Targeted CGRP Small Molecule Antagonists for Acute Migraine Therapy

Zavegepant for Acute Treatment of Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of zavegepant (BHV-3500), a recently approved nasal spray containing a third-generation calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, for treating acute migraine attacks.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted across various databases up to 06/26/2023 to identify relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on zavegepant's efficacy and safety in treatment of acute migraine attacks. Primary outcome: freedom from pain at 2 hours postdose. Safety outcomes were evaluated based on adverse events (AEs), with zavegepant 10 mg and placebo groups compared for incidence of AEs.

RESULTS

Two RCTs, involving 2061 participants (1014 receiving zavegepant and 1047 receiving placebo), were quantitatively analyzed. An additional trial was included for qualitative synthesis. Zavegepant 10 mg exhibited a significantly higher likelihood of achieving freedom from pain at 2 hours postdose compared with the placebo group (risk ratio [RR] 1.54, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28 to 1.84). It also showed superior relief from the most bothersome symptoms at 2 hours postdose compared with placebo (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.42). However, the zavegepant 10 mg group experienced a higher incidence of AEs compared with placebo (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.5 to 2.12), with dysgeusia being the most reported AE (RR 4.18, 95% CI 3.05 to 5.72).

CONCLUSION

Zavegepant 10 mg is more effective than placebo in treating acute migraine attacks, providing compelling evidence of its efficacy in relieving migraine pain and most bothersome associated symptoms. Further trials are necessary to confirm its efficacy, tolerability, and safety in diverse clinic-based settings with varied patient populations.

Use of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies for the Treatment of Migraines in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Migraines are a common comorbidity and source of disability in patients with chronic inflammatory diseases like multiple sclerosis (MS). Recently, therapeutic agents for episodic and chronic migraine known as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors have shown to effectively control migraine attacks and improve quality of life in the general population. This study explored the use of these novel agents in individuals with comorbid MS.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study at the University of South Florida's neurology clinic; it evaluated individuals with both MS and migraine.

RESULTS

A total of 27 individuals with MS and chronic or episodic migraine who received treatment with a CGRP monoclonal antibody were identified. Of these, 63% reported a reduction in their migraine frequency of greater than 75%. Concurrent use of a disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for MS occurred in 82% of patients, and in 37% of these, the DMT used was also a monoclonal antibody. Adverse effects from CGRP monoclonal antibodies were mild and occurred in only 11% of patients, and no patient experienced worsening of their MS symptoms during cotreatment over the duration of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed a significant reduction in migraine frequency and a favorable adverse event profile for individuals with comorbid MS who took CGRP monoclonal antibodies and experienced no worsening of MS symptoms. In individuals with MS, CGRP monoclonal antibodies seem to be a safe and effective therapy for episodic or chronic migraine.

Association between patent foramen ovale and migraine: evidence from a resting-state fMRI study

A relationship between migraine without aura (MO) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) has been observed, but the neural basis underlying this relationship remains elusive. Utilizing independent component analysis via functional magnetic resonance imaging, we examined functional connectivity (FC) within and across networks in 146 patients with MO (75 patients with and 71 patients without PFO) and 70 healthy controls (35 patients each with and without PFO) to elucidate the individual effects of MO and PFO, as well as their interaction, on brain functional networks. The main effect of PFO manifested exclusively in the FC among the visual, auditory, default mode, dorsal attention and salience networks. Furthermore, the interaction effect between MO and PFO was discerned in brain clusters of the left frontoparietal network and lingual gyrus network, as well as the internetwork FC between the left frontoparietal network and the default mode network (DMN), the occipital pole and medial visual networks, and the dorsal attention and salience networks. Our findings suggest that the presence of a PFO shunt in patients with MO is accompanied by various FC changes within and across networks. These changes elucidate the intricate mechanisms linked to PFO-associated migraines and provide a basis for identifying novel noninvasive biomarkers.

