Mapping Migraine-Specific Quality of Life to Health State Utilities in Patients Receiving Rimegepant

Rimegepant for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine: a narrative review of the evidence

INTRODUCTION

Rimegepant is an oral small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved in several countries for acute treatment of migraine and preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. This review summarizes the evidence, published to date, for the use of rimegepant as an acute or preventive treatment of migraine.

AREAS COVERED

A brief overview of migraine, the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant, and the mechanism of action of rimegepant are provided. Evidence evaluating rimegepant as an acute or preventive treatment of migraine is then summarized in more detail, based on a literature search for full-length publications related to clinical or real-world use of rimegepant.

EXPERT OPINION

Several clinical trials established rimegepant as a safe and effective treatment (acute and preventive) of migraine in adults. There are few head-to-head studies with other migraine treatments to determine relative efficacy. However, the favorable safety profile of rimegepant makes it appropriate for many patients, particularly those with contraindication, intolerance, or inadequate response to other classes of standard-of-care migraine treatments. Additional studies on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness relative to other treatments may further define the role of rimegepant in migraine treatment.

Profile of Sensory Integration Disorders in Migraine Patients-New Perspectives of Therapy

Background: The involvement of sensory integration disorders in the pathophysiology of migraine has been suggested. This study aims to analyze the relationship between symptoms of sensory integration disorders and migraine in a broad scope, including all sensory domains, and examine its impact on migraine attacks. Methods: The study included 372 people diagnosed with migraine. The Daniel Travis Questionnaire was used to assess symptoms of sensory integration disorders and their severity across six domains. The relationships between the severity of these symptoms and headache features, as well as accompanying headache symptoms, were the subject of statistical analysis. Results: Current impairment in all sensory domains was significantly associated with headaches exacerbated by everyday life activities. A significant inverse relationship was found between the occurrence of throbbing headaches and symptoms of sensory integration disorders in terms of current sensory discrimination, current motor skills, and current emotional/social skills. Past under-responsiveness and past disturbances in emotional/social abilities were significantly associated with migraine aura. Conclusions: The severity of symptoms of sensory integration disorders affects the clinical picture of migraine. The significant association between migraine and emotional/social disorders, as well as under-responsiveness in the past, needs further research to assess whether this is a cause-and-effect relationship. There is a need for in-depth diagnostics of sensory integration disorders in migraine patients, which could be an additional target of their therapy.

Understanding the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Severity Premium: Exploring Its Implementation and the Implications for Decision Making and Patient Access

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence's (NICE) new severity modifier, which has replaced the end-of-life (EoL) premium, on future NICE recommendations, considering past decision-making patterns.

METHODS

NICE technology appraisals (TAs) published between January 2020 and December 2022 were reviewed. Summary statistics were generated to assess how the new severity modifier might affect hypothetical decision making in historical TAs.

RESULTS

A total of 138 data points were identified from 132 TAs. Although the EoL premium was applied in 46 appraisals (33%), 57 (39%) qualify for a severity-based quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) multiplier. Only 19 appraisals (14.6%) not receiving an EoL premium met the severity criteria, the majority (17) qualifying for a 1.2× multiplier. In appraisals predicted to meet the severity criteria, 45 (79%) were in oncology, making them 4.04 times (95% CI 1.91-9.02) more likely to qualify for a severity modifier than nononcology indications. Among historically EoL indications, 42 (91%) were predicted to meet the severity criteria, making them 14.8 times (95% CI 6.37-37.6) more likely to qualify for a severity modifier.

CONCLUSIONS

The new severity modifier will predominantly benefit oncology indications, continuing their previous explicit prioritization under the EoL decision modifier. However, the new severity modifier is harder to achieve and less generous; only a fraction of appraisals qualify for the highest effective £51 000 per QALY threshold. The vast majority of indications previously approved at £50 000 per QALY would now need to meet a cost-effectiveness threshold of <£36 000. This may necessitate greater pricing flexibility from manufacturers and increase the likelihood of negative recommendations.

Estimating treatment effects on health utility scores for patients living with migraine: a post hoc analysis of the DELIVER trial

BACKGROUND

This post hoc analysis aimed to estimate eptinezumab's therapeutic effect on health utilities and determined to which extent monthly migraine days (MMDs) explain changes in health utilities.

