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

Eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of migraine

Our knowledge of the pathophysiology of migraine and the molecules implicated in the disorder have evolved over time. Among these, calcitonin gene-related peptide has shown a crucial role that led to the development of therapies specifically targeting the molecule. Four monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway are currently available after the US FDA approval of eptinezumab for the indication of migraine prevention. This is the only one of the class to be administered intravenously. The pharmacology of eptinezumab and the four studies that led to the approval, two Phase II and two Phase III clinical trials, are reviewed in this paper. Eptinezumab has demonstrated efficacy, tolerability and safety in patients with episodic and chronic migraine. Studies including migraineurs who have failed previous preventives, and comparison with other options administered quarterly, as well as real-world experience data will all be welcome.

An Evidence-Based Review of Galcanezumab for the Treatment of Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This is a comprehensive review of the current literature on the usage of galcanezumab for migraine treatment. It reviews the biology, pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, and conventional treatment of migraines, then compares the literature available for galcanezumab with historical treatment options.

RECENT FINDINGS

Migraine is a common headache disorder and constitutes a significant source of distress from both a personal and societal perspective. Conventional treatment includes abortive and preventive treatment. Treatment options are limited and may be only partially or minimally effective in some of the population. Recent evidence points to metabolic changes in the brain as possible causes of migraine, via reduced available energy or a spiking need for it, resulting in a relative insufficiency. This leads to trigeminocervical complex (TCC) activation and a headache episode, modulated by calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). Galcanezumab (Emgality) is a monoclonal antibody targeting CGRP that is given in a monthly injection for the prevention of migraines. Its safety was previously shown in phase 1 and 2 trials, and recent phase 3 trials showed efficacy, with up to 50% reduction in monthly migraine days and improved functional capacity in migraineurs. Studies show that the drug is well tolerated and safe. Migraine headache is a common neurological syndrome that causes great pain and suffering. Treatment options today are limited. Galcanezumab does not prevent migraines, but it is effective in decreasing their frequency and length. It is also much better tolerated than the currently existing therapies. While it is unlikely to provide monotherapy for migraines, it is a novel therapy that may be added for cases of severe or frequent migraines.

Migraine Headache Day Response Rates and the Implications to Patient Functioning: An Evaluation of 3 Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trials of Galcanezumab in Patients With Migraine

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc study investigated the relationship between patient response in terms of migraine headache day reduction and patient-reported outcomes of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and disability categories.

BACKGROUND

Migraine causes considerable disease-related disability and negatively impacts HRQoL of patients. Calcitonin gene-related peptide inhibitors improve these outcomes and may eliminate disability due to migraine in some patients.

METHODS

Analyses used data from 3 double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase 3 studies in adults with episodic migraine (EM) (EVOLVE-1: N = 858 and EVOLVE-2: N = 915) or chronic migraine (CM) (REGAIN: N = 1113). Patients were randomized 2:1:1 to subcutaneous injection of PBO, galcanezumab (GMB) 120 mg, or GMB 240 mg once monthly for 6 months in EVOLVE-1 and -2 and for 3 months in REGAIN. Primary endpoint was overall mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days. Patients were divided into 4 response-level groups based on percent change from baseline (<30%, ≥30% to <50%, ≥50% to <75%, ≥75%). Patient-reported outcomes included the 14-item Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ) and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire.

RESULTS

Among patients with migraine, mean improvements from baseline in MSQ domain scores increased with each successive level of migraine headache day response. On a 100-pt scale, increases in Role Function-Restrictive score in EM were 16.8 and 36.0 at the <30% and ≥75% response levels, respectively, and for CM were 10.7 and 46.5. Similar patterns in scores were observed for the Role Function-Preventive and Emotional Function domains. Examination of improvement in MSQ item score by treatment group showed that, in patients with EM, approximately 10 to 20% more GMB-treated patients (N = 796 for GMB 120 mg and GMB 240 mg) had improvements in all 14 MSQ items compared with PBO-treated patients (N = 773) (all P < .001). In patients with CM, 3 to 16% more GMB-treated patients (N = 507) had improvements in the 14 MSQ items compared with PBO (N = 494), though differences were statistically significant in only 19 of 28 comparisons. At baseline, mean MIDAS scores (EM, 33.1; CM, 67.2) indicated severe mean disability for patients with EM and very severe disability for patients with CM. Among patients with EM, 215 of 425 (50.6%) of those treated with GMB 120 mg and 212 of 413 (51.3%) treated with 240 mg had little/no disability due to migraine after 6 months (PBO: 277 of 832 (33.3%), P < .001 for both). Among patients with CM, 50 of 254 (19.7%) of those treated with GMB 120 mg and 54 of 258 (20.9%) treated with 240 mg reached the level of little/no disability after 3 months of treatment (PBO: 70 of 504 (13.9%), P = .045 for 120 mg, P = .017 for 240 mg).

CONCLUSIONS

Because migraine greatly impairs an individual's ability to participate in activities of daily living, measurements of HRQoL are essential in clinical research. This study showed that function in daily life, as measured by MSQ score, improved as migraine headache days were reduced and that GMB-treated patients were more likely to see improvement in MSQ item scores compared with PBO-treated patients. Elimination of migraine-related disability was also more frequent in GMB-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients.

Eptinezumab for the Prevention of Episodic Migraine: Sustained Effect Through 1 Year of Treatment in the PROMISE-1 Study

PURPOSE

The Prevention of Migraine via Intravenous ALD403 Safety and Efficacy 1 (PROMISE-1) study was a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study designed to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic properties of repeat intravenous (IV) doses of the calcitonin gene-related peptide‒targeted monoclonal antibody eptinezumab (ALD403) for migraine prevention in adults with episodic migraine. Here we present the results of PROMISE-1 through 1 year of treatment (up to 4 doses).

METHODS

Patients received up to 4 IV administrations of eptinezumab 30 mg, 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo every 12 weeks. Patients recorded migraine and headache in an electronic diary daily. Additional assessments, including the patient-reported outcomes, were performed at regularly scheduled clinic visits throughout the 56-week study period.

FINDINGS

A total of 888 adults (mean age, 39.8 years; 84.3% female; 83.8% white) received treatment: eptinezumab 30 mg, n = 219; eptinezumab 100 mg, n = 223; eptinezumab 300 mg, n = 224; and placebo, n = 222. During the primary 12-week study evaluation period, single doses of eptinezumab 100 mg and 300 mg led to significant reductions in mean monthly migraine-days versus placebo, beginning as early as the first day after the initial dose. The reduction in mean monthly migraine-days was maintained throughout the study (100 mg, -3.9, -4.5, -4.7, and -4.5 days; 300 mg, -4.3, -4.8, -5.1, and -5.3 days; and placebo, -3.2, -3.8, -4.0, and -4.0 days during weeks 1-12, 13-24, 25-36, and 37-48, respectively). Overall, the number of patients with a ≥50% or ≥75% reduction in migraine for each 12-week interval during the entire study was consistently numerically higher in the eptinezumab groups than in the placebo group. The proportions of patients with ≥50% reduction in migraine were similar across the eptinezumab groups. Eptinezumab was well tolerated throughout the study. Adverse events were similar across dosing periods, and there were no serious tolerability signals identified with continued dosing.

