to advanced therapies, and fostering patient education. Emphasizing the importance of lifestyle modifications and holistic approaches, the review underscores the potential of mass media and patient groups in disseminating critical health information and shaping the future of migraine management.

Advances in diagnosis and treatment of vestibular migraine and the vestibular disorders it mimics

Dizziness is one of the most common chief complaints in both the ambulatory care setting and the emergency department. These symptoms may be representative of a broad range of entities. Therefore, any attempt at treatment must first start with determining the etiology. In this current perspective, we focus specifically on the diagnosis of and treatment of vestibular migraine, which is common and overlaps clinically with a variety of other diagnoses. We discuss the traditional treatments for vestibular migraine in addition to the recent explosion of novel migraine therapeutics. Because vestibular migraine can mimic, or co-exist with, a variety of other vestibular diseases, we discuss several of these disorders including persistent postural-perceptual dizziness, benign paroxysmal positional vertigo, post-concussive syndrome, Ménière's disease, and cerebrovascular etiologies. We discuss the diagnosis of each, as well as overlapping and distinguishing clinical features of which the reader should be aware. Finally, we conclude with evidence based as well as expert commentary on management, with a particular emphasis on vestibular migraine.

A Risk-Difference Meta-Analysis for the Prophylactic Treatments of Chronic Migraine

Chronic migraine (CM) imposes significant personal, societal, and financial burdens, historically lacking specific prophylactic treatments. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) represent a novel, mechanism-based, and migraine-specific prophylactic approach. Four mAbs, namely, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab, have been marketed, although head-to-head trials with standard anti-migraine treatments are absent. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of anti-CGRP mAbs with standard anti-migraine treatments using a cross-trial indirect model of the absolute risk difference (ARD) of a 50% responder rate, in order to express the final results in terms of the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH). Phase 3 and 2b randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CM prophylaxis were searched in the MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases with specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The ARD between groups for the percentage of trial participants who reported a 50% reduction in monthly migraine days and the differences in the number of adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and participants who withdrew from each RCT were calculated, and subsequently, the NNT and NNH were calculated for each one of the outcome measures. In total, eight RCTs were considered eligible. A similar efficacy and safety have been demonstrated among CGRP mAbs and all standard CM treatments. The results of the ARD for the total number of studies concerning efficacy, total adverse events, serious adverse events, and dropout from the RCTs ranged from -0.688 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.821-(-0.513)) to -0.018 (95% CI: -0.044-(0.007)), from 0.032 (95% CI: -0.041, 0.104) to -0.380 (95% CI: -0.589, -0.126), from -0.025 (95% CI: -0.046, -0.006) to 0.014 (95% CI: -0.015, 0.42), from 0.048 (95% CI: -0.112, 0.014) to 0.232 (95% CI: -0.016, 0.458) correspondingly. All anti-CGRP mAbs showed a roughly equal statistically significant ARD and similar NNTs, ranging from 5 to 8, while the ARD of onbotulinum toxin A (oBTA) was not significant with an NNT 56. The two studies of topiramate showed contradictory results, the one significant while the other not, with NNTs 2 and 22, respectively. All four anti-CGRP mAbs showed an invariably high efficacy among their studies, in terms of the ARD and its derivative measure of NNT, in contrast to oBTA, while in topiramate, the results are contradictory between the two studies.

Posttraumatic headache is a distinct headache type from migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Posttraumatic headache (PTH), a headache that develops within 7 days of a causative injury, is one of the most common secondary headaches, mostly attributed to mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Because presence of preinjury headache is a risk factor for developing PTH and PTH symptoms often resemble migraine or tension-type headache, the association between PTH and primary headaches has attracted attention from clinicians and scientists.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies on epidemiological aspects, headache features, risk factors, imaging characteristics, and response to treatment, suggest overlapping features and distinct objective findings in PTH compared to migraine.

SUMMARY

We argue that PTH is distinct from migraine. Therefore, PTH epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis should continue to be investigated separately from migraine.

Clinical Evaluation After Discontinuation of Galcanezumab in Japanese Patients with Episodic and Chronic Migraine: Analysis of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial and Open-label Extension Study

INTRODUCTION

This analysis of two Japanese clinical trials evaluated efficacy and safety after galcanezumab (GMB) discontinuation in patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM).

METHODS

Data were from a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo [PBO]-controlled primary trial (patients with EM) and a 12-month open-label extension trial (patients with EM/CM). Patients received 6 months' (primary) or 12/18 months' (extension) treatment with GMB 120 mg (GMB120) plus 240-mg loading dose or 240 mg (GMB240) with 4 months' post-treatment follow-up. Efficacy was assessed as number of monthly migraine headache days during post-treatment. Safety was assessed via post-treatment-emergent adverse events (PTEAEs).

RESULTS

The analysis population included 186 patients from the primary trial (PBO N = 93; GMB120 N = 45; GMB240 N = 48), 220 patients with EM from the extension trial (PBO/GMB120 N = 57; PBO/GMB240 N = 55; GMB120/GMB120 N = 55; GMB240/GMB240 N = 53), and 55 patients with CM (GMB120 N = 28; GMB240 N = 27). In patients with EM receiving 6 months' GMB120, mean standard deviation (SD) monthly migraine headache days increased from 5.69 (4.64) at treatment end to 6.24 (4.37) at end of follow-up but did not return to pre-treatment levels (8.80 [2.96]). In the extension trial, mean monthly migraine headache days in patients with EM receiving GMB120 were 4.13 (3.85) after 12 months and 4.45 (3.78) at end of follow-up, and 3.59 (3.48) after 18 months and 3.91 (3.57) at end of follow-up. Monthly migraine headache days in patients with CM (12 months' GMB120) were 10.71 (4.61) at treatment end and 11.17 (5.64) at end of follow-up (pre-treatment 20.15 [4.65]). Similar results were seen for patients receiving GMB240. The most observed PTEAE after GMB discontinuation was nasopharyngitis.

CONCLUSION

Galcanezumab exhibited post-treatment efficacy for up to 4 months in Japanese patients with EM and with CM. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02959177 and NCT02959190.

Synergism of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies and OnabotulinumtoxinA in the Treatment of Chronic Migraine: A Real-World Retrospective Chart Review

BACKGROUND

Many patients with chronic migraine do not achieve clinically meaningful improvement in their headache frequency with monotherapy. The burden associated with chronic migraine calls for a multifaceted treatment approach targeting multiple aspects of migraine pathophysiology.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of concurrent anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb) and onabotulinumtoxinA (onabot) treatment on median monthly migraine days (MMD) in patients with chronic migraine, through a retrospective study.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of Cleveland Clinic patients either concurrently (dual therapy) or consecutively (monotherapy) treated with anti-CGRP mAbs and onabot between June 2018 and November 2021 were extracted. Only adult patients (≥ 18 years of age) were included in this study. MMDs for 194 concurrently treated (86.6% female and a median [interquartile range] age of 51 [41-61] years) and 229 consecutively treated (88.2% female and median age of 47 [IQR 39-57] years) patients were examined at baseline, after first therapy of either anti-CGRP mAb or onabot, and following dual therapy for 3 consecutive months. The reduction of MMDs for each treatment group were compared. The same approach was utilized to compare consecutive monotherapy at separate times (n = 229) and dual-therapy groups.