Rimegepant 75 mg in Subjects With Hepatic Impairment: Results of a Phase 1, Open-Label, Single-Dose, Parallel-Group Study

Rimegepant is a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist (gepant) with demonstrated efficacy and safety in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. Here, we report the pharmacokinetics and safety of a single 75-mg oral dose of rimegepant in subjects with severe, moderate, or mild hepatic impairment and matched healthy subjects from an open-label, single-dose, 4-group phase 1 study. Thirty-six subjects aged 41-71 years were enrolled, including 6 each with severe, moderate, or mild hepatic impairment and 18 healthy subjects. All subjects completed the study. A <20% increase in total and unbound pharmacokinetics was observed in subjects with mild hepatic impairment and ≤65% increase with moderate hepatic impairment versus matched healthy controls. Total and unbound systemic exposure increased 2.0- and 3.9-fold in the severe hepatic impairment group. In subjects with severe hepatic impairment, geometric mean ratios (severe impairment/controls) for total concentrations were 202.2% for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, 202.2% for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity, and 189.1% for maximum observed plasma concentration. Corresponding geometric mean ratios using unbound concentrations were 388.8% and 388.7%, respectively. Three (8.3%) subjects reported 4 treatment-emergent adverse events. Rimegepant is not recommended for use in adults with severe hepatic impairment.

The Surgical Management of Migraines and Chronic Headaches: A Cross-sectional Review of American Insurance Coverage

BACKGROUND

Migraine headache can be an extremely debilitating condition, with pharmacotherapy for prophylaxis or treatment of acute symptoms being unsuccessful in a large proportion of patients. Surgical management of migraine has recently gained popularity as an alternative to pharmacotherapy for severe disease. However, the novel nature of these procedures may lead to variable insurance coverage, limiting access to care.

METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis of 101 US insurance companies was conducted. Companies were chosen based on greatest market share and enrollment per state. A Web-based search or phone call identified whether each company had a publicly available policy on nonsurgical or surgical management of migraine or headache. For companies with an available policy, coverage was categorized into covered, covered on a case-by-case basis, or never covered, with criteria required for coverage collected and categorized.

RESULTS

Of the 101 evaluated insurers, significantly fewer companies had a policy on surgical treatment for migraine or headache (n = 52 [52%]) compared with nonsurgical treatment (n = 78 [78%]) (P < 0.001). For companies with a policy, the most frequently covered nonsurgical treatments were biofeedback (n = 23 [92%]) and botulism toxin injections (n = 61 [88%]). Headaches were an approved indication for occipital nerve stimulation in 4% (n = 2) of company policies and nerve decompression in 2% (n = 1) of policies. Migraines were never offered preauthorized coverage for surgical procedures.

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of US insurance companies have a publicly available policy on surgical management of migraine or headache. Surgical treatment was seldom covered for the indication of headache and would never receive preauthorized coverage for migraine. Lack of coverage may create challenges in accessing surgical treatment. Additional prospective, controlled studies are necessary to further support the efficacy of surgical treatment.

Migraine and the Gender Divide

Migraine is a global neurologic disease that is highly prevalent, especially in women. Studies have observed a predisposition for the development of migraine in women, although the mechanisms involved have yet to be fully elucidated. This review aimed to summarize the recent evidence regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of migraine and highlight key sex differences. We also identify gaps in care for both women and men living with migraine and discuss the presence of migraine-related stigma and how this may impact the efficacy of clinical care.

Migraine drugs

According to recent studies, migraine affects more than 1 billion people worldwide, making it one of the world’s most prevalent diseases. Although this highly debilitating illness has been known since ancient times, the first therapeutic drugs to treat migraine, ergotamine (Gynergen) and dihydroergotamine (Dihydergot), did not appear on the market until 1921 and 1946, respectively. Both drugs originated from Sandoz, the world’s leading pharmaceutical company in ergot alkaloid research at the time. Historically, ergot alkaloids had been primarily used in obstetrics, but with methysergide (1-methyl-lysergic acid 1′-hydroxy-butyl-(2S)-amide), it became apparent that they also held some potential in migraine treatment. Methysergide was the first effective prophylactic drug developed specifically to prevent migraine attacks in 1959. On the basis of significantly improved knowledge of migraine pathophysiology and the discovery of serotonin and its receptors, Glaxo was able to launch sumatriptan in 1992. It was the first member from the class of triptans, which are selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists. Recent innovations in acute and preventive migraine therapy include lasmiditan, a selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist from Eli Lilly, the gepants, which are calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists discovered at Merck & Co and BMS, and anti-CGRP/receptor monoclonal antibodies from Amgen, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and others.