IMPLICATIONS

IV eptinezumab administered every 12 weeks for up to 4 doses was associated with early and sustained migraine-preventive effects and a favorable safety profile in adults with episodic migraine. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02559895.

Galcanezumab for the Management of Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

Introduction Migraine is a frequent neurological condition manifested by several episodes of headache. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has been shown to play a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Galcanezumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds CGRP and inhibits its action, without affecting the CGRP receptor. The aim of this study is to carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized placebo-controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of galcanezumab (120 mg or 240 mg) for the management of migraine. Methods We screened four databases (PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Central) from inception to October 10, 2020. Studies meeting the following criteria were included: (i) Patients: individuals with migraine, (ii) Intervention: galcanezumab at a dose of 120 mg or 240 mg, (iii) Comparator: placebo, (iv) Outcomes: prespecified efficacy and safety outcomes, and (v) Study design: randomized placebo-controlled trials. Efficacy outcomes included change in migraine headache days (MHDs), change in MHDs with acute medication use, patient global impression of severity (PGI-S) score, migraine-specific quality of life role function-restrictive domain (MSQ RF-R) score, and migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score. Safety outcomes included frequency of injection-site pain, nasopharyngitis, and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). Moreover, we used the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Review Manager Software, version 5.4.1, was used for statistical analysis. Mean difference and risk ratio with 95% confidence interval were used to analyze continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively. We used the fixed-effects and random-effects models to analyze homogeneous and heterogeneous data, respectively. Results A total of six studies comprising 4,023 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. When compared to placebo, both doses of galcanezumab were highly effective in decreasing MHDs (p<0.001), reducing MHDs with acute medication use (p<0.001), and improving the PGI-S score (p<0.001). On the other hand, MSQ RF-R and MIDAS scores were significantly enhanced only in the 240-mg dose group (p<0.001). With regard to side effects, the rates of injection-site pain and nasopharyngitis did not substantially differ between galcanezumab (inclusive of 120 mg and 240 mg) and placebo groups. Nonetheless, when compared to placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg, but not galcanezumab 240 mg, substantially correlated with a higher rate of URTI. Conclusions Galcanezumab is clinically safe and efficient for the management of migraine, and the use of a higher dose increases its efficacy. Future research directions should be geared toward determining the optimal dose of galcanezumab in the management of patients with migraine. Moreover, head-to-head comparative studies between galcanezumab and other related anti-CGRP receptor monoclonal antibodies are warranted.

Interrelations between migraine-like headache and persistent post-traumatic headache attributed to mild traumatic brain injury: a prospective diary study

BACKGROUND

Persistent post-traumatic headache (PTH) is a common sequela of mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) and retrospective assessments have found a migraine-like phenotype to be very frequent. This has raised a discussion of shared underlying mechanisms and whether persistent PTH is simply trauma-triggered migraine.

METHODS

A 28-day prospective diary study with daily entries and acquisition of data on headache characteristics, associated symptoms, and acute medication use. A total of 64 patients with persistent PTH were enrolled from April 2019 to August 2019. Outcomes were the proportion of monthly headache days of any intensity that met the criteria for a migraine-like day or TTH-like day, as well as the corresponding figures for monthly headache days of moderate to severe intensity. Headache phenotypes were initially assigned based on diagnostic evaluation by semi-structured interview, whilst final headache phenotypes were assigned by diary review.

RESULTS

After diary review, we found that monthly headache days were exclusively migraine-like in 24 of 64 patients (38%) and exclusively TTH-like days in 8 of 64 patients (13%). Considering only monthly headache days of moderate to severe intensity, the corresponding figures were 35 of 64 patients (55%) for migraine-like days and 8 of 64 patients (13%) for TTH-like days. The following headache phenotypes were assigned based on diary review: chronic migraine-like (n = 47, 73%), combined episodic migraine-like and chronic TTH-like (n = 9, 13%), and 'pure' chronic TTH-like (n = 8, 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

A migraine-like phenotype is common in patients most adversely affected by persistent PTH, although some patients did have a pure chronic TTH-like phenotype. At minimum, these findings suggest that persistent PTH is - at least in some - not 'trauma-triggered migraine'.

MRGPRX2 sensing of cationic compounds-A bridge between nociception and skin diseases?

Mast cells are innate immune cells located at many barrier sites in the body and known to protect the host against environmental threats and to be involved in allergic diseases. More recently, new studies have investigated their roles in the regulation of skin inflammation and transmission of pain and itch sensations. Mast cell signalling through the Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor (MRGPR) X2 or its mouse orthologue MRGPRB2 has been reported to be one of the major mechanism by which mast cell can regulate such processes. MRGPRX2 and MRGPRB2 can induce mast cell degranulation upon binding to a broad panel of cationic molecules such as neuropeptides, bacteria-derived quorum sensing molecules, venom peptides, host defense peptides and, unfortunately, various FDA-approved drugs. Upon activation, mast cells release granule-associated proteases, lipids and multiple cytokines that can modulate vascular permeability, immune cells recruitment and activation status of tissue-projecting nociceptive sensory neurons (ie nociceptors). Here, we discuss the modality of MRGPRX2-dependent mast cell activation and its different consequences on the patterns of skin inflammation and associated diseases. We notably emphasize how MRGPRX2-dependent skin mast cell activation might trigger various pathological traits such as pruritus, pain and inflammation and therefore become a potential therapeutic target for inflammatory pain, itch, atopic dermatitis and drugs-induced injection site reactions.

Eptinezumab Demonstrated Efficacy in Sustained Prevention of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Beginning on Day 1 After Dosing

Objective

To determine the onset of preventive efficacy with eptinezumab in patients with migraine.

Background

Eptinezumab is a monoclonal antibody inhibiting calcitonin gene‐related peptide approved as an intravenously administered treatment for the prevention of migraine.

Methods

Patients who received eptinezumab 100 mg, eptinezumab 300 mg, or placebo in PROMISE7‐1 (episodic migraine; 100 mg, n = 221; 300 mg, n = 222; placebo, n = 222) or PROMISE7‐2 (chronic migraine; 100 mg, n = 356; 300 mg, n = 350; placebo, n = 366) were included. Testing of the percentage of patients with a migraine on day 1 after dosing was prespecified and alpha‐controlled. In further exploration of this prespecified endpoint, a post hoc closed testing procedure, which controlled the false‐positive (type 1) error rate, provided a statistically rigorous evaluation of migraine prevention onset. The procedure involved up to 84 tests of significance, all of which were performed in sequence until the first nonsignificant result.