RESULTS

The initial treatment of the dual-therapy group reduced the median (IQR) MMDs from 30 (30-30) to 15 (12-30) [p < 0.0001]. After initiation of dual therapy, the median MMDs was further decreased from 15 (12-30) to 8 (3-22) [p < 0.0001]. A majority [132/194 (68.0%)] of the dual-therapy patients reported a ≥ 50% reduction in MMD and 90/194 (46.4%) reported a ≥ 75% reduction. For the consecutive monotherapy group, median MMDs changed from a baseline of 30 (25-30) to 15 (8-25) from onabot monotherapy and decreased from 25 (15-30) to 12 (4-25) after anti-CGRP mAb monotherapy. Almost half (113/229 [49.3%] from onabot, and 104/229 [45.4%] from anti-CGRP mAb) of these patients achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in MMDs and a minority (38/229 [16.6%] from onabot, and 45/229 [19.7%] from anti-CGRP mAb) achieved a reduction of ≥ 75%. Additionally, dual therapy showed significant improvement in MMDs compared with monotherapy of either treatment (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Dual therapy of anti-CGRP mAbs and onabot may be more efficacious than monotherapy, possibly due to their synergistic mechanisms of action.

Observational Retrospective Study in Patients Treated with Galcanezumab as Preventive Treatment for Migraine: The ORYGAM Study

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of galcanezumab has been demonstrated in randomized controlled trials, but evidence about its use under clinical practice conditions is still limited. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of the patients treated with galcanezumab in routine clinical practice in Spain as well as treatment patterns, persistence, and effectiveness.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review study was carried out in six hospitals. Information of adults with migraine, who started treatment with galcanezumab between November 2019 and September 2021, was analyzed until end or loss of follow-up. Continuous variables were described as mean (standard deviation, SD) and median (interquartile range, IQR), and categorical variables as frequency and percentages. Persistence to treatment was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 314 patients were analyzed over median follow-up period of 17.5 months (13.8-20.7), with a mean age of 46.3 (12.6), 85% women, 80.6% chronic migraine, and reporting a mean of monthly migraine days of 16.7 (7.8). Overall, 72.9% had comorbid conditions, with anxiety and depression disorders being the most frequent. More than 60% had received ≥ 6 previous preventive drugs, the most common being antiepileptics, antidepressants, and botulinum toxin (95.2%, 89.8% and 84.1%, respectively). Overall, 60.3% of the patients with other preventive treatments maintained them after galcanezumab initiation. The median time on galcanezumab was 14.6 months (9.4-22.8); 95.7%, 82.0%, 76.2% and 59.8% of patients were persistent to treatment at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, respectively. Of the patients who discontinued (151: 48.1%), 57.6% were due to lack of effectiveness and 31.1% were due to improvement in migraine. The average reduction of monthly migraine days at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months was 7.9 (7.2), 9.1 (7.5), 8.8 (6.6) and 9.0 (6.9) days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In real clinical practice, galcanezumab is an effective treatment and has a high persistence in patients with migraine, mostly chronic and with multiple use of previous preventive treatments.

Blood pressure monitoring in elderly migraineurs starting an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody: a real-world prospective study

BACKGROUND

While monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the CGRP pathway have revolutionized migraine management due to their improved tolerance and adherence, concerns remain about their potential impact on blood pressure (BP), especially in older patients, due to CGRP-mediated vasodilation blockade. Given the growing use of these therapies in older populations, assessing their cardiovascular (CV) safety is of paramount importance.

METHODS

This multicentric observational prospective study focused on migraine sufferers aged ≥ 60 who began erenumab, galcanezumab, or fremanezumab for prevention. Baseline, three-month, and twelve-month BP measurements were collected. Changes in antihypertensive medication and "Newly or Worsened Hypertensive" patients (NWHP) were assessed.

RESULTS

Among 155 patients receiving anti-CGRP mAbs (40 Erenumab, 47 Galcanezumab, 68 Fremanezumab), 42.5% had hypertension history and 39% were on antihypertensive treatment. No significant systolic or diastolic BP changes occurred at any time point compared to baseline (all p > 0.05), with no differences between the three groups. After one year, 20/155 (12.9%) patients were considered NWHP; 11/20 had prior hypertension, and 5/11 adjusted antihypertensive therapy. Among 9/20 newly hypertensive patients, 5/9 had a single measurement above the normal threshold with no requirement for new pharmacological therapy. A higher baseline BP value was associated with increased BP (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The study concludes that treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs over one year does not significantly affect BP in patients aged ≥ 60, nor does it increase the incidence of hypertension compared to general population trends. Nonetheless, continuous monitoring and further long-term studies are necessary to fullya scertain the cardiovascular safety of these medications in the elderly.

Therapeutic Options for Migraines in the Microsurgical Patient: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

There exists an increasing array of treatments proposed to prevent, alleviate, and abort symptoms of a migraine; however, for patients who undergo reconstructive microsurgery, caution must be taken to preserve vascular integrity. This study is the first-to-date scoping review of vascular and bleeding risk of current migraine therapies, with the purpose of identifying potential therapeutic agents for postoperative migraine management appropriate for microsurgical patients.

METHODS

Currently available migraine therapeutics were compiled from the UpToDate software system and the American Academy of Family Physicians. A PubMed literature review was performed for each therapeutic's effect on bleeding or vascular involvement. Data were compiled into tables of abortive, symptom-controlling and prophylactic, and nonpharmacologic treatments. Expert microsurgeons reviewed the data to provide recommendations for optimized patient care.

RESULTS

Triptans and other ergot derivatives demonstrated strong evidence of vasoconstriction and were greatly advised against for immediate postmicrosurgical use. Novel pharmaceutical therapies such as lasmiditan and calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists have no literature indicating potential for vasoconstriction or hematoma and remain an investigational option for abortive medical treatment. For symptom control, acetaminophen appears the safest option, with clinical judgment and further research needed for use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Alternative treatment techniques may include migraine prophylaxis with botulinum toxin injection or nutraceutical treatment by means of magnesium supplementation or coenzyme Q10 administration, minimizing the need for additional medication in the postoperative setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing reconstructive microsurgery have a unique medical profile limiting the therapeutic options available to treat migraines. This review provides preliminary evidence to be considered as a guide for prescribing therapeutics for migraine in the postoperative setting.

Treatment Outcome After Switching From Galcanezumab to Fremanezumab in Patients With Migraine

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor (anti-CGRP-R) have been widely administered to patients with migraine who show inadequate responses to preventive medications. Among patients in whom a particular anti-CGRP-R mAb is ineffective, switching between different anti-CGRP-R mAbs can be the next option. Few studies have investigated treatment outcomes for antibody switching, especially between mAbs with the same target of the CGRP ligand. We aimed to determine the treatment outcome after switching between two anti-CGRP mAbs (galcanezumab to fremanezumab).

METHODS

We identified migraine patients in a prospective headache clinic registry who received galcanezumab for ≥3 months and were switched to fremanezumab for a further ≥3 months at a single university hospital. We defined a treatment response as a ≥50% reduction in the number of days with a moderate or severe headache at the third month of treatment relative to baseline. The treatment response after switching to fremanezumab was compared with the initial treatment response to galcanezumab.

RESULTS

Among 21 patients identified in the registry, 7 (33.3%) were initial responders to galcanezumab. After switching to fremanezumab, 7 (33.3%) showed a treatment response. The treatment response rate was 28.6% in the initial responders and 71.4% in the nonresponders to galcanezumab (p>0.999).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching between anti-CGRP mAbs (galcanezumab to fremanezumab) yielded a treatment outcome comparable to that reported previously when switching from an anti-CGRP-R mAb (erenumab) to an anti-CGRP mAb (galcanezumab or fremanezumab). The treatment response to fremanezumab seems to be independent of the prior treatment response to galcanezumab. Our findings suggest that switching to another anti-CGRP mAb can be considered when a particular anti-CGRP mAb is ineffective or intolerable.