Graphical abstract

Real-World Analysis of Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Insufficient Responders and Responders to Prescribed Acute Migraine Treatment in China

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a common disabling primary headache disorder characterized by attacks of severe pain, sometimes accompanied by symptoms including nausea and photo-/phono-phobia. Real-world data of patients with migraine who sufficiently (responders) and insufficiently (insufficient responders) respond to acute treatment (AT) are limited in China. This analysis explored whether responders to AT differ from insufficient responders in terms of clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, and patient-reported outcomes in China.

METHODS

Data were drawn from the Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of internists/neurologists and their consulting patients with migraine, conducted in a real-world setting in China, January-June 2014. Responders and insufficient responders to prescribed AT were patients who typically achieved headache pain freedom within 2 h of AT in ≥ 4 and ≤ 3 of five migraine attacks, respectively. Responders were compared with insufficient responders; logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with insufficient response.

RESULTS

Of 777 patients currently receiving AT, 44.0% were insufficient responders. Significantly fewer responders than insufficient responders had migraine with aura (13.1 vs. 23.8%; p = 0.0001). Responders reported a significantly lower mean Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) total score (5.5 vs. 6.6; p = 0.0325). Responders reported a lower mean impairment while working (50.0 vs. 63.9%; p < 0.0001), overall work impairment (52.6 vs. 66.0%; p < 0.0001), and activity impairment (48.9 vs. 59.0%; p < 0.0001). Statistically significant factors associated with insufficient response to AT included diabetes, unilateral pain, vomiting, sensitivity to smell, visual aura/sight disturbance, and an increase in MIDAS total score. However, there were no statistically significant differences in ATs received by responders and insufficient responders at any regimen of therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients with migraine in China are insufficient responders to AT, experiencing worse symptoms that lead to overall poorer quality of life than responders. This unmet need suggests that new effective treatment options are required for migraine.

Resveratrol derivatives: Synthesis and their biological activities

Resveratrol, a natural compound known especially for its antioxidant properties and protective action, opens the door for both it and its structural derivatives to be considered not only as chemopreventive but also as cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Due to the pharmacokinetic problems of resveratrol that demonstrate its poor bioavailability, the study of new derivatives is of interest. Thus, in this work (E)-stilbenes derived directly from resveratrol and other cyclic analogues containing the benzofuran or indole nucleus have been synthesized. The synthesized compounds have been evaluated for their ability to affect tumor growth in vitro. Compounds 2, 3, 4 and 5 have shown cytotoxicity in human colon cancer (HT-29) and human pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells (MIA PaCa-2) higher than those of (E)-resveratrol. The indolic derivative 13, a cyclic analog of resveratrol, has shown in vitro cytotoxic activity 8 times higher than resveratrol against HT-29 cancer cells. The cyclic derivatives 8, 9 and 12 showed a high inhibition of cell growth in HCT-116 (KRas mutant) at 20 μM, while 13 shows moderate antiangiogenesis activity at 10 μM.

Efficacy of scalp acupuncture for migraine: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a disorder that is prevalent worldwide. However, there is still no clear and effective treatment for migraine. Recently, acupuncture as a treatment has been attracting attention and studies have shown the value of scalp acupuncture. Therefore, this protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis was created to assess the evidence of effectiveness and safety of scalp acupuncture in the treatment of migraine.

METHODS

All published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the following databases will be searched from their inception to September 2022: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), OASIS, Korean Studies Information Service System (KISS), Korean Medical Database and NDSL, CiNii (Citation Information by NII), and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), without language restrictions. The data collection and analysis will be conducted independently by two reviewers. The Cochrane Collaboration tool will be used to evaluate the risk of bias by evaluating the available studies. A meta-analysis will be conducted using RevMan V.5.4 software.

RESULTS

The purpose of the proposed systemic review is to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of scalp acupuncture for the treatment of migraine.

CONCLUSIONS

To sum up, this review will assess the effectiveness and safety of scalp acupuncture for the treatment of migraine. The results of this review are expected to provide new guidelines for the treatment of migraine.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The review and meta-analysis will not require ethical approval because personal information from individuals will not be involved. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide in migraine: from pathophysiology to treatment

INTRODUCTION

It has been observed in recent years that levels of such molecules as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and, to a lesser extent, the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide are elevated during migraine attacks and in chronic migraine, both in the cerebrospinal fluid and in the serum. Pharmacological reduction of these proteins is clinically significant, with an improvement in patients' migraines. It therefore seems logical that one of the main lines of migraine research should be based on the role of CGRP in the pathophysiology of this entity.