Results

For both studies, all tests for significance for eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg, from days 1‐84 through day 1 alone, achieved nominal significance (P < .05), indicating that eptinezumab was fully effective beginning on day 1. Over each interval, the treatment effect was comparable to the effect over weeks 1‐12. Mean changes from baseline in monthly migraine days for the primary endpoint period ranged from −3.9 to −4.9, −4.1 to −4.9, and −2.2 to −3.2 for eptinezumab 100, 300 mg, and placebo, respectively, in PROMISE7‐1 and from −7.2 to −8.0, −7.9 to −8.2, and −4.3 to −5.6, respectively, in PROMISE7‐2. The difference from placebo (95% confidence interval) in day 1 treatment effect was −2.2 (−4.1, −0.3) and −2.5 (−4.4, −0.6) days/month for eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg, respectively, in PROMISE7‐1, and was −3.8 (−5.6, −2.0) and −4.0 (−5.8, −2.1) days/month for 100 and 300 mg, respectively, in PROMISE7‐2.

Conclusions

The migraine preventive effect of eptinezumab is rapid and sustained in patients with episodic or chronic migraine, with onset of optimal preventive efficacy observed on the day following the initial dose.

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

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

Medication overuse in a subgroup analysis of phase 3 placebo-controlled studies of galcanezumab in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine

INTRODUCTION

Acute medication overuse is prevalent in patients with migraine.

METHODS

In three phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies, patients with episodic migraine (EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2) or chronic migraine (REGAIN) were randomized 2:1:1 to monthly subcutaneous injections of placebo or galcanezumab 120 or 240 mg for 3 or 6 months. This subgroup analysis evaluated mean changes in the number of monthly migraine headache days in each treatment among patients with versus without baseline acute medication overuse via mixing modelling with repeated measures.

RESULTS

The percentages of patients with baseline medication overuse in placebo, galcanezumab 120-mg and 240-mg groups, respectively, were 19.4%, 17.3%, and 19.3% for EVOLVE-1/-2 (pooled; post hoc), and 63.4%, 64.3%, and 64.1% for REGAIN (a priori). Both galcanezumab doses demonstrated significant improvement compared with placebo for overall least squares mean change in monthly migraine headache days in patients with baseline medication overuse in both the episodic and chronic migraine studies (p ≤ 0.001). Furthermore, both galcanezumab doses reduced average monthly medication overuse rates compared to placebo (p < 0.001) in both patient populations with medication overuse at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Galcanezumab appears to be effective for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine in patients who overuse acute medications.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02614183, NCT02614196, and NCT02614261.

Role of greater occipital nerve block for preventive treatment of chronic migraine: A critical review

Objective:

The aim of this study is to critically analyze the evidence of the efficacy and safety of greater occipital nerve (GON) block for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM).

Background:

A rigorous scientific assessment of efficacy and safety of the GON block for preventive treatment in CM is not available. This critical review was undertaken for this purpose.

Methods:

References for this review were identified by searches of articles published in the English language in PubMed between 1969 and April 15, 2020 using “greater occipital nerve block,” “chronic migraine,” “migraine,” “headache,” and “treatment” as keywords.

Results:

Out of potential 532 articles, 9 open-label and 4 placebo-controlled trials that studied the role of GON block for prevention of CM were identified and reviewed. Open-label trials reported a reduction of headache severity and frequency in 35–68% of patients. The beneficial effect of a single block lasted up to 4 weeks. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) used varied methodology and techniques of GON block and the outcomes were reported at different time points. A single RCT showed a beneficial effect of the GON block at 1 week. However, the GON block was found to be safe and well tolerated.

Conclusion:

Long-term efficacy of GON block in CM shall need further well-designed RCTs using standardized methodology. This study, in addition, reviewed the limitations and uncertainties regarding the technique and methods of use of GON block in CM.

Impact of galcanezumab on total pain burden: findings from phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with episodic or chronic migraine (EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, and REGAIN trials)

Background

Focus on the frequency of migraine pain may undervalue the total burden of migraine as pain duration and severity may present unique, additive burden. A composite measure of total pain burden (TPB; frequency, severity, and duration) may provide a more comprehensive characterization of pain burden and treatment response in patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM). The impact of galcanezumab versus placebo on TPB among patients with EM or CM was analyzed.

Methods

Patients from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled episodic (two 6-month studies pooled) and chronic migraine (3-month) studies received once-monthly subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab 120 mg or placebo. A post hoc analysis of TPB for a given month was calculated as severity-weighted duration by multiplying duration (hours) and maximum pain severity (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe) of migraine for each day and summing these over the days in a month. Least square mean change from baseline in monthly TPB across Months 1–6 (EM, N = 444 galcanezumab, N = 894 placebo) and Months 1–3 (CM, N = 278 galcanezumab, N = 558 placebo) were compared using a mixed-model repeated measures model. Correlation of the Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) to TPB at baseline was assessed.

Results

At baseline, the duration of migraine on a given migraine headache day accounted for the greatest unique proportion of variability (EM, 57.4% and CM, 61.1%) to TPB after adjusting for frequency of migraine headache days and maximum pain severity. The decrease from baseline in monthly TPB was greater with galcanezumab than placebo for patients with EM (68.6 versus 36.2) and CM (102.6 versus 44.4). The average percent reduction of TPB from baseline was significantly greater with galcanezumab compared with placebo in patients with EM (50.8% versus 17.2%) and CM (29.7% versus 11.0%). In patients with EM and CM, TPB correlated with MSQ total score (r = − 0.35 and r = − 0.37) and MIDAS (r = 0.34 and r = 0.32).

Conclusions

Greater reduction in TPB was seen in patients with EM and CM treated with galcanezumab 120 mg once-monthly injection relative to placebo. Discussing TPB supports patient-centric conversations regarding treatment expectations when clinicians are evaluating options for migraine prevention.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: #NCT02614183 (I5Q-MC-CGAG; EVOLVE-1), #NCT02614196 (I5Q-MC-CGAH; EVOLVE-2), and #NCT02614261 (I5Q-MC-CGAI; REGAIN) – all 3 trials were registered on 23 November 2015.

Efficacy of Galcanezumab for Migraine Prevention in Patients With a Medical History of Anxiety and/or Depression: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled REGAIN, and Pooled EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2 Studies

OBJECTIVE

This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy of galcanezumab for the prevention of migraine in patients with and without comorbid anxiety and/or depression.

BACKGROUND

Patients with migraine have a higher risk of anxiety and/or depression. Given the high prevalence of psychiatric symptoms and their potential negative prognostic impact, determining the efficacy of migraine treatments in patients with these comorbidities is important.

METHODS

The results of 2 phase 3 episodic migraine studies of patients with 4-14 migraine headache days (MHD) per month were pooled. A third chronic migraine study, which was evaluated separately, enrolled patients with ≥15 headache days per month, of which ≥8 had migraine-like features. Patients in all 3 studies were randomized 2:1:1 to placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg, or galcanezumab 240 mg. The efficacy of galcanezumab on migraine was measured in subgroups of patients with anxiety and/or depression (current or past) and patients without. A repeated measures model was used to compare treatment groups within each subgroup and to test for consistency of treatment effect across the anxiety/depression subgroups (subgroup-by-treatment interaction) during the double-blind treatment phases.