Nonspecific oral medications versus anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) versus nonspecific oral migraine preventives (NOEPs).

BACKGROUND

Insurers mandate step therapy with NOEPs before approving CGRP mAbs.

METHODS

Databases were searched for class I or II randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CGRP mAbs or NOEPs versus placebo for migraine prevention in adults. The primary outcome measure was monthly migraine days (MMD) or moderate to severe headache days.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs for CGRP mAbs, 5 RCTs for topiramate, and 3 RCTs for divalproex were included in the meta-analysis. There was high certainty that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo, with weighted mean difference (WMD; 95% confidence interval) of -1.64 (-1.99 to -1.28) MMD, which is compatible with small effect size (Cohen's d -0.25 [-0.34 to -0.16]). Certainty of evidence that topiramate or divalproex is more effective than placebo was very low and low, respectively (WMD -1.45 [-1.52 to -1.38] and -1.65 [-2.30 to -1.00], respectively; Cohen's d -1.25 [-2.47 to -0.03] and -0.48 [-0.67 to -0.29], respectively). Trial sequential analysis showed that information size was adequate and that CGRP mAbs had clear benefit versus placebo. Network meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between CGRP mAbs and topiramate (WMD -0.19 [-0.56 to 0.17]) or divalproex (0.01 [-0.73 to 0.75]). No significant difference was seen between topiramate or divalproex (0.21 [-0.45 to 0.86]).

CONCLUSIONS

There is high certainty that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo, but the effect size is small. When feasible, CGRP mAbs may be prescribed as first-line preventives; topiramate or divalproex could be as effective but are less well tolerated. The findings of this study support the recently published 2024 position of the American Headache Society on the use of CGRP mAbs as the first-line treatment.

Developments in targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide

INTRODUCTION

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapy has revolutionized migraine treatment since its first approval in 2018. CGRP-targeted therapy includes monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and gepants, which modulate trigeminal nociceptive and inflammatory responses, alleviating pain sensitization involved in migraine pathogenesis. CGRP-targeted therapy is effective not only for migraine but also for other chronic headache disorders that share the CGRP pathway.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the latest developments and evidence for CGRP-targeted therapy for episodic migraine and chronic migraine. In addition, the authors discuss the emerging evidence on response prediction, menstrual migraine, vestibular migraine, idiopathic intracranial hypertension, post-traumatic headache, and the relationship between selected migraine comorbidities and CGRP.

EXPERT OPINION

Since the launch of CGRP-targeted therapy, many practical issues have been raised. Generally, it's safe to combine CGRP-targeted mAbs and gepants; this is an excellent option for patients with partial response. When considering stopping CGRP-targeted therapy, although a disease-modifying effect is likely, the optimal time for discontinuation remains unknown. Finally, beyond migraine, CGRP-targeted therapy may be used for other chronic pain disorders and psychological comorbidities.

Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Arabic version of HIT-6 questionnaire in patients with migraine indicated for preventive therapy: A multi-center study

BACKGROUND

The Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) is an important patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in migraine prevention trials.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to (i) assess the reliability and validity of the Arabic version of HIT-6 in Arabic-speaking patients experiencing migraine, and (ii) evaluate the responsiveness of HIT-6 following migraine preventive therapy.

METHODS

In this prospective study, patients with migraine (n = 145) were requested to fill out a headache diary, the Arabic version of HIT-6, and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) at two time points (baseline and 3 months after initiation of prophylactic treatment). Some respondents (n = 73) were requested to fill out HIT-6 again 1 week from the baseline for test-retest reliability. The intensity of migraine headache attacks was evaluated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). An anchor-based method was used to establish the minimal important change (MIC) value and responsiveness of HIT-6.

RESULTS

The total scores of HIT-6 were significantly correlated to a fair degree with MIDAS (r = 0.41), as well as VAS (r = 0.53), and monthly migraine days (r = 0.38) at the baseline while at the follow-up (after 3 months), the correlations were of moderate degree with MIDAS scores (r = 0.62) and monthly migraine days (r = 0.60; convergent validity). Reliability estimates of the Arabic HIT-6 were excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.91 at baseline and 0.89 at follow-up). The average measure interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value for the test-retest reliability was 0.96 (95% confidence interval = 0.94-0.98, p < 0.001). The HIT-6 total score is sensitive to change, being significantly reduced after prophylactic treatment compared to before (effect size = 1.5, standardized response mean = 1.3). A reduction from baseline of 4.5 on HIT-6 showed the highest responsiveness to predict improvement with an area under the curve equal to 0.66, sensitivity of 80%, specificity of 45%, and significance at 0.021. Changes in the HIT-6 total score were positively correlated with changes in monthly migraine days (r = 0.40) and VAS scores (r = 0.69) but not with changes in the score of MIDAS (r = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

The Arabic version of HIT-6 is valid, reliable, and sensitive to detect clinical changes following migraine prophylactic treatment with a MIC of 4.5 points.

Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Patients with migraine often cycle through multiple nonspecific preventive medications due to poor tolerability and/or inadequate efficacy leading to low adherence and increased disease burden.

Objective

To compare the efficacy, tolerability, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction between erenumab and nonspecific oral migraine preventive medications (OMPMs) in patients with episodic migraine (EM) who had previously failed 1 or 2 preventive treatments.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The 12-month prospective, interventional, global, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sustained benefit of 2 treatment paradigms (erenumab qm vs oral prophylactics) in adult episodic migraine patients (APPRAISE) trial was a 12-month open-label, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 4 randomized clinical trial conducted from May 15, 2019, to October 1, 2021. This pragmatic trial was conducted at 84 centers across 17 countries. Overall, participants 18 years or older with a 12-month or longer history of migraine, and 4 or more but fewer than 15 monthly migraine days (MMDs) were included.

Interventions

Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive erenumab or OMPMs. Dose adjustment was permitted (label dependent).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the proportion of patients completing 1 year of the initially assigned treatment and achieving a reduction of 50% or greater from baseline in MMDs at month 12. Secondary end points included the cumulative mean change from baseline in MMDs during the treatment period and the proportion of responders according to the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale at month 12 for patients taking the initially assigned treatment.

Results

A total of 866 patients were screened, of whom 245 failed the screening and 621 completed the screening and baseline period. Of the 621 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 41.3 [11.2] years; 545 female [87.8%]; 413 [66.5%] in the erenumab group; 208 [33.5%] in the OMPM group), 523 (84.2%) completed the treatment phase, and 98 (15.8%) discontinued the study. At month 12, significantly more patients assigned to erenumab vs OMPM achieved the primary end point (232 of 413 [56.2%] vs 35 of 208 [16.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% CI, 4.28-9.82; P <.001). Compared with OMPMs, treatment with erenumab showed higher responder rate (314 of 413 [76.0%] vs 39 of 208 [18.8%]; OR, 13.75; 95% CI, 9.08-20.83; P <.001) on the PGIC scale (≥5 at month 12). Significant reduction in cumulative average MMDs was reported with erenumab treatment vs OMPM treatment (-4.32 vs -2.65; treatment difference [SE]: -1.67 [0.35] days; P < .001). Substantially fewer patients in the erenumab arm compared with the OMPM arm switched medication (9 of 413 [2.2%] vs 72 of 208 [34.6%]) and discontinued treatment due to adverse events (12 of 408 [2.9%] vs 48 of 206 [23.3%]). No new safety signals were identified.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that earlier use of erenumab in patients with EM who failed 1 or 2 previous preventive treatments provided greater and sustained efficacy, safety, and adherence than continuous OMPM.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03927144.