DEVELOPMENT

The Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group decided to draft this document in order to address the evidence on such important issues as the role of CGRP in the pathophysiology of migraine and the mechanism of action of monoclonal antibodies and gepants; and to critically analyse the results of different studies and the profile of patients eligible for treatment with monoclonal antibodies, and the impact in terms of pharmacoeconomics.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical development of gepants, which are CGRP antagonists, for the acute treatment of migraine attacks, and CGRP ligand and receptor monoclonal antibodies offer promising results for these patients.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide in migraine: from pathophysiology to treatment

INTRODUCTION

It has been observed in recent years that levels of such molecules as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and, to a lesser extent, the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating peptide are elevated during migraine attacks and in chronic migraine, both in the cerebrospinal fluid and in the serum. Pharmacological reduction of these proteins is clinically significant, with an improvement in patients' migraines. It therefore seems logical that one of the main lines of migraine research should be based on the role of CGRP in the pathophysiology of this entity.

DEVELOPMENT

The Spanish Society of Neurology's Headache Study Group decided to draft this document in order to address the evidence on such important issues as the role of CGRP in the pathophysiology of migraine and the mechanism of action of monoclonal antibodies and gepants; and to critically analyse the results of different studies and the profile of patients eligible for treatment with monoclonal antibodies, and the impact in terms of pharmacoeconomics.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical development of gepants, which are CGRP antagonists, for the acute treatment of migraine attacks, and CGRP ligand and receptor monoclonal antibodies offer promising results for these patients.

OUP accepted manuscript

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) signaling inhibitors have shown efficacy in both the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. Telcagepant, a first-generation CGRP receptor antagonist, was effective but failed in clinical trials due to hepatotoxicity. Subsequently, although 4 next-generation CGRP receptor antagonists (rimegepant, zavegepant, atogepant, and ubrogepant) were being advanced into late-stage clinical trials, due to telcagepant’s failure, more confidence in the liver safety of these compounds was needed. DILIsym v6A, a quantitative systems toxicology (QST) model of drug-induced liver injury (DILI), was used to model all 5 compounds and thus to compare the 4 next-generation CGRP receptor antagonists to telcagepant. In vitro experiments were performed to measure the potential for each compound to inhibit bile acid transporters, produce oxidative stress, and cause mitochondrial dysfunction. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic models were produced for each compound in order to appropriately estimate liver exposure. DILIsym predicted clinical elevations of liver enzymes and bilirubin for telcagepant, correctly predicting the observed DILI liability of the first-generation compound. By contrast, DILIsym predicted that each of the 4 next-generation compounds would be significantly less likely to cause DILI than telcagepant. Subsequent clinical trials have validated these predictions for each of the 4 compounds, and all 3 of the compounds submitted to FDA to date (rimegepant, ubrogepant, and atogepant) have since been approved by the FDA with no warning for hepatotoxicity. This work demonstrates the potential for QST modeling to prospectively differentiate between hepatotoxic and nonhepatotoxic molecules within the same class.

Hypervigilance, Allostatic Load, and Migraine Prevention: Antibodies to CGRP or Receptor

Migraine involves brain hypersensitivity with episodic dysfunction triggered by behavioral or physiological stressors. During an acute migraine attack the trigeminal nerve is activated (peripheral sensitization). This leads to central sensitization with activation of the central pathways including the trigeminal nucleus caudalis, the trigemino-thalamic tract, and the thalamus. In episodic migraine the sensitization process ends with the individual act, but with chronic migraine central sensitization may continue interictally. Increased allostatic load, the consequence of chronic, repeated exposure to stressors, leads to central sensitization, lowering the threshold for future neuronal activation (hypervigilance). Ostensibly innocuous stressors are then sufficient to trigger an attack. Medications that reduce sensitization may help patients who are hypervigilant and help to balance allostatic load. Acute treatments and drugs for migraine prevention have traditionally been used to reduce attack duration and frequency. However, since many patients do not fully respond, an unmet treatment need remains. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a vasoactive neuropeptide involved in nociception and in the sensitization of peripheral and central neurons of the trigeminovascular system, which is implicated in migraine pathophysiology. Elevated CGRP levels are associated with dysregulated signaling in the trigeminovascular system, leading to maladaptive responses to behavioral or physiological stressors. CGRP may, therefore, play a key role in the underlying pathophysiology of migraine. Increased understanding of the role of CGRP in migraine led to the development of small-molecule antagonists (gepants) and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target either CGRP or the receptor (CGRP-R) to restore homeostasis, reducing the frequency, duration, and severity of attacks. In clinical trials, US Food and Drug Administration-approved anti-CGRP-R/CGRP mAbs were well tolerated and effective as preventive migraine treatments. Here, we explore the role of CGRP in migraine pathophysiology and the use of gepants or mAbs to suppress CGRP-R signaling via inhibition of the CGRP ligand or receptor.