RESULTS

Among 1773 intent-to-treat patients with episodic migraine, both doses of galcanezumab demonstrated statistically significant improvements relative to placebo in overall number of MHD for the subgroups of patients with anxiety and/or depression (mean change difference from placebo [95% CI]: -2.07 [-2.81, -1.33] for galcanezumab 120 mg [P < .001], -1.91 [-2.78, -1.04] for 240 mg [P < .001]) and without anxiety and/or depression (mean change difference from placebo [95% CI]: -1.92 [-2.36, -1.47] for 120 mg [P < .001], -1.77 [-2.20, -1.33] for 240 mg [P < .001]), as was observed for the secondary outcomes of MHD with acute medication use and functional impairment. Among 1113 intent-to-treat patients with chronic migraine, those with anxiety and/or depression had significant reductions in overall MHD frequency with the 240-mg dose (mean change difference from placebo [95% CI]: -1.92 [-3.52, -0.33]; P = .018), whereas significant reductions were observed at both the 120-mg (mean change difference from placebo [95% CI]: -2.29 [-3.26, -1.31]; P < .001) and 240-mg (-1.85 [-2.83, -0.87]; P < .001) doses in patients without anxiety and/or depressions. Significant reductions (P < .01) in MHD with acute medication use were observed at both doses within both anxiety/depression subgroups and for overall functional impairment for patients without anxiety and/or depression, though neither dose significantly reduced overall functional impairment beyond placebo in the subgroup with anxiety and/or depression. In the episodic and chronic migraine studies, the subgroup-by-treatment interaction was not statistically significant for MHD, MHD with acute medication use, or functional impairment (chronic study only), suggesting a lack of evidence of differential effect between subgroups. Furthermore, differences between subgroups in the mean change differences from placebo, as well as overlapping 95% confidence intervals for the subgroups, indicated lack of a clinical or statistical difference between subgroups for these outcome variables. There was a significantly higher percentage of patients with episodic migraine attaining ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% reductions, and a higher percentage of patients with chronic migraine attaining ≥50% and ≥75% reductions from baseline with galcanezumab compared with placebo, regardless of medical history of anxiety and/or depression.

CONCLUSIONS

A medical history of anxiety and/or depression does not seem to interfere with response to galcanezumab among patients with episodic migraine, and both doses of galcanezumab appear efficacious for these individuals regardless of this psychiatric history. Among patients with chronic migraine and comorbid anxiety and/or depression, the 240-mg dose, but not the 120-mg dose, significantly decreased overall MHD, but neither dose resulted in significantly greater functional improvement. Patients with migraine and comorbid anxiety and/or depression often require additional interventions, and this may be more important in chronic migraine.

Three new drugs for the prevention of migraine

DTB drug reviews provide an overview of medicines that have been recently launched in the UK. The articles include a summary of the evidence of benefits and harms as well as details of the regulatory authority's assessment report.

Safety and efficacy of galcanezumab in Taiwanese patients: a post-hoc analysis of phase 3 studies in episodic and chronic migraine

OBJECTIVE

Migraine is a chronic, disabling neurological disease affecting >1 billion people worldwide. Migraine remains undertreated in Asia, including Taiwan. Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds calcitonin gene-related peptide, a peptide firmly established in the pathophysiology of migraine, with demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in Taiwanese patients with episodic or chronic migraine.

METHODS

We conducted a sub-group analysis of the Taiwanese cohort from two double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 clinical trials of galcanezumab in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine, EVOLVE-2 (NCT02614196) and REGAIN (NCT02614261), respectively. During the EVOLVE-2 and REGAIN double-blind periods, 2092 patients were randomly assigned to receive monthly injections of either placebo, 120 mg galcanezumab (240 mg loading dose), or 240 mg galcanezumab. In REGAIN, a 9-month open-label period followed. Post-hoc analysis on the Taiwanese population across both trials included 106 patients, 45 of whom continued into the open-label period in REGAIN.

RESULTS

Our findings show that galcanezumab has similar efficacy and safety in the Taiwanese population, as compared to the "All Patients" population included in the study. Galcanezumab treatment reduced the number of monthly migraine headache days, determined a higher percentage of patients with a ≥ 50% response, and positively impacted quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Galcanezumab is a promising therapeutic for the preventive treatment of migraine in the Taiwanese population.

What is changing in chronic migraine treatment? An algorithm for onabotulinumtoxinA treatment by the Italian chronic migraine group

INTRODUCTION

OnabotulinumtoxinA (OBT-A) and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway are two of the few treatments that ameliorate chronic migraine (CM) in randomized controlled trials and real-life studies. Separate clinical practice guidelines have been developed for the management of CM with OBT-A or CGRP-targeting mAbs.

AREAS COVERED

Considering the concomitant availability of OBT-A and CGRP-targeting mAbs as therapeutic treatment options, Italian migraine experts reviewed the evidence supporting the efficacy of OBT-A and CGRP-targeting mAbs in CM in order to rationalize the management of CM patients treated with OBT-A. Experts addressed everyday practice needs to shape the optimal pharmacological management by balancing adherence to regulatory indications, ethical considerations, and clinical expertise. Considering the remarkable challenge of improving the health and quality of life of patients with CM, even partial improvements may be clinically meaningful, particularly for those who are resistant or intolerant to oral migraine treatments.

EXPERT OPINION

In this collaborative effort, we propose a treatment algorithm that integrates the relevant aspects of managing patients with CM to provide ready-to-use practical guidance regarding the appropriate use of OBT-A.

The relation between the placebo response, observed treatment effect, and failure to meet primary endpoint: A systematic review of clinical trials of preventative pharmacological migraine treatments

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between the degree of response to placebo in migraine studies and the observed difference between drug and placebo across studies of preventative treatments for migraine.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials from January 1988 to June 2019. Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials on oral or injection preventative treatments for migraine were included. Single- and multi-variable linear regression analyses were performed on the placebo-subtracted response rate (i.e. placebo responders subtracted from active responders), and the proportion of placebo responders. Fisher's exact tests were performed on the level of placebo response and the success in meeting the study's primary endpoint.

RESULTS

After adjusting for route of administration and number of randomized subjects, there was a statistically significant association between the proportion of patients who were placebo responders and the placebo-subtracted response rate (b = -0.27, p = 0.02). There was a statistically significant difference in trial success rate (60%) between studies with ≤20% placebo responders and studies with > 30% placebo responders (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Considering the detrimental impact that high placebo response can have on clinical trials, it is imperative to find effective solutions to decrease the placebo response and increase assay sensitivity.

Safety and efficacy of galcanezumab in patients for whom previous migraine preventive medication from two to four categories had failed (CONQUER): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial

BACKGROUND

Many patients who require migraine preventive treatment have not been able to tolerate or have not responded to multiple previous preventive medications. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of galcanezumab, an antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide, in patients with migraine who had not benefited from preventive medications from two to four categories.