Evaluation of the concomitant use of prophylactic treatments in patients with migraine under anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide therapies: The PREVENAC study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) therapies are recent preventive therapies approved for both episodic and chronic migraine. One of the measures of effectiveness is the withdrawal of other preventive treatments. The objective of this study is to quantify the impact of anti-CGRP drugs in concomitant preventive treatment in patients with migraine.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort study with patients from nine national headache units. Patients with migraine undergoing treatment for at least 6 months with anti-CGRP antibodies, who were initially associated with some preventive treatment (oral and/or onabotulinumtoxinA) were included. Demographic and clinical variables were collected, as well as variables related to headache. Differences according to withdrawal or nonwithdrawal were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 408 patients were included, 86.52% women, 48.79 (SD = 1.46) years old. Preventive treatment was withdrawn in 43.87% (179/408), 20.83% partially and 23.04% totally. In 27.45% (112/408), it was maintained exclusively due to comorbidity and in 28.6% (117/408) due to partial efficacy. The most frequent time of withdrawal was between 3 and 5 months after the start of treatment. The baseline characteristics associated with nonwithdrawal were comorbidities: insomnia, hypertension and obesity, chronic migraine, and medication overuse. In the multivariate analysis, the absence of high blood pressure, a greater number of preventive treatments at the start, and a lower number of migraine days/month after anti-CGRP treatment were independently associated with withdrawal of the treatment (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Anti-CGRP antibodies allow the withdrawal of associated preventive treatment in a significant percentage of patients, which supports its effectiveness in real-life conditions.

Adverse and serious adverse events incidence of pharmacological interventions for managing chronic and episodic migraine in adults: a systematic review

Background

Migraine is the second most common prevalent disorder worldwide and is a top cause of disability with a substantial economic burden. Many preventive migraine medications have notable side effects that affect different body organs.

Method

We systematically searched for published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using terms for migraine/headache and preventive medications. Using eligibility criteria, two reviewers independently assessed the articles. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was applied to assess the quality of the studies. Data were classified by system organ class (SOC).

Results

Thirty-two RCTs with 21 780 participants met the eligibility criteria for the incidence of adverse events (AEs). Additionally, 33 RCTs with 22 615 participants were included to synthesise the incidence of serious AEs (SAEs). The percentage of attributed AEs and SAEs to each SOC for 10 preventive drugs with different dosing regimens was calculated. Amitriptyline and topiramate had a higher incidence of nervous system disorders; Topiramate was also associated with a higher incidence of psychiatric disorders. All drugs showed a certain incidence of infections and infestations, with Onabotulinumtoxin A (BTA) having the lowest rate. BTA had a higher incidence of musculoskeletal disorders than the other drugs. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) such as fremanezumab and galcanezumab were linked to more general disorders and administration site conditions than other drugs.

Conclusion

Notably, the observed harm to SOCs varies among these preventive drugs. We suggest conducting head-to-head RCTs to evaluate the safety profile of oral medications, BTA, and CGRP MAbs in episodic and/or chronic migraine populations.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42021265993.

CGRP-targeted medication in chronic migraine - systematic review

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine is a highly debilitating condition that is often difficult to manage, particularly in the presence of medication overuse headache. Drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), or its receptor have shown promising results in treating this disorder.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed and Embase to identify randomized clinical trials and real-world studies reporting on the use of medication targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in patients with chronic migraine.

RESULTS

A total of 270 records were identified. Nineteen studies qualified for the qualitative analysis. Most studies reported on monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP (anti-CGRP mAbs), that overall prove to be effective in decreasing monthly migraine days by half in about 27.6-61.4% of the patients. Conversion from chronic to episodic migraine was seen in 40.88% of the cases, and 29-88% of the patients stopped medication overuse. Obesity seems to be the main negative predictor of response to anti-CGRP mAbs. There is no evidence to suggest the superiority of one anti-CGRP mAb. Despite the lack of strong evidence, the combination of anti-CGRP medication with onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine is likely to bring benefits for resistant cases. Atogepant is the first gepant to demonstrate a significant decrease in monthly migraine days compared to placebo in a recent trial. Further, anti-CGRP mAb and gepants have a good safety profile.

CONCLUSION

There is strong evidence from randomized trials and real-world data to suggest that drugs targeting CGRP are a safe and effective treatment for chronic migraine.

Improvement of comorbid anxiety and depression in patients with migraine treated with injectable preventive calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists: Review of clinical evidence

Background

Migraine is often associated with depression and anxiety, leading to a diminished quality of life. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists have shown promise in treating migraines, but their effects on concurrent depression and anxiety have not been clarified.

Methods

A literature review was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Ovid Medline, and EMBASE focusing on phase 3 clinical trials, post-hoc analysis studies, and real-world evidence (RWE) published in the past 5 years. The review primarily utilized patient-reported outcome tools, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory-II, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)-7, and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), to assess anxiety and depression in relation to CGRP-targeted monoclonal antibodies.

Results

Out of 260 studies, 17 met the inclusion criteria. Eptinezumab lacked sufficient evidence regarding its impact on depression and anxiety. While sufficient evidence on its effect on comorbid anxiety was not available, fremanezumab was shown to significantly improve comorbid depression in one study while not achieving statistical significance in another. Erenumab and galcanezumab showed significant improvement in comorbid depression, implying possible benefits in patients with migraine. Galcanezumab showed faster relief from depressive symptoms than other injectable CGRP antagonists. Galcanezumab also exhibited improvements in GAD-7 scores for anxiety, although not statistically significant, whereas RWE showed promising HARS scores for both galcanezumab and erenumab.

Conclusions

Galcanezumab and erenumab appear to be more effective in improving concurrent depressive and anxiety symptoms in migraine patients than fremanezumab. Notably, these psychometric questionnaires were not the primary outcome measures of the trials and were not specifically designed to investigate the effects of these medications on depression or anxiety. Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of CGRP antagonists on mental health disorders associated with migraines. These findings have implications for enhancing the overall well-being and quality of life in individuals with migraines and comorbid psychiatric conditions.

Anti-CGRP mAbs for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: An Overview Review and a Cost Saving Analysis in the Global Scenario

Objectives: Migraine is a neurological disease with a high frequency of incidence. The new monoclonal antibodies selective for the calcitonin gene-related peptide and its ligand (anti-CGRP mAbs) have been marketed both in the USA and EU based on the positive efficacy results in the prevention of migraine. This search has been carried out with the aim of collecting real-world evidence on the effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs, performing a cost-savings analysis, and comparing performances among anti-CGRP mAbs medicines marketed in the American and European market. Methods: The literature review has been performed in PubMed database on 31 December 2022; the cost of the unitary dose of anti-CGRP mAbs has been extracted consulting an American national database. Results: The results confirm efficacy and good tolerability of anti-CGRP mAbs, determining a difference in the purchase price. In fact, all extracted studies showed a protective risk factor exposure in monthly migraine days reduction for all the anti-CGRP mAbs, whereas the cost analysis showed that using eptinezumab, in a quarter there is a cost saving of at least $425 per patient, compared with the other anti-CGRP mAbs. Conclusions: With equal efficacy and equal safety, anti-CGRP mAbs should be prescribed also regard to the cost established at the negotiation, making sure to guarantee the best treatment to the patients, but at the same time impacting as little as possible to the healthcare services resources.