Roles of calcitonin gene-related peptide in the skin, and other physiological and pathophysiological functions

Skin immunity is regulated by many mediator molecules. One is the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). CGRP has roles in regulating the function of components of the immune system including T cells, B cells, dendritic cells (DCs), endothelial cells (ECs), and mast cells (MCs).

Herein we discuss actions of CGRP in mediating inflammatory and vascular effects in various cutaneous models and disorders.

•

CGRP can help to recruit immune cells through endothelium-dependent vasodilation.

•

CGRP plays an important role in the pathogenesis of neurogenic inflammation.

•

Functions of many components in the immune system are influenced by CGRP.

•

CGRP regulates various inflammatory processes in human skin by affecting different cell-types.

Comparison of New Pharmacologic Agents With Triptans for Treatment of Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

New therapeutic classes of migraine-specific treatment have been developed, including 5-hydroxytryptamine1F receptor agonists (lasmiditan) and calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists (rimegepant and ubrogepant).

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes associated with the use of lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant vs triptans for acute management of migraine headaches.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and PubMed were searched from inception to March 5, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Double-blind randomized clinical trials examining current available migraine-specific acute treatments were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was applied to extract the data according to a predetermined list of variables of interest, and all network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the odds ratio (OR) for freedom from pain (hereafter referred to as pain freedom) at 2 hours after the dose, and the secondary outcomes were ORs for pain relief at 2 hours after the dose and any adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 64 randomized clinical trials were included (46 442 participants; 74%-87% women; age range, 36-43 years). Most of the included treatments were associated with reduced pain at 2 hours compared with placebo. Most triptans were associated with higher ORs for pain freedom at 2 hours compared with lasmiditan (range: OR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.06-2.80] to OR, 3.40 [95% CI, 2.12-5.44]), rimegepant (range: OR, 1.58 [95% CI, 1.07-2.33] to OR, 3.13 [95% CI, 2.16-4.52]), and ubrogepant (range: OR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.00-2.37] to OR, 3.05 [95% CI, 2.02-4.60]). Most triptans were associated with higher ORs for pain relief at 2 hours compared with lasmiditan (range: OR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.09-1.96] to OR, 3.31 [95% CI, 2.41-4.55]), rimegepant (range: OR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.01-1.76] to OR, 3.01 [95% CI, 2.33-3.88]), and ubrogepant (range: OR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.02-1.88] to OR, 3.13 [95% CI, 2.35-4.15]). The comparisons between lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant were not statistically significant for both pain freedom and pain relief at 2 hours. Lasmiditan was associated with the highest risk of any adverse events, and certain triptans (rizatriptan, sumatriptan, and zolmitriptan) were also associated with a higher risk of any adverse events than the calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

For pain freedom or pain relief at 2 hours after the dose, lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant were associated with higher ORs compared with placebo but lower ORs compared with most triptans. However, the lack of cardiovascular risks for these new classes of migraine-specific treatments may offer an alternative to triptans.

Acute Care and Treatment of Migraine

OBJECTIVE

Migraine is a chronic neurological disease involving the brain and its vasculature, typically characterized by recurrent attacks of moderate or severe throbbing headache, accompanied by sensitivity to light and sound, and associated with nausea, vomiting, and inability to move due to worsening of pain. About 30% of migraineurs have some type of aura, most often visual. Migraine attacks, if untreated or suboptimally treated, usually result in significant disability, requiring bed rest and resulting in poor quality of life. Increased frequency of attacks and overuse of acute care medication are significant risks for chronification, resulting in the transformation of episodic migraine into chronic migraine. We aim to review most acute care treatments for migraine.