METHODS

CONQUER was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial done at 64 sites (hospitals, clinics, or research centres) in 12 countries (Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea, Spain, the UK, and the USA). Patients were 18-75 years of age, with episodic or chronic migraine, with migraine onset before the age of 50 years, who had a documented failure of preventive medications from two to four drug categories in the past 10 years owing to lack of efficacy or tolerability, or both. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive subcutaneous placebo or galcanezumab 120 mg per month (with a 240 mg loading dose administered as two 120 mg injections) for 3 months. For masking purposes, patients receiving placebo also received two injections during the first dosing visit. Randomisation was done by a computer-generated random sequence by means of an interactive web-response system stratified by country and migraine frequency (low frequency episodic migraine, four to fewer than eight migraine headache days per month; high frequency episodic migraine, eight to 14 migraine headache days per month and fewer than 15 headache days per month; chronic migraine, at least eight migraine headache days per month and at least 15 headache days per month). The primary endpoint was the overall mean change from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days during the 3-month treatment period in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03559257, and is now completed.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 10, 2018, and March 21, 2019, 462 participants with episodic (269 [58%]) or chronic (193 [42%]) migraine were randomly assigned and received at least one injection with placebo (n=230) or galcanezumab (n=232). Galcanezumab-treated patients had significantly greater reduction in migraine headache days versus placebo across months 1-3. The galcanezumab group had on average 4·1 fewer monthly migraine headache days compared with baseline (13·4), while the placebo group had on average 1·0 fewer than at baseline (13·0; between-group difference -3·1 [95% CI -3·9 to -2·3]; p<0·0001; effect size=0·72). Types and number of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between galcanezumab and placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 122 (53%) of 230 patients in the placebo group and 119 (51%) of 232 patients in the galcanezumab group. There were four serious adverse events during the study, two (1%) reported in the placebo group and two (1%) reported in the galcanezumab group.

INTERPRETATION

Galcanezumab was superior to placebo in the preventive treatment of migraine and was safe and well tolerated in patients for whom multiple previous standard-of-care preventive treatments had failed. Galcanezumab might represent an important treatment option for patients who have not benefited from or tolerated previous standard-of-care treatments.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Reducing Episodic Cluster Headaches: Focus on Galcanezumab

The involvement of calcitonin gene-related peptide in migraine and cluster headache has led to the recent development of new therapies. Galcanezumab, a novel monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide, is approved for the migraine prevention and has recently been tested for the prevention of cluster headache. Two clinical trials have been conducted to investigate the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in episodic cluster headache and chronic cluster headache. While efficacy endpoints were not met in the chronic subtype, galcanezumab reduced the weekly frequency of attacks in patients with episodic cluster headaches. In both studies, the antibody was well tolerated. This review summarizes and critically reviews the available data regarding the rationale behind targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide with galcanezumab for the prevention of cluster headache.

Galcanezumab for the prevention of cluster headache

INTRODUCTION

Cluster headache (CH) is among the worst painful conditions. The available therapies are scarce and not specific, leaving many patients unsatisfied because of poor efficacy and/or tolerability. Patients not responding to common treatments are offered semi-invasive and invasive procedures with uncertain results. Based on the current understanding of CH pathophysiology, new possible therapeutic approaches come from drugs interfering with Calcitonin Gene Related Peptide (CGRP).

AREAS COVERED

After summarizing the evidence for CGRP involvement in CH pathophysiology, we review the published literature (PubMed) and information (clinicaltrials.gov, EudraCT, EMA and FDA websites) regarding a novel anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody, Galcanezumab, its pharmacological properties, development, and evidence for the treatment of CH. Publications regarding other indications (migraine) are considered for completeness and safety/tolerability profile.

EXPERT OPINION

In one randomized clinical trial, Galcanezumab has proven to be effective and safe as a preventive treatment in episodic CH, with a favorable tolerability profile offering a potential new option in the therapeutic arsenal. Inefficacy of galcanezumab in chronic CH as well as the inefficacy of another monoclonal antibody against CGRP (fremanezumab) in both episodic and chronic CH question the scalability of the drug in CH management. Further, studies comparing galcanezumab to the current standard treatments are highly desirable.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

This analysis characterizes the immunogenicity profile of galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its activity, in phase 3 migraine trials.

METHODS

Immunogenicity data were analyzed from baseline and double-blind, placebo-controlled phases of the 3-month chronic migraine study REGAIN, the 6-month episodic migraine studies EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2, and from baseline and open-label phases of the 12-month chronic and episodic migraine Study CGAJ. The incidence of baseline antidrug antibodies, treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies, neutralizing antidrug antibodies, and the effect of antidrug antibody titer on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed. The relationship between antidrug antibody status and efficacy was explored using average change in monthly migraine headache days. Safety analyses assessed the potential relationship between treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies and hypersensitivity events or adverse events related to injection sites.

FINDINGS

Across studies, 5.9-11.2% of patients had baseline antidrug antibodies. The incidence of treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies was 2.6-12.4% in the galcanezumab group and 0.5-1.7% in the placebo group. The majority of treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies were detected approximately 3-6 months after first study drug dose. Overall, the observed antidrug antibody titer did not impact galcanezumab concentrations, calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations, or galcanezumab efficacy. There was no evidence that hypersensitivity events or adverse events related to injection sites were mediated by treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies.

INTERPRETATION

These data showed that immunogenicity did not impact galcanezumab concentrations, calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations, or the efficacy and hypersensitivity profile of galcanezumab in patients with migraine.

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

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

Biochemical Modulation and Pathophysiology of Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common disabling neurological disorder where attacks have been recognized to consist of more than headache. The premonitory, headache, and postdromal phases are the various phases of the migraine cycle, where aura can occur before, during, or after the onset of pain. Migraine is also associated with photosensitivity and cranial autonomic symptoms, which includes lacrimation, conjunctival injection, periorbital edema, ptosis, nasal congestion, and rhinorrhoea. This review will present the current understanding of migraine pathophysiology and the relationship to the observed symptoms.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The literature was reviewed with specific focus on clinical, neurophysiological, functional imaging, and preclinical studies in migraine including the studies on the role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and pituitary adenylate cyclase activating polypeptide (PACAP).

RESULTS

The phases of the migraine cycle have been delineated by several studies. The observations of clinical symptoms help develop hypotheses of the key structures involved and the biochemical and neuronal pathways through which the effects are mediated. Preclinical studies and functional imaging studies have provided evidence for the role of multiple cortical areas, the diencephalon, especially the hypothalamus, and certain brainstem nuclei in the modulation of nociceptive processing, symptoms of the premonitory phase, aura, and photophobia. CGRP and PACAP have been found to be involved in nociceptive modulation and through exploration of CGRP mechanisms, new successful treatments have been developed.

CONCLUSIONS

Migraine is a complex neural disorder and is important to understand when seeing patients who present to neuro-ophthalmology, especially with the successful translation from preclinical and clinical research leading to successful advances in migraine management.

Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab for prevention of migraine headache in Japanese patients with episodic migraine: A phase 2 randomized controlled clinical trial

Objective:

This study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in comparison with placebo for the prevention of migraine in Japanese patients with episodic migraine.