Long-Term Effectiveness of Galcanezumab in the Prevention of Migraine: An Italian Retrospective Analysis (REALITY)

BACKGROUND

Galcanezumab is approved in the European Union (EU) as migraine prophylaxis in adults with at least four migraine days per month. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of galcanezumab on migraine-related burdens and its impact on the use of healthcare resources for migraine prophylaxis in an Italian setting.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in patients with migraine who initiated treatment with galcanezumab for migraine prevention between September 2019 and December 2020. Patient data for monthly migraine days (MMDs) and MMDs with acute medication intake were obtained by medical chart reviews. Information on patient-reported outcomes (using the Migraine Disability Assessment [MIDAS] questionnaire and Headache Impact Test 6 [HIT-6] questionnaire) and on the use of healthcare resources were also collected. The time points of interest were 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 months after the initiation of galcanezumab, and the most recent time point available during follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 207 patients were enrolled in the study. Starting from month 3 after treatment initiation, more than half of the patients presented at least a 50% reduction in MMDs, and approximately one-third of non-responders at month 3 became responders at month 6. From month 3 to month 12, MMDs decreased on average by 10 days. Headache impact and disability, as well as migraine-associated health resource utilization decreased significantly during the treatment period. A positive significant association among the three dimensions of clinical burden (MMDs, MIDAS and days of acute medication intake) was also observed.

CONCLUSION

The results of this Italian real-world study confirmed that galcanezumab has a rapid onset of effect and provides a long-term response among patients over different migraine-related burdens. The use of healthcare resources was also remarkably reduced.

Reporting Quality and Risk of Bias Analysis of Published RCTs Assessing Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review

Objective: Phase II/III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are vulnerable to many types of bias beyond randomization. Insights into the reporting quality of RCTs involving migraine patients treated with monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide system (anti-CGRP MAbs) are currently lacking. Our aim was to analyze the reporting quality of phase II/III RCTs involving migraine patients treated with anti-CGRP MAbs. Methods: A systematic search was performed on the PubMed and EMBASE databases, according to PRISMA guidelines, for relevant RCTs in either episodic or chronic migraine prevention. Additionally, an adapted version of the 2010 CONSORT statement checklist was utilized. The ROBvis online tool was used to document the risk of bias. Results: From the initially identified 179 articles, we finally found 31 RCTs that were eligible for evaluation. The average CONSORT compliance was 88.7% (69.7-100%), while 93.5% (N = 29) of the articles had a compliance greater than 75%. Twenty-eight CONSORT items were reported in more than 75% of the articles. The average compliance of the analyzed RCTs was 93.9% for Galcanezumab, 91.3% for Fremanezumab, followed by 85.4% for Erenumab and Eptinezumab studies. Implementation of the ROB2 tool showed some concerning "missing information" arising from the inadequate reporting. Specifically, 50% of the studies (N = 16) were categorized as having inadequate information regarding the randomization process. Conclusions: Adequate reporting quality was disclosed in the evaluated RCTs with anti-CGRP MAbs in migraine prevention. However, some methodological issues need to be highlighted to be addressed in future studies assessing the efficacy of new molecules targeting CGRP or other candidate pathways implicated in migraine pathophysiology.

Eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: a narrative review

Eptinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), was recently approved in Europe for the prophylactic treatment of migraine in adults who have at least four migraine days a month. Eptinezumab is administered by intravenous infusion every 12 weeks. During recent months, a considerable amount of evidence from eptinezumab trials has been published. The aim of this review is to describe the existing evidence on the tolerability, safety and efficacy of eptinezumab in patients with migraine. Data from randomized (PROMISE-1, PROMISE-2, RELIEF and DELIVER) and open-label (PREVAIL) phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated the favorable effect of eptinezumab in migraine symptoms from first day of treatment. These studies showed that eptinezumab results in an overall reduction in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs), increases in the ≥50% and ≥ 75% migraine responder rates (MRRs) and improvements in patient-reported outcome measures in both patients with episodic migraine (EM) and with chronic migraine (CM), including patients who failed previous preventive treatments. The RELIEF trial also showed that eptinezumab, within 2 h of administration, reduced headache pain, migraine-associated symptoms and acute medication use when administered during a migraine attack. Eptinezumab benefits manifested as early as day 1 after dosing and with the subsequent doses lasted up to at least 2 years. Treatment-emergent adverse events reported by ≥2% of patients included upper respiratory tract infection and fatigue. Current evidence demonstrates that eptinezumab has a potent, fast-acting, sustained migraine preventive effect in patients with EM and CM. Eptinezumab has also shown to be well tolerated, supporting its use in the treatment of patients with migraine and inclusion in the current migraine therapeutic options.

Effectiveness, tolerability, and response predictors of preventive anti-CGRP mAbs for migraine in patients over 65 years old: a multicenter real-world case-control study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate clinical characteristics, effectiveness, and tolerability of preventive anti- calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in the elderly. Anti-CGRP mAbs have demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with migraine although there is limited information regarding the elderly.

DESIGN

We performed a multicenter case-control study of cases (patients over 65 years old) and controls (sex-matched patients under 55 years old) with migraine receiving anti-CGRP mAbs.

METHODS

We included the demographic characteristics, effectiveness-reduction in the number of monthly headache days (MHD) and monthly migraine days (MMD), 30%, 50%, and 75% responder rates-and treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The primary endpoint was the 50% response rate regarding MHD at weeks 20-24; exploratory 50% response predictors in the elderly were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 228 patients were included: 114 cases , 114 controls-. Among cases 84.2% (96/114) were women, 79.8% (91/114) CM; mean age of cases 70.1 years old (range: 66-86); mean age of controls was 42.9 years old(range: 38-49). Cases had a higher percentage of vascular risk factors (P < .05),older age of onset (P < .001) and more reported prior preventive treatments (P < .001). Regarding effectiveness in cases, 50% response rate was achieved by 57.5% (42/73) at 20-24 weeks, with lower reduction in the MHD at 8-12 weeks (5 [7.2], 8 [9.1]; P = .001) and a higher reduction in MMD at 20-24 weeks (10.7 [9.1], 9.2 [7.7]; P = .04) compared to the control group. The percentage of TEAEs was similar in the 2 groups. Diagnosis of episodic migraine (EM) (P = .03) and lower number of MHD at baseline (P = .001) were associated with a 50% response in the elderly in univariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides real world evidence of effectiveness and safety of anti-CGRP mAbs for migraine in patients without upper age-limit and possible predictors of anti-CGRP response in the elderly.

Efficacy of migraine prophylaxis treatments for treatment-naïve patients and those with prior treatment failure: a protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Migraine headache is a significant health problem affecting patients' psychological well-being and quality of life. Several network meta-analyses (NMAs) have compared the efficacy of migraine prophylaxis medications. However, some have focused exclusively on oral medications, while others were limited to injectable medications. Moreover, none of these NMAs conducted a stratified analysis between treatment-naïve patients and those with prior treatment failure. Therefore, this systematic review and NMA will compare the efficacy among all treatments for migraine prophylaxis, stratified by the treatment status of patients (ie, treatment-naïve and previous treatment failure).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Randomised-controlled trials that included patients with chronic or episodic migraine, assessed the efficacy of oral or injectable treatments for migraine prophylaxis and measured the outcomes as monthly migraine day, monthly headache day, migraine-related disability, health-related quality of life or adverse drug events will be eligible for inclusion in this review. Relevant studies will be searched from Medline, Scopus, the US National Institutes of Health Register, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO-ICTRP) databases since inception through 15 August 2023. Risk of bias assessment will be performed using a revised tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomised trials. Two-stage NMA will be applied to compare relative treatment effects among all treatments of migraine prophylaxis. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve will be applied to estimate and rank the probability to be the best treatment. Consistency assumption will be assessed using a design-by-treatment interaction model. Publication bias will be assessed by comparison-adjusted funnel plot. All analyses will be stratified according to patients' status (ie, treatment-naïve and prior treatment failure).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is a systematic review protocol collecting data from published literature and does not require approval from an institutional review board. Results from this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020171843.