METHODS

Current treatment options for migraine attacks were reviewed from the selected literature and combined with our clinical experience.

RESULTS

Current acute treatment options for migraine attacks include over-the-counter analgesics, at times combined with caffeine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, opioids, and migraine-specific medications such as triptans and ergots. In the near future, we will probably have 3 gepants (small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide [CGRP] receptor antagonists). The first one was just approved in the United States. A ditan acting as a stimulator of 5-HT1F receptors, was also just approved by the FDA. Stimulation of the trigeminal, vagal, occipital, and even upper arm peripheral nerves through electrical nerve stimulation devices and magnetic stimulation devices are available as alternative, nondrug treatment options. Several devices have already been FDA-allowed for treatment in the United States and/or approved elsewhere, and others will follow soon. Behavioral medicine techniques such as biofeedback training and mindfulness have been available for some time and are often helpful.

CONCLUSION

A wide variety of acute care options to treat migraine are available, and others will soon be and will herein be described in further detail. Some medications have been approved by regulatory authorities in countries other than the United States, and some devices have been given a CE Mark in Europe.

DD04107-Derived neuronal exocytosis inhibitor peptides: Evidences for synaptotagmin-1 as a putative target

The analgesic peptide DD04107 (Pal-EEMQRR-NH₂) and its acetylated analogue inhibit α-calcitonin gene-related peptide (α-CGRP) exocytotic release from primary sensory neurons. Examining the crystal structure of the SNARE-Synaptotagmin-1(Syt1) complex, we hypothesized that these peptides could inhibit neuronal exocytosis by binding to Syt1, hampering at least partially its interaction with the SNARE complex. To address this hypothesis, we first interrogate the role of individual side-chains on the inhibition of α-CGRP release, finding that E1, M3, Q4 and R6 residues were crucial for activity. CD and NMR conformational analysis showed that linear peptides have tendency to adopt α-helical conformations, but the results with cyclic analogues indicated that this secondary structure is not needed for activity. Isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) measurements demonstrate a direct interaction of some of these peptides with Syt1-C2B domain, but not with Syt7-C2B region, indicating selectivity. As expected for a compound able to inhibit α-CGRP release, cyclic peptide derivative Pal-E-cyclo[EMQK]R-NH₂ showed potent in vivo analgesic activity, in a model of inflammatory pain. Molecular dynamics simulations provided a model consistent with K_D values for the interaction of peptides with Syt1-C2B domain, and with their biological activity. Altogether, these results identify Syt1 as a potential new analgesic target.

Efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for chronic migraine prevention: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial in Japanese and Korean patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy and safety of fremanezumab administration in Japanese and Korean patients with chronic migraine (CM).

BACKGROUND

Available preventive treatments for CM are limited by various efficacy and safety issues. Fremanezumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway involved in migraine pathogenesis, has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in large-scale, international Phase 3 trials.

METHODS

Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of patients with CM who received subcutaneous fremanezumab monthly (675 mg at baseline and 225 mg at weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline and placebo at weeks 4 and 8), or matching placebo. Primary endpoint was the mean change from baseline in the monthly (28-day) average number of headache days of at least moderate severity during the 12 weeks after the first dose.

RESULTS

Among 571 patients randomized (safety set, n = 569; full analysis set, n = 566), the least-squares mean (±standard error [SE]) reduction in the average number of headache days of at least moderate severity per month during 12 weeks was significantly greater with fremanezumab monthly (-4.1 ± 0.4) and fremanezumab quarterly (-4.1 ± 0.4) than with placebo (-2.4 ± 0.4). The difference from the placebo group in the mean change (95% confidence interval [CI]) was -1.7 days (-2.54, -0.80) for the fremanezumab monthly group and -1.7 days (-2.55, -0.82) for the fremanezumab quarterly group (p < 0.001 vs. placebo for both fremanezumab groups). The percentage of patients with a ≥50% reduction in the average number of headache days of at least moderate severity per month (response rate) was higher with fremanezumab monthly (29.0%) and fremanezumab quarterly (29.1%) than with placebo (13.2%) in addition to other improvements in secondary endpoints, including reduction of acute medication use (mean change from baseline during 12-week period ± SE: fremanezumab monthly, -3.7 ± 0.4; fremanezumab quarterly, -3.9 ± 0.4; placebo, -2.4 ± 0.4) and improvements in disability scores (mean change from baseline in six-item Headache Impact Test score at 4 weeks after third injection ± SE: fremanezumab monthly, -8.1 ± 0.7; fremanezumab quarterly, -8.0 ± 0.7; placebo, -6.5 ± 0.7). Fremanezumab was well tolerated with a similar incidence of adverse events including injection-site reactions as placebo (patients with at least one treatment-emergent adverse event: fremanezumab total, n = 232 [61.4%]; placebo, n = 118 [61.8%]).