Methods:

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, which was conducted over 6 months, randomized adult patients received subcutaneous injections of galcanezumab (120 mg n = 115, 240 mg n = 114) or placebo ( n = 230) once monthly. The primary endpoint was the overall mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days. The key secondary outcome measures were response rates (≥50%, ≥75%, and 100%); the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire Role Function-Restrictive score; monthly migraine headache days requiring acute treatment; and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGI-S).

Results:

The mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days over months 1–6 was significantly ( p < 0.001) greater for the 120-mg galcanezumab dose (−3.60 days) and the 240-mg galcanezumab dose (−3.36 days) compared with placebo (−0.59 days). Both the 120-mg and 240-mg doses of galcanezumab were superior compared with placebo for each of the key secondary endpoints except for PGI-S (only the 240-mg dose was superior). The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events were local injection-site reactions; erythema, swelling, pruritus, and pain were more commonly reported by patients who were treated with galcanezumab than those treated with placebo.

Conclusion:

The number of monthly migraine headache days was reduced with both doses of galcanezumab, and both doses were safe and well tolerated in Japanese patients with episodic migraine.

Persistent post-traumatic headache: a migrainous loop or not? The preclinical evidence

Background

According to the International Classification of Headache Disorders 3, post-traumatic headache (PTH) attributed to traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a secondary headache reported to have developed within 7 days from head injury, regaining consciousness following the head injury, or discontinuation of medication(s) impairing the ability to sense or report headache following the head injury. It is one of the most common secondary headache disorders, and it is defined as persistent when it lasts more than 3 months.

Main body

Currently, due to the high prevalence of this disorder, several preclinical studies have been conducted using different animal models of mild TBI to reproduce conditions that engender PTH. Despite representing a simplification of a complex disorder and displaying different limitations concerning the human condition, animal models are still a mainstay to study in vivo the mechanisms of PTH and have provided valuable insight into the pathophysiology and possible treatment strategies. Different models reproduce different types of trauma and have been ideated in order to ensure maximal proximity to the human condition and optimal experimental reproducibility.

Conclusion

At present, despite its high prevalence, PTH is not entirely understood, and the differential contribution of pathophysiological mechanisms, also observed in other conditions like migraine, has to be clarified. Although facing limitations, animal models are needed to improve understanding of PTH. The knowledge of currently available models is necessary to all researchers who want to investigate PTH and contribute to unravel its mechanisms.

Pharmacological treatment of migraine: CGRP and 5-HT beyond the triptans

Migraine is a highly disabling neurovascular disorder characterized by a severe headache (associated with nausea, photophobia and/or phonophobia), and trigeminovascular system activation involving the release of calcitonin-gene related peptide (CGRP). Novel anti-migraine drugs target CGRP signaling through either stimulation of 5-HT1F receptors on trigeminovascular nerves (resulting in inhibition of CGRP release) or direct blockade of CGRP or its receptor. Lasmiditan is a highly selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist and, unlike the triptans, is devoid of vasoconstrictive properties, allowing its use in patients with cardiovascular risk. Since lasmiditan can actively penetrate the blood-brain barrier, central therapeutic as well as side effects mediated by 5-HT1F receptor activation should be further investigated. Other novel anti-migraine drugs target CGRP signaling directly. This neuropeptide can be targeted by the monoclonal antibodies eptinezumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab, or by CGRP-neutralizing L-aptamers called Spiegelmers. The CGRP receptor can be targeted by the monoclonal antibody erenumab, or by small-molecule antagonists called gepants. Currently, rimegepant and ubrogepant have been developed for acute migraine treatment, while atogepant is studied for migraine prophylaxis. Of these drugs targeting CGRP signaling directly, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, rimegepant and ubrogepant have been approved for clinical use, while atogepant is in the last stage before approval. Although all of these drugs seem highly promising for migraine treatment, their safety should be investigated in the long-term. Moreover, the exact mechanism(s) of action of these drugs need to be elucidated further, to increase both safety and efficacy and to increase the number of responders to the different treatments, so that all migraine patients can satisfactorily be treated.

Effect of age on pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of galcanezumab treatment in adult patients with migraine: results from six phase 2 and phase 3 randomized clinical trials

Background

Migraine clinical profile may change with age, making it necessary to verify that migraine treatments are equally safe and effective in older patients. These analyses evaluated the effects of patient age on the pharmacokinetics (PK), efficacy, and safety of galcanezumab for prevention of migraine.

Methods

Analyses included efficacy data from three double-blind phase 3 clinical trials: two 6-month studies in episodic migraine (EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2: N = 1773) and one 3-month study in chronic migraine (REGAIN:N = 1113). Patients were randomized 2:1:1 to placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg, or galcanezumab 240 mg. Safety and PK data included additional phase 2 and phase 3 trials for a larger sample size of patients > 60 years (range = 18–65 for all studies). Subgroup analyses assessed efficacy measures, adverse event (AE) occurrence, and cardiovascular measurement changes by patient age group. Galcanezumab PK were evaluated using a population analysis approach, where age was examined as a potential covariate on apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V/F) of galcanezumab.

Results

Numbers of baseline monthly migraine headache days were similar across age groups. There were no statistically significant treatment-by-age group interactions for any efficacy measures, except in episodic migraine studies where older patients appeared to have a larger reduction than younger patients in the number of monthly migraine headache days with acute medication use. Age (18–65) had a minimal effect on CL/F, and no effect on V/F. Galcanezumab-treated patients ≥60 years experienced no clinically meaningful increases in blood pressure and no increased frequency in treatment-emergent AEs, discontinuations due to AEs, serious adverse events (SAEs) overall, or cardiovascular SAEs, compared to age-matched placebo-treated patients.

Conclusions

Age (up to 65 years) does not affect efficacy in migraine prevention and has no clinically meaningful influence on galcanezumab PK to warrant dose adjustment. Furthermore, older galcanezumab-treated patients experienced no increases in frequency of AEs or increases in blood pressure compared with age-matched placebo-treated patients.

Trial registrations

EVOLVE-1 (NCT02614183, registered 23 November 2015), EVOLVE-2 (NCT02614196, 23 November 2015), REGAIN (NCT02614261, 23 November 2015), ART-01 (NCT01625988, 20 June 2012, ), I5Q-MC-CGAB (NCT02163993, 12 June 2014, ), I5Q-MC-CGAJ (NCT02614287, 23 November 2015, ), all retrospectively registered.