Efficacy and Safety of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Prevention of Chronic Migraine: A Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

Due to the unmet needs in the management of migraine, a primary headache, and disabling disorder, the past decade has focused on developing monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against the calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP) as migraine prophylactic agents. The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various anti-CGRP mAbs in the prevention of chronic migraine. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed using the Bayesian framework to estimate the efficacy and safety of mAbs after performing a literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane database, and International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP). The outcomes calculated were in terms of mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with a 95% credible interval (95%CrI). Network graphs were constructed and node-split analysis was done to analyze the inconsistency. The NMA included a total of 10 clinical trials. Galacanezumab (120 mg) (MD: -2.7; 95%CrI: -4.8 to -0.83) was found to be better than other mAbs in terms of the difference in mean migraine days (MMD). Fremanezumab quarterly dose administration showed the best response (OR: 2.9; 95%CrI: 1.9 to 4.6) in terms of responder rate. Eptinezumab was found to be safer (OR: 0.88; 95%CrI: 0.61-1.3) as compared to other mAbs in terms of the rate of adverse events. Fremanezumab (quarterly) ranked better in terms of response rate, and eptinezumab was found to be the safest in the prophylactic management of migraine. Galacenequmab was better at reducing MMD. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term safety, efficacy, and use of mAbs in migraine patients.

Real-world effectiveness of Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies compared to OnabotulinumtoxinA (RAMO) in chronic migraine: a retrospective, observational, multicenter, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine (CM) is a disabling condition with high prevalence in the general population. Until the recent approval of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (Anti-CGRP mAbs), OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) was the only treatment specifically approved for CM prophylaxis. Direct comparisons between the two treatments are not available so far.

METHODS

We performed an observational, retrospective, multicenter study in Italy to compare the real-world effectiveness of Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A. Patients with CM who had received either treatment according to Italian prescribing regulations were extracted from available clinical databases. Efficacy outcomes included the change from baseline in monthly headache days (MHD), MIgraine Disability ASsessment test (MIDAS), and monthly acute medications (MAM) evaluated at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was MHD change from baseline at 12 months. Safety outcomes included serious adverse events (SAE) and treatment discontinuation. Unadjusted and adjusted models were used for the analyses.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixteen potentially eligible patients were screened; 183 (86 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 97 BoNT-A) were included. One hundred seventy-one (80 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 91 BoNT-A) and 154 (69 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 85 BoNT-A) patients were included in the efficacy analysis at 6 and 12 months of follow-up, respectively. Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A both resulted in a mean MHD reduction at 6 (-11.5 and -7.2 days, respectively; unadjusted mean difference -4.3; 95%CI -6.6 to -2.0; p = 0.0003) and 12 months (-11.9 and -7.6, respectively; unadjusted mean difference -4.4; 95%CI -6.8 to -2.0; p = 0.0002) of follow-up. Similar results were observed after adjusting for baseline confounders. Anti-CGRP mAbs showed a significant MIDAS (-31.7 and -19.2 points, p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0296, respectively) and MAM reduction (-5.1 and -3.1 administrations, p = 0.0023 and p = 0.0574, respectively) compared to BoNT-A at 6 and 12 months. No SAEs were reported. One patient receiving fremanezumab discontinued treatment due to arthralgia. Treatment discontinuations, mainly for inefficacy, were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Both Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A were effective in CM patients with Anti-CGRP mAbs presenting higher effect magnitude, with comparable safety. Still, BoNT-A remains a valuable option for CM patients with contraindications to Anti-CGRP mAbs or for frail categories who are candidates to local therapy with limited risk of systemic administration.

The introduction of the CGRP monoclonal antibodies and their effect on the prescription patterns of chronic migraine preventive medications in a tertiary headache center: A retrospective, observational analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of the introduction of the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) in 2018 on the prescribing of older medications for the prevention of chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND

Prior to 2018, the preventive treatment of migraine borrowed from medications intended to treat other illnesses with the last medication, onabotulinumtoxinA, receiving Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the prevention of chronic migraine in 2010. The FDA approval of three CGRP mAbs in 2018 provided the ideal natural experiment to assess how the introduction of these medications, and a fourth in 2020, affected the generally stable migraine preventive medications market.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis using the aggregated de-identified data of 6595 patients. The percentage of patients with chronic migraine who had been prescribed one of ten most prescribed oral preventive medications or onabotulinumtoxinA, or any of the four CGRP mAbs, were calculated relative to the total number of patients with chronic migraine who received a prescription for any medication from our clinic during the pre-CGRP mAb years of 2015-2017 and post-approval years of 2019-2021.

RESULTS

We observed a statistically significant decrease in the prescription of the top 10 most prescribed medications after the introduction of the CGRP mAbs overall (1456/3144, 46.3%, to 1995/4629, 43.1%, p = 0.001), as well as with most individual medications, including large decreases in verapamil (230/3144, 7.3%, to 125/4629, 2.7%; p < 0.001), the tricyclic antidepressants (494/3144, 15.7%, to 532/4629, 11.5%; p < 0.001), topiramate (566/3144, 18.0%, to 653/4629, 14.1%; p < 0.001), and onabotulinumtoxinA (861/3144, 27.4%, to 1134/4629, 24.5%; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The introduction of the CGRP mAbs during 2018 resulted in a decrease in utilization of most oral medications and onabotulinumtoxinA for the prevention of migraine. Future work should continue to observe how the prescription patterns of these medications evolve with time.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Galcanezumab Versus Rimegepant for Prevention of Episodic Migraine: Results from a Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

There have been no prior trials directly comparing the efficacy of different calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists for migraine prevention. Reported are the results from the first head-to-head study of two CGRP antagonists, galcanezumab (monoclonal antibody) versus rimegepant (gepant), for the prevention of episodic migraine.

METHODS

In this 3-month, double-blind, double-dummy study, participants were randomized (1:1) to subcutaneous (SC) galcanezumab 120 mg per month (after a 240 mg loading dose) and a placebo oral disintegrating tablet (ODT) every other day (q.o.d.) or to rimegepant 75 mg ODT q.o.d. and a monthly SC placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with a ≥ 50% reduction in migraine headache days per month from baseline across the 3-month double-blind treatment period. Key secondary endpoints were overall mean change from baseline in: migraine headache days per month across 3 months and at month 3, 2, and 1; migraine headache days per month with acute migraine medication use; Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire Role Function-Restrictive domain score at month 3; and a ≥ 75% and 100% reduction from baseline in migraine headache days per month across 3 months.

RESULTS

Of 580 randomized participants (galcanezumab: 287, rimegepant: 293; mean age: 42 years), 83% were female and 81% Caucasian. Galcanezumab was not superior to rimegepant in achieving a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in migraine headache days per month (62% versus 61% respectively; P = 0.70). Given the pre-specified multiple testing procedure, key secondary endpoints cannot be considered statistically significant. Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 21% of participants, with no significant differences between study intervention groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Galcanezumab was not superior to rimegepant for the primary endpoint; however, both interventions demonstrated efficacy as preventive treatments in participants with episodic migraine. The efficacy and safety profiles observed in galcanezumab-treated participants were consistent with previous studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinTrials.gov-NCT05127486 (I5Q-MC-CGBD).