CONCLUSION

Fremanezumab effectively prevents CM in Japanese and Korean patients and was well tolerated. No safety signal was detected.

Acute Treatment of Migraine: What has Changed in Pharmacotherapies?

Background

Migraine is the most prevalent neurological disorder and the leading cause of disability in individuals under 50 years of age. Two types of migraine therapies have been defined: acute therapy (abortive or symptomatic treatment), the purpose of which is to interrupt migraine attacks, and preventive treatment (prophylactic treatment), the purpose of which is to reduce the frequency and severity of migraine attacks.

Objective

This paper reviews research advances in new agents for acute therapy of migraine.

Material and Methods

This review provides an overview of emerging new drugs for acute treatment of migraine based on clinical evidence and summarizes the milestones of different stages of clinical development.

Results

Two new formulations of sumatriptan, DFN-11 (3 mg doses of subcutaneous sumatriptan) and DFN-02 (a nasal spray of sumatriptan 10 mg and a permeation-enhancing excipient), have been developed, and both of them showed a fast-onset action with efficacy for acute treatment of migraine with fewer adverse events. New drug discovery programs shifted the focus to the development of ditans, a group of antimigraine drugs targeting 5-HT_1F receptors. Only lasmiditan has progressed to phase III clinical trials and was finally approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for acute migraine treatment. The other target for acute therapy is CGRP receptor antagonists, namely, gepants. Ubrogepant and rimegepant demonstrated statistically significant efficacy, and both were recently approved by the FDA. These 5-HT_1F receptor agonists and CGRP receptor antagonists did not cause vasoconstriction, offering advantages over the current mainstay of specific acute migraine treatment.

Conclusions

Overall, these new agents have expanded the available acute therapies for migraine treatment and will likely change the strategy with which we treat patients with migraine in the future.

Long-Term Safety Evaluation of Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine: Phase 3, Randomized, 52-Week Extension Trial

Objective

To evaluate the long‐term safety and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine.

Background

Ubrogepant is an oral, calcitonin gene–related receptor antagonist in development for the acute treatment of migraine. The efficacy of ubrogepant was demonstrated in 2 phase 3 trials in which a significant improvement was observed in migraine headache pain, migraine‐associated symptoms, and ability to function.

Methods

This was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open‐label, 52‐week extension trial. Adults with migraine with or without aura entered the trial after completing one of 2 phase 3 lead‐in trials and were re‐randomized 1:1:1 to usual care, ubrogepant 50 mg, or ubrogepant 100 mg. Randomization to ubrogepant dose was blinded. Those randomized to usual care continued to treat migraine attacks with their own medication. The usual care arm was included in this trial to capture background rates of hepatic laboratory parameters and contextualize hepatic safety assessments. Safety and tolerability were the primary outcome measures. The safety population for the ubrogepant arms included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of treatment. All cases of alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevations of ≥3 times the upper limit of normal were adjudicated by an independent panel of liver experts who were blinded to dose.

Results

The safety population included 1230 participants (404 in the ubrogepant 50‐mg group, 409 in the ubrogepant 100‐mg group, and 417 in the usual care group). Participants were on average 42 years of age, 90% (1106/1230) female and 85% (1043/1230) white, with an average BMI of 30 kg/m². Throughout the trial, 21,454 migraine attacks were treated with 31,968 doses of ubrogepant. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 268/404 (66%) participants receiving ubrogepant 50 mg and 297/409 (73%) receiving ubrogepant 100 mg. The most commonly reported TEAE was upper respiratory tract infection (<12%); findings were similar across dose groups. Treatment‐related TEAEs were reported by 42/404 (10%) participants in the ubrogepant 50‐mg group and 43/409 (11%) in the ubrogepant 100‐mg group. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported by 9/404 (2%) participants in the ubrogepant 50‐mg group and 12/409 (3%) participants in the ubrogepant 100‐mg group. Twenty cases of ALT/AST levels of ≥3 times the upper limit of normal were reported and reviewed by an independent clinical adjudication committee of liver experts. There were no cases of Hy’s Law.