RESEARCH DESIGN/METHODS

DELIVER, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3b trial (NCT04418765), investigated eptinezumab efficacy and safety in patients with 2-4 prior migraine treatment failures. Regression analysis explored the relationship between utility scores and MMDs, with eptinezumab treatment as a covariate along with MMDs to identify any MMD-independent effect on utilities. Path analysis quantified eptinezumab's impact as mediated through MMD reduction.

RESULTS

The base case model showed that each reduction in MMD was associated with a mean utility score increase (0.0189; 95% CI: 0.0180, 0.0198; P < 0.001). Mean utility score was generally higher for eptinezumab versus placebo, justifying addition of treatment effect to the base case model. Patients administered eptinezumab had on average 0.0562 (95% CI: 0.0382, 0.0742; P < 0.001) higher utility versus placebo when controlling for number of MMDs. From path analysis, MMD reduction resulting from eptinezumab treatment accounted for 53% additional utility gain observed in patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in MMDs alone inadequately captured migraine's impact on patient utility, as there was also a positive eptinezumab-driven, treatment-specific impact on utility score.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov identifier: NCT04418765).

Clinical efficacy and safety of rimegepant in the treatment of migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of rimegepant for the treatment of migraine in adult patients using a meta-analysis.

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched up to March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated migraine and other comparator treatments in adult patients were included. The clinical response at the post-treatment evaluation, including acute pain free and relief effect, whereas the secondary outcomes were the risk of adverse events (AEs).

Results

A total of 4 RCTs involving 4,230 patients with episodic migraine were included. Outcome indicators for the number of pain free and relief patients at 2 h, 2-24 h, 2-48 h post-dose showed that rimegepant had better effects relative to the placebo [free at 2 h: OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.55, 2.18), P < 0.00001; relief at 2 h: OR = 1.80, 95% CI (1.59, 2.04), P < 0.00001]. And there was no significant difference between the occurrence of adverse events in the experimental and control groups [OR = 1.29, 95% CI (0.99, 1.67), P = 0.06].

Conclusion

Rimegepant has better therapeutic effects compared to placebo and no significant difference in adverse events.

Emerging drugs for the preventive treatment of migraine: a review of CGRP monoclonal antibodies and gepants trials

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a leading cause of years lived with disability and preventive strategies represent a mainstay to reduce health-related disability and improve quality of life of migraine patients. Until a few years ago, migraine prevention was based on drugs developed for other clinical indications and relocated in the migraine therapeutic armamentarium, characterized by unfavourable tolerability profiles. The advent of monoclonal antibodies against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) and gepants, CGRP receptor antagonists, has been a turning point in migraine prevention owing to advantageous efficacy, safety and tolerability profiles.Nevertheless, while in an ideal scenario a drug characterized by significant greater efficacy and tolerability compared to existing therapeutic strategies should be adopted as a first-line treatment, cost-effectiveness analyses available for monoclonal antibodies against CGRP pathway tend to limit their administration to more severe migraine phenotypes.

AREAS COVERED

The present narrative review aim to provide a critical appraisal of phase II and III CGRP-mAbs and gepants trials to analyse their use in clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite monoclonal antibodies against CGRP pathway and gepants can be undoubtedly considered top-of-the-range treatments, there are still issues deserving to be addressed in the coming years as the risk of off-target effects as well as their economic sustainability based on the considerable migraine burden.

Rimegepant: A Review in the Acute Treatment and Preventive Treatment of Migraine

Rimegepant [Nurtec^® ODT (USA); Vydura^® (EU)] is a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults, and for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. Rimegepant is available as an orally disintegrating tablet (ODT), which offers convenience and a potentially faster response time than the conventional tablet formulation. In pivotal phase III trials, rimegepant was more effective than placebo at relieving pain and the most bothersome symptom when taken as needed for the acute treatment of migraine. Rimegepant was also more effective than placebo at reducing the number of monthly migraine days when taken every other day for the preventive treatment of migraine. The beneficial effects of rimegepant in reducing migraine frequency and improving quality of life were maintained over the longer term (up to 52 weeks). Rimegepant was generally well tolerated, with no evidence of hepatotoxicity or cardiovascular toxicity in clinical trials. As the first dual agent approved for both treatment and prevention of migraine, rimegepant represents a useful option for the management of migraine in adults.

Long-term open-label and real-world studies of lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant for the acute treatment of migraine attacks

BACKGROUND

Long-term data helps assess the consistency of efficacy, tolerability, and safety of acute treatment over repeated use for different attacks. Real-world studies help assess tolerability, safety, and efficacy in patients with possibly refractory chronic migraine, more comorbidities, other diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, and polypharmacy.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of the long-term open-label and real-world studies of lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant for the acute treatment of migraine. Both manuscripts and abstracts were reviewed.