Anti-CGRP antibody galcanezumab modifies the function of the trigeminovascular nocisensor complex in the rat

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies directed against the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) are effective in the prevention of chronic and frequent episodic migraine. Since the antibodies do not cross the blood brain barrier, their antinociceptive effect is attributed to effects in meningeal tissues. We aimed to probe if such an antibody can be visualized within the dura mater and the trigeminal ganglia following its administration to rats and to examine if the activity of the trigeminovascular nocisensor complex is influenced by this treatment.

METHODS

Effects of the anti-CGRP antibody galcanezumab on the trigeminovascular nocisensor complex was examined by measuring release of sensory neuropeptides and histamine from the rat dura mater. Deposits of galcanezumab were visualized by fluorescence microscopy in the trigeminal ganglion and the dura mater.

RESULTS

Fluorophore-labelled galcanezumab was detected in the dura mater and the trigeminal ganglion up to 30 days after treatment affirming the long-lasting modulatory effect of this antibody. In female rats, seven days after systemic treatment with galcanezumab the capsaicin-induced release of CGRP was decreased, while that of substance P (SP) was increased in the dura mater. In control rats, release of the inhibitory neuropeptide somatostatin (SOM) was higher in females than in males. Stimulation with high concentration of KCl did not significantly change the release of SOM in control animals, while in rats treated with galcanezumab SOM release was slightly reduced. Galcanezumab treatment also reduced the amount of histamine released from dural mast cells upon stimulation with CGRP, while the effect of compound 48/80 on histamine release was not changed.

CONCLUSIONS

Galcanezumab treatment is followed by multiple changes in the release of neuropeptides and histamine in the trigeminal nocisensor complex, which may contribute to the migraine preventing effect of anti-CGRP antibodies. These changes affecting the communication between the components of the trigeminal nocisensor complex may reduce pain susceptibility in migraine patients treated with CGRP targeting monoclonal antibodies.

Real-world experience with calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted antibodies for migraine prevention: a retrospective observational cohort study at two Japanese headache centers

BACKGROUND

Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) are an efficacious and safe therapeutic modality for migraine prevention, their clinical benefits have not been well validated in Japanese patients in the real-world setting. The present study aimed to evaluate the real-world efficacy and safety of galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and erenumab in Japanese patients with migraine.

METHODS

This observational retrospective cohort study was conducted at two headache centers in Japan. Patients with migraine who had experienced treatment failure with at least one traditional oral migraine preventive agent were treated with a CGRP mAb de novo. The primary efficacy endpoints were the changes from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMDs) and Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) score after 3 dosing intervals (V3). We explored whether demographic and clinical characteristics predicted therapeutic outcomes at V3.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients who completed three doses of a CGRP mAb (85.3% female [58/68], mean age: 46.2 ± 13.1 years) were included in the analysis. There were 19 patients with chronic migraine. The baseline MMDs were 13.4 ± 6.0. After 3 doses, the MMDs significantly decreased to 7.4 ± 5.5 (p < 0.0001), and the 50% response rate was 50.0%. HIT-6 score was significantly reduced from 66.7 ± 5.4 to 56.2 ± 8.7 after 3 doses (P = 0.0001). There was a positive correlation between the changes in MMDs and HIT-6 score from baseline after 2 doses (p = 0.0189). Those who achieved a ≥ 50% therapeutic response after the first and second doses were significantly more likely to do so at V3 (crude odds ratio: 3.474 [95% CI: 1.037 to 10.4], p = 0.0467). The most frequent adverse event was constipation (7.4%). None of the adverse events were serious, and there was no need for treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study demonstrated that CGRP mAbs conferred Japanese patients with efficacious and safe migraine prevention, and an initial positive therapeutic response was predictive of subsequent favorable outcomes. Concomitant measurement of MMDs and HIT-6 score was useful in evaluating the efficacy of CGRP mAbs in migraine prevention.

Real-World Effectiveness of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide-Binding Monoclonal Antibodies for Migraine Prevention: A Systematic Review

Background

Migraine is a neurological disease with a high incidence. The new anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP mAbs) have demonstrated effectiveness in preventing episodic and chronic migraine.

Objective

To collect evidence of the real-world effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs by assessing outcomes such as reduction in monthly migraine days (MMDs), reduction in monthly headache days (MHDs), and percentage of patients having a 50% reduction in MMDs.

Data Sources

The PubMed database was searched for the period from inception to October 20, 2021.

Study Selection and Data Extraction

Of interest for this review were studies that evaluated the real-world effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs in terms of MMDs and reduction in MHDs. The search terms included "migraine", "monthly migraine days", and various drug names. The data are reported in terms of patients' baseline characteristics and treatment effectiveness.

Data Synthesis

A total of 46 studies were evaluated, of which 30 (enrolling a total of 4273 patients across 10 countries) were included in the systematic review. The greatest absolute reduction in MMD was from 20.4 at baseline to 10.7 after 3 months of treatment. After 6 months, the greatest absolute difference was 10, relative to baseline. The largest absolute reduction in MHD at 3 months was from 22 to 8, whereas at 6 months, the greatest absolute reduction in MHD was 13. The treatment could be considered clinically effective (≥ 50% reduction in MMDs) for 41% of patients at 3 months and about 44% of patients at 6 months.

Conclusions

Despite substantial variability in baseline values, this review confirmed the effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs, which yielded important clinical reductions in both MMDs and MHDs.

Efficacy and Safety of Rimegepant for Migraine Patients: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

OBJECTIVES

Rimegepant may have some potential in treating migraine, and this meta-analysis aims to study the efficacy and safety of rimegepant for migraine patients.

METHODS

We have searched several databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases and selected the randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of rimegepant versus placebo for migraine patients. This meta-analysis was conducted using the random- or fixed-effect model based on the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with placebo in migraine patients, rimegepant treatment was associated with substantially improved freedom from pain at 2 hours (odds ratio [OR], 2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69-2.59; P < 0.00001), pain relief at 2 hours (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.65 to 2.25; P < 0.00001), freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 hours (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35-1.91; P < 0.00001), ability to function normally at 2 hours (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.42-2.01; P < 0.00001), sustained freedom from pain at 24 hours (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.74-4.78; P < 0.0001), sustained pain relief at 24 hours (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.96-2.72; P < 0.00001), and no rescue medication (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 2.02-2.90; P < 0.00001) but showed no obvious impact on adverse events (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant may be effective and safe for the treatment of migraine patients.

Characteristics associated with response to subcutaneously administered anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody medications in a real-world community cohort of persons living with migraine: A retrospective clinical and genetic study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate response to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) migraine preventives in a real-world community cohort of persons living with migraine and to identify clinical and genetic characteristics associated with efficacious response.

BACKGROUND

Erenumab-aooeb, fremanezumab-vrfm, and galcanezumab-gnlm target CGRP or its receptor; however, many patients are non-responsive.