Cost of fremanezumab, erenumab, galcanezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA associated adverse events, for migraine prophylaxis in Spain

Objective: To compare the cost of adverse events (AEs) associated with preventive treatment of migraine with fremanezumab, versus erenumab, galcanezumab, and onabotulinumtoxinA.Methods: A probabilistic modeling analysis was performed, using second-order Monte Carlo simulations, with 1,000 simulations, in patients with at least 4 days of migraine per month, from the perspective of the National Health System and a time horizon of 12 weeks. The frequency of AEs described in the clinical trials was analyzed with 12 weeks of treatment. Unit costs (€) of management of AEs were obtained from public health prices, expert panels, and published Spanish studies.Results: Fremanezumab would generate average savings of -€469 (95% CI -€303; -€674) versus erenumab, -€268 (95% CI -€171; -€391) versus galcanezumab, -€1,100 (95% CI -€704; -€1,608) or -€1,295 (95% CI -€835; -€1,893) versus onabotulinumtoxinA using real-life or clinical trial data, respectively.Conclusions: The different safety profile of treatment with fremanezumab, compared to erenumab, galcanezumab, and onabotulinumtoxinA, would generate savings in health-care resources in all the scenarios considered.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Efficacy and Safety of Galcanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: A Narrative Review

Migraine is a debilitating neurologic disease. People who experience migraine can have substantial disability, impaired functioning and a decreased quality of life (QoL). Expert recommendations suggest that people with frequent migraine attacks or severe impairment related to attacks may benefit from preventive treatment. Despite these recommendations and the existence of evidence-based guidelines for the use of preventive medication, many people who are candidates for preventive therapies do not receive them. Thus, there is still a substantial unmet need for preventive migraine treatment. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has a demonstrated role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Galcanezumab-gnlm (galcanezumab) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the CGRP ligand and prevents binding to its receptor. It is administered as a once-monthly subcutaneous injection. The aim of this review is to present a comprehensive overview of the existing short- and long-term efficacy and safety data for galcanezumab in patients with migraine. Data from the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2 and REGAIN studies show that galcanezumab treatment for 3 or 6 months results in overall reduction in mean monthly migraine headache days in patients with episodic (EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2) and chronic (REGAIN) migraine. Greater proportions of patients with episodic migraine receiving galcanezumab versus placebo demonstrated a ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100% response to therapy and reported a lower level of disability and an improvement in functioning and QoL. Similarly, when compared with placebo, greater proportions of patients with chronic migraine treated with galcanezumab demonstrated a ≥ 50% and ≥ 75% response and reported improved functioning. A 12-month open-label study demonstrated the continued efficacy of galcanezumab for up to 12 months. In all studies galcanezumab was well tolerated. In conclusion, data from pivotal studies show that galcanezumab may fulfill an unmet need in the treatment of patients with migraine who require preventive therapy.

Migraine is a significant contributor to the global burden of disease. Migraine symptoms can lead to substantial disability and can significantly impact an individual’s ability to perform everyday tasks and their overall quality of life. While individuals with infrequent migraine attacks might have success with acute treatments alone, those with more frequent attacks or who have severe migraine-related impairment may require preventive treatment. Although recommendations on the use of preventive treatment exist, only about one-third of individuals who qualify for preventive therapy actually receive it, resulting in a substantial unmet need. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has a demonstrated role in migraine. Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to the CGRP ligand and prevents receptor binding. In clinical trials of patients with ≥ 4 migraine headache days per month, treatment with galcanezumab was associated with a reduction in the average number of migraine headache days per month. The majority of galcanezumab groups had greater responder rates compared with the placebo groups, and levels of disability and daily functioning were generally improved. Galcanezumab was well tolerated, with the most common adverse events being injection site reactions. The results from the clinical trials of galcanezumab suggest that this drug may fulfill an unmet need in the treatment of individuals with migraine who require preventive therapy.

Emerging Treatment Options for Migraine

Migraine is one of top 5 medical conditions that contribute to Years Lived with Disability and affects approximately 1 billion people from around the world. To date, preventive treatment and acute therapies for migraine are limited, have undesirable side effects and are poorly tolerated in patients. In the last few decades, considerable advances in our understanding of migraine and its pathophysiology have paved the way for the development of targeted treatment options. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) plays an integral role in the neurobiology of migraine, and new classes of drugs that target the CGRP pathway have included gepants and CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies. Serotonin 5-HT1F receptor agonists—namely ditans—have also been developed to treat acute migraine. Lastly, non-invasive neuromodulation offers another treatment option for migraine patients who prefer treatments that have fewer side effects and are well tolerated. In this review, we discussed emerging treatment options for migraine that were made available in recent years. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2020;49:226–35 Key words: Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody, Gepants, Headache, Lasmiditan, Neuromodulation

Novelty in Inflammation and Immunomodulation in Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a diffuse and disabling disease. Its pathophysiology is complex and involves both central and peripheral dysfunctions.

OBJECTIVE

This review will discuss the pathogenesis of migraine from the origin of the neuro-inflammatory theory, to the modern pathophysiological model and the latest therapies.

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE (up to May 2019) were searched for: migraine, inflammation, immunomodulation. An additional search was carried out from the bibliography of previous review articles.

RESULTS

Migraine was thought to be mainly a vascular disorder, according to the so-called "vascular theory". Based on animal models, a new hypothesis called "the neuro-inflammatory" was conceived at the end of the 20th century. The growing knowledge about the trigeminovascular system and its role in the inflammatory-pain pathway, allowed to identify other specific neurotransmitters, such as the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide and Pituitary Adenylate Cyclase-Activating Peptide. Evidence was provided that the inflammatory-pain system could become sensitised and, due to this sensitisation, the pain could also perpetuate, even in the absence of any triggers of the migraine attack. At last, brain immune cells modification during cortical spreading depression in migraine was demonstrated, along with the existence and function of the glymphatic system. The better comprehension of the immune system abnormalities allowed the development of new immunomodulating drugs: the monoclonal antibodies against the CGRP or the CGRP receptor. Moreover, new insights into the molecular mechanism of CGRP, and the function of C-fibres and Aδ-fibres, highlighted the mechanism of action of Botulinum Toxin type A in the treatment of chronic migraine.

CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies for cluster headache

INTRODUCTION

The involvement of the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway in primary headache disorders, especially migraine, had led to recent success in the development of new migraine therapies. The CGRP pathway also plays a role in the pathophysiology of cluster headache, so CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies have been studied in the prevention of cluster headache attacks.

AREAS COVERED

This review will outline the trials of fremanezumab and galcanezumab, the two CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies that have undergone trials in cluster headache prevention. This review will highlight key efficacy and safety outcomes from the trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Galcanezumab was shown to be efficacious, reducing the frequency of attacks in episodic cluster headache, while fremanezumab failed its primary endpoint in episodic cluster headache. Both fremanezumab and galcanezumab trials in chronic cluster headache were terminated after futility analysis predicting the failure of both trials to fulfil their primary endpoint. The role of CGRP in cluster headache supports ongoing trials of the remaining CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies and gepants for preventive and acute treatment. A broad view would include targeting neuropeptides involved in parasympathetic signaling in cluster headache, such as pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide (PACAP); such targets warrant exploration in the search of new treatments.

Migraine Care in the Era of COVID-19: Clinical Pearls and Plea to Insurers

Objective

To outline strategies for the treatment of migraine which do not require in‐person visits to clinic or the emergency department, and to describe ways that health insurance companies can remove barriers to quality care for migraine.