RESULTS

The efficacy and tolerability of lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant are maintained over time. No significant cardiovascular adverse events were thought to be related to any of these medications. The rare instances of palpitations and/or tachycardia occurred within 48 hours of lasmiditan. One participant with a history of supraventricular tachycardia had sinus tachycardia thought to be related to ubrogepant which did not recur despite continued use. One case of thrombocytopenia and two cases of increased aspartate aminotransferase and alanine transaminase were thought to be possibly related, but the alanine transaminase and aspartate aminotransferase levels normalized despite continued use of ubrogepant. A case of first-degree atrioventricular block was considered possibly related to rimegepant. Acute use of rimegepant was associated with a decrease in monthly migraine days over time. The three medications were associated with improvement in function and/or productivity.

CONCLUSION

Long-term and real-world data of tolerability, safety and efficacy of lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant is thus far consistent with prior studies, but more longitudinal data that clarifies long-term safety as well as consistency and predictors of response is needed.

Health State Utility Mapping of Rimegepant for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: Double-Blind Treatment Phase and Open Label Extension (BHV3000-305)

INTRODUCTION

The objectives of this study were to (1) report long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes among patients using rimegepant preventatively in BHV3000-305 (NCT03732638) open-label extension (OLE) and (2) map Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2) to EQ-5D-3L utility values over the double-blind treatment (DBT; 0-12 weeks) and the OLE (13-64 weeks) to assess the influence of treatment on these values.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis using data from a rimegepant study for the prevention of migraine (BHV3000-305). Adult patients with migraine took either rimegepant 75 mg or placebo every other day (EOD) during the DBT phase. All patients received rimegepant during the OLE. MSQv2 was measured at baseline, weeks 12, 24, and 64. A validated algorithm was used to map MSQv2 scores to EQ-5D utilities.

RESULTS

Baseline data were available for 347 patients treated with placebo and 348 treated with rimegepant in the DBT period, who continued to the OLE. Baseline EQ-5D utilities were similar between trial arms: 0.598 for placebo and 0.614 for rimegepant. EQ-5D improved from baseline to week 12 and utilities increased by + 0.09 for placebo and + 0.10 for rimegepant (p value = 0.011). By 24 weeks, at which point patients who were originally randomized to placebo had received rimegepant 75 mg EOD for 12 weeks, HRQoL measures (MSQv2 and EQ-5D) were similar across groups, demonstrating rapid onset of treatment effect. This HRQoL improvement was durable out to 64 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Compared to placebo, treatment with rimegepant 75 mg was associated with greater improvement in EQ-5D utilities during the 12-week DBT phase. Patients originally randomized to placebo experienced a similar improvement in EQ-5D utilities after switching to rimegepant during the OLE, demonstrating that benefits are realized within 12 weeks of active treatment. This preventive effect was durable out to 64 weeks and was associated with an additional increase in HRQoL over time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03732638.

Rimegepant 75 mg for acute treatment of migraine is associated with significant reduction in monthly migraine days: Results from a long-term, open-label study

Background:

Rimegepant, a small molecule oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, is approved for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. We hypothesized that intermittent CGRP receptor blockade with rimegepant 75 mg acute treatment as needed (PRN) might result in reductions in monthly migraine days (MMD) over time, and was evaluated as the study objective.

Methods:

This was a post-hoc analysis of adults with ≥6 MMD at baseline who self-administered rimegepant 75 mg orally PRN for acute treatment of migraine up to 52-weeks in an open-label safety study (BHV3000-201; NCT03266588). Outcome measures (defined as median time to) and response rates (defined as proportion of patients reporting) were captured for ≥30% and ≥50% reduction of baseline MMD.

Results:

1044 participants with ≥6 MMD at baseline were analyzed. Median time to ≥30% reduction in MMD was 12 weeks (IQR; 4–40 weeks); median time to ≥50% reduction was 32 weeks (IQR; 12-NR weeks). Reduction in MMD was observed over time regardless of baseline migraine frequency, however higher baseline MMD were associated with a longer time to achieving ≥30% or ≥50% MMD reduction.

Conclusion:

In participants presenting with ≥6 MMD, PRN acute treatment of migraine attacks over 52-weeks with oral rimegepant 75 mg was observed to confer reductions in migraine frequency.

Trial registration:

NCT03266588