METHODS

In this retrospective clinical and genetic study, we identified 1077 adult patients who satisfied the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, criteria for migraine without aura, migraine with aura, or chronic migraine and who were prescribed an anti-CGRP migraine preventive between May 2018 and May 2021. Screening of 558 patients identified 289 with data at baseline and first follow-up visits; data were available for 161 patients at a second follow-up visit. The primary outcome was migraine days per month (MDM). In 198 genotyped patients, we evaluated associations between responders (i.e., patients with ≥50% reduction in MDM at follow-up) and genes involved in CGRP signaling or pharmacological response, and genetic and polygenic risk scores.

RESULTS

The median time to first follow-up was 4.4 (0.9-22) months after preventive start. At the second follow-up, 5.7 (0.9-13) months later, 145 patients had continued on the same preventive. Preventives had strong, persistent effects in reducing MDM in responders (follow-up 1: η2  = 0.26, follow-up 2: η2  = 0.22). At the first but not second follow-up: galcanezumab had a larger effect than erenumab, while no difference was seen at either follow-up between galcanezumab and fremanezumab or fremanezumab and erenumab. The decrease in MDM at follow-up was generally proportional to baseline MDM, larger in females, and increased with months on medication. At the first follow-up only, patients with prior hospitalization for migraine or who had not responded to more preventive regimens had a smaller decrease in MDM. Reasons for stopping or switching a preventive varied between medications and were often related to cost and insurance coverage. At both follow-ups, patient tolerance (1: 92.2% [262/284]; 2: 95.2% [141/145]) and continued use (1: 77.5% [224/289]; 2: 80.6% [116/145]) were high and similar across preventives. Response consistency (always non-responders: 31.7% [46/145]; always responders: 56.5% [82/145], and one-time only responders: 11.7% [17/145]) was also similar across preventives. Non-responder status had nominally significant associations with rs12615320-G in RAMP1 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 4.7 [1.5, 14.7]), and rs4680-A in COMT (0.6[0.4, 0.9]). Non-responders had a lower mean genetic risk score than responders (1.0 vs. 1.1; t(df) = -1.75(174.84), p = 0.041), and the fraction of responders increased with genetic and polygenic risk score percentile.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world setting, anti-CGRP preventives reduced MDM persistently and had similar and large effect sizes on MDM reduction; however, clinical and genetic factors influenced response.

Clinical effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for managing chronic migraine in adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic migraine can be a profoundly disabling disorder that may be treated with preventive medications. However, uncertainty remains as to which preventive medication is the most effective. We present a network meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness and rank of preventive drugs for chronic migraine in adults.

METHODS

We identified, reviewed, and extracted data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of preventive drugs for chronic migraine with at least 200 participants. Data were analysed using network meta-analysis.

FINDINGS

We included 12 RCTs of six medications (Eptinezumab, Erenumab, Fremanezumab, Galcanezumab, Onabotulinumtoxin A, and Topiramate) compared to placebo or each other. All drugs effectively reduced monthly headache and migraine days compared with placebo. The most effective drug for monthly headache days was Eptinezumab 300mg, with a mean difference of -2.46 days, 95% Credible Interval (CrI): -3.23 to -1.69. On the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Area (SUCRA) analysis, the probability that Eptinezumab 300mg was ranked highest was 0.82. For monthly migraine days, the most effective medication was Fremanezumab-monthly, with a mean difference: -2.77 days, 95% CrI: -3.36 to -2.17, and 0.98 probability of being ranked the highest. All included drugs, except Topiramate, improved headache-related quality of life. No eligible studies were identified for the other common preventive oral medications such as Amitriptyline, Candesartan, and Propranolol. The main reasons were that the studies did not define chronic migraine, were undertaken before the definition of chronic migraine, or were too small.

INTERPRETATION

All six medications were more effective than the placebo on monthly headache and migraine days. The absolute differences in the number of headache/migraine days are, at best, modest. No evidence was found to determine the relative effectiveness of the six included drugs with other oral preventive medications.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (number CRD42021265990).

Galcanezumab Efficacy Through the Dosing Interval in Japanese Patients with Episodic Migraine: Post Hoc Analysis of a Phase 2 Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of galcanezumab as a preventive treatment in Japanese patients with episodic migraine was demonstrated in a phase 2, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (conducted December 2016-January 2019). This post hoc analysis assessed the consistency of galcanezumab efficacy through the monthly dosing interval.

METHODS

Patients with 4-14 migraine headache days/month were randomized (2:1:1, stratified by baseline migraine frequency) to subcutaneous placebo (n = 230), 120-mg galcanezumab (with 240-mg loading dose; n = 115) or 240-mg galcanezumab (n = 114) once monthly for 6 months. Outcomes included change from baseline in weekly migraine headache days, proportion of patients with migraine headache on each day, and proportion of patients with worsening migraine headache days during each month ([average of weeks 3-4] - [average of weeks 1-2] > 0).

RESULTS

In the 120-mg (approved dose) galcanezumab group, mean change from baseline in weekly migraine headache days was consistent and significantly greater (p < 0.05) than placebo for weeks 1-4; efficacy was consistent when averaged across months 1-6 and in most individual months. Averaged across months 1-6, the proportion of patients with migraine headache was significantly lower with galcanezumab than placebo on every day in both dose groups and was not significantly different between days 2 and 28 with 120-mg galcanezumab (p = 0.161). Within each month, the proportion of patients with migraine headache was generally consistent from days 2-28. The proportion of patients with worsening during the dosing interval did not significantly exceed 50% in any group during any month.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis supports the consistency of efficacy of galcanezumab across 6 months of treatment and suggests that wearing-off within the dosing interval does not occur on a population level in Japanese patients with episodic migraine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02959177.

Consensus-Based Recommendations on the Use of CGRP-Based Therapies for Migraine Prevention in the UAE

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.

Placebo and nocebo in the treatment of migraine: How much does real world effectiveness depend on contextual effects?

PURPOSE

Treatments in medicine impact individuals beyond their intended effects, due to phenomena such as the placebo and nocebo effects. The placebo effect arises from the positive expectation of a treatment being beneficial, while the nocebo effect stems from the negative expectation of a treatment causing harm. Both in real-world practice and clinical trials, treatments can lead to outcomes unrelated to their intended mechanism of action, which we categorize as placebo and nocebo responses. These responses, combined with the inherent fluctuation in a condition's natural progression, regression to the mean, and random comorbidities, make up a significant part of the therapeutic experience. Particularly in pain management, placebo and nocebo effects play a substantial role. By addressing modifiable contextual factors such as patient expectations, lifestyle choices, and the therapeutic relationship, healthcare providers can enhance the effectiveness of migraine treatments, paving the way for a more comprehensive, individualized approach to patient care. We must also consider non-modifiable factors like personal experiences, beliefs, and information from social media and the internet.

CONCLUSION

This review offers a summary of our current understanding of the placebo and nocebo effects in migraine management.

The history and rationale of the development of new drugs for migraine treatment

Migraine is one of the most prevalent and disabling diseases in the world. Migraine attack treatments and prophylactic treatments of this disease are essential to lessen its individual, social, and economic impact. This is a narrative review of the main drugs used for treating migraine, as well as the experimental models and the theoretical frameworks that led to their development. Ergot derivatives, triptans, non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, tricyclic antidepressants, beta-blockers,: flunarizine,: valproic acid,: topiramate, onabotulinumtoxin A, ditans, monoclonal antibodies against CGRP and its receptor, and gepants are discussed. Possible therapeutic targets for the development of new drugs that are under development are also addressed. Many of the drugs currently in use for treating migraine were developed for the treatment of other diseases, but have proven effective for the treatment of migraine, expanding knowledge about the disease. With a better understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine, new drugs have been and continue to be developed specifically for the treatment of this disease.