Background

COVID‐19 is a global pandemic causing widespread infections and death. To control the spread of infection we are called to observe “social distancing” and we have been asked to postpone any procedures which are not essential. Since procedural therapies are a mainstay of headache care, the inability to do procedures could negatively affect our patients with migraine. In this manuscript we review alternative therapies, with particular attention to those which may be contra‐indicated in the setting of COVID‐19 infection.

Design/Results

The manuscript reviews the use of telemedicine visits and acute, bridge, and preventive therapies for migraine. We focus on evidence‐based treatment where possible, but also describe “real world” strategies which may be tried. In each section we call out areas where changes to rules from commercial health insurance companies would facilitate better migraine care.

Conclusions

Our common goal as health care providers is to maximize the health and safety of our patients. Successful management of migraine with avoidance of in‐person clinic and emergency department visits further benefits the current urgent societal goal of maintaining social distance to contain the COVID‐19 pandemic.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure-response analysis of eptinezumab in the treatment of episodic and chronic migraine

Eptinezumab is a humanized mAb that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide and is under regulatory review for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine (EM, CM). It is important to determine whether exposures achieved with intravenous (IV) administration of eptinezumab achieve desired pharmacologic effects. Population pharmacokinetics, including dose- and exposure-response analyses, were performed using patient-level data from the eptinezumab clinical trial program with IV doses ranging from 10 to 1000 mg in pharmacokinetic analyses or 10 to 300 mg in phase 2/3 clinical studies in patients with EM or CM. Exposure-response analysis explored the relationship between eptinezumab exposure metrics and efficacy parameters including monthly migraine days. The pharmacokinetic profile of eptinezumab was characterized by rapid attainment of maximum plasma concentration (ie, end of IV administration) and a terminal half-life of 27 days. Covariate analysis found that patient characteristics had no clinically significant effects on pharmacokinetic parameters and were insufficient to influence dosing. Dose- and exposure-response analyses found exposure with single doses ≥100 mg was associated with greater efficacy compared with doses ≤30 mg and a plateau of effect between 100 and 300 mg. A saturable inhibitory Emax model found the exposure over 12 weeks produced by single-dose eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg exceeded the exposure estimates required to achieve 90% of the maximal efficacy (EC90 ). This pharmacokinetic analysis of eptinezumab supports dosing every 12 weeks with no adjustment for patient characteristics, including exposures associated with 100- or 300-mg doses producing optimal efficacy effects. The similar efficacy profiles support 100 mg as the lowest effective dose of eptinezumab.

Managing Migraine in the Times of COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 pandemic is an emerging, rapidly evolving situation. Migraine is one of the commonest and highly disabling chronic neurological diseases in the world. During the pandemic and lockdown, migraine patients are facing an enormous problem in getting optimum care because of difficulty in access, forced social isolation, and encountering a health system that is getting rapidly overwhelmed. It is important that they must be protected by minimizing their visits to the clinics and emergency departments. Paradoxically multiple triggers are in operation which is likely to increase their headache frequency. Hence physicians should be made aware of the new rules of the game in treating migraines during this time of the pandemic so that these patients get optimum treatment and care and don't feel left out. This review tries to answer a series of questions related to managing migraines in the times of COVID-19 pandemic.

No central action of CGRP antagonising drugs in the GTN mouse model of migraine

Introduction

Clinically, calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonising drugs are recognized as effective in migraine treatment, but their site of action is debated. Only a small fraction of these compounds pass the blood-brain barrier and accesses the central nervous system. Regardless, it has been argued that the central nervous system is the site of action. Here, we test this hypothesis by bypassing the blood-brain barrier through intracerebroventricular injection of calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonising drugs.

Methods

We used the glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) mouse model, which is well validated by its response to specific migraine drugs. The calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist olcegepant and the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody ALD405 were administered either intraperitoneally or intracerebroventricularly. The outcome measure was cutaneous mechanical allodynia.

Results

Mice given olcegepant intraperitoneally + GTN on day 1 had a mean 50% withdrawal threshold of 1.2 g in contrast to mice receiving placebo + GTN, which had a threshold of 0.3 g ( p < 0.001). Similarly, in the ALD405 + GTN group, mice had thresholds of 1.2 g versus 0.2 g in the placebo + GTN group ( p < 0.001). However, both drugs were ineffective when delivered intracerebroventricularly, as control and active groups had identical mechanical sensitivity thresholds, 0.2 g versus 0.1 g and 0.1 g versus 0.1 g for olcegepant and ALD405, respectively ( p > 0.99 in both cases).

Discussion

The site of action of olcegepant and of the monoclonal antibody ALD405 is outside the blood-brain barrier in this mouse model of migraine. It is likely that these results can be generalised to all gepants and all antibodies and that the results are relevant for human migraine.

How much do calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies improve the quality of life in migraine? A patient's perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Migraine is a prevalent and extremely disabling brain disorder, with an impact on the individual, family, workplace and society. This review focuses on describing Calcitonin Gene Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies (CGRP-mABs) efficacy on improving the quality of life (QoL) and decreasing the disability and impact of migraine measured with patient related outcomes (PROs), on patients who participated in clinical trials with erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab and eptinezumab. The goal is to better reflect the effect of these preventive migraine treatments in the daily life of our patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

CGRP-mABs have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) as the first migraine specific treatment for the prevention of migraine. In clinical trials, CGRP-mABs have proven to achieve their primary endpoint which is to reduce the number of headache days, and also have shown to have an impact on disability, QoL and workplace productivity.

SUMMARY

CGRP-mABs have an impact on the disability, QoL, workplace productivity and global impression of improvement of migraine, which will translate into changes in the real world of migraine patients who are treated with CGRP-mABs.

Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache: Results from 3-month double-blind treatment

Objective

To report efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in adults with chronic cluster headache.

Background

Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its biological activity.

Methods

This study comprised a prospective baseline period, a 12-week double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period, and a 52-week open-label period. Up to six protocol-specified concomitant preventive medications were allowed if patients were on a stable dose for 2 months prior to the prospective baseline period. Patients were randomized 1:1 to monthly subcutaneous galcanezumab (300 mg) or placebo. The primary endpoint was overall mean change from baseline in weekly attack frequency with galcanezumab compared to placebo. Key secondary endpoints were ≥50% response rate and percentage of patients meeting sustained response. Results from the double-blind treatment period are reported.

Results

A total of 237 patients were randomized and treated (120 placebo; 117 galcanezumab). At baseline, the mean age was 45 years and 63% were using ≥1 preventive drug. The primary endpoint was not met; mean change in weekly attack frequency was −4.6 placebo versus −5.4 galcanezumab (p = 0.334). Key secondary endpoints also were not met. Injection site-related treatment-emergent adverse events were more common in the galcanezumab than the placebo group, with significantly more injection site erythema.

Conclusion

Treatment with galcanezumab 300 mg did not achieve its primary and key secondary endpoints. This study underscores the potential distinct biology of cCH as well as the significant unmet need for safe, effective, and well-tolerated preventive treatment. The safety profile of galcanezumab in cCH is consistent with that observed in trials of episodic CH and migraine.

Trial registration

NCT02438826; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02438826.