Conclusions

Long‐term intermittent use of ubrogepant 50 and 100 mg given as 1 or 2 doses per attack for the acute treatment of migraine was safe and well tolerated, as indicated by a low incidence of treatment‐related TEAEs and SAEs and discontinuations due to adverse events in this 1‐year trial.

A Single Supratherapeutic Dose of Atogepant Does Not Affect Cardiac Repolarization in Healthy Adults: Results From a Randomized, Single-Dose, Phase 1 Crossover Trial

Atogepant is a selective, oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist in development for preventive treatment of migraine. This randomized, double‐blind, phase 1 crossover study evaluated the cardiac repolarization effect of a single supratherapeutic (300 mg) atogepant dose vs placebo in healthy adults. Moxifloxacin 400 mg was the open‐label active control. The primary end point was a change from baseline in Fridericia‐corrected QT intervals (ΔQTcF). Sixty participants were randomized to atogepant 300 mg, placebo, and moxifloxacin; 59 (98.3%) completed all interventions. Assay sensitivity was confirmed: lower 90% confidence interval limit for QTcF interval change from baseline (ΔΔQTcF) for moxifloxacin was >5 millisecond vs placebo at prespecified 2‐, 3‐, and 4‐hour time points. Following single‐dose atogepant 300 mg, mean atogepant ΔΔQTcF and upper 90% confidence interval limits were lower than the 10‐millisecond threshold at all time points. Atogepant mean peak plasma concentration was 3197 ng/mL, area under the concentration‐time curve from time 0 to time t was 16 640 ng • h/mL, area under the concentration‐time curve from time 0 to 24 hours was 16 607 ng • h/mL, and median time to peak plasma concentration was 2.1 hours. The incidence of adverse events was low; no serious adverse events or elevations of liver enzymes were reported. Overall, a single supratherapeutic dose of atogepant was safe and did not impact cardiac repolarization in healthy participants.

Safety and efficacy of ubrogepant in participants with major cardiovascular risk factors in two single-attack phase 3 randomized trials: ACHIEVE I and II

OBJECTIVE

To examine the safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for acute treatment of migraine across cardiovascular (CV) disease risk categories.

METHODS

ACHIEVE I and II were multicenter, double-blind, single-attack, phase 3 trials in adults with migraine, with or without aura. Participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant (50 or 100 mg in ACHIEVE I; 25 or 50 mg in ACHIEVE II), to treat one migraine attack of moderate or severe headache pain intensity. This post-hoc analysis pooled data from ubrogepant 50 mg and placebo groups from the ACHIEVE trials to examine the safety and efficacy of ubrogepant by baseline cardiovascular disease risk factors. Using a cardiovascular risk assessment algorithm, participants were categorized as having no cardiovascular risk, low cardiovascular risk or moderate-high cardiovascular risk at baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events were documented 48 h and 30 days after taking the trial medication. Co-primary efficacy outcomes were 2-h pain freedom and 2-h absence of most bothersome migraine-associated symptom.

RESULTS

Overall, 3358 participants were randomized in the ACHIEVE trials (n = 2901 safety population; n = 2682 modified intent-to-treat population). In the safety population, 11% of participants were categorized as moderate-high (n = 311), 32% low (n = 920), and 58% no cardiovascular risk factors (n = 1670). The proportion of ubrogepant participants reporting a treatment-emergent adverse event was comparable across risk categories and similar to placebo. The treatment effects of ubrogepant versus placebo were consistent across cardiovascular risk categories for all efficacy outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of a single migraine attack did not differ by the presence of major cardiovascular risk factors. No evidence of increased treatment-emergent adverse events or cardiac system organ class adverse events with ≥2 major cardiovascular risk factors and no safety concerns were identified.Trial Registration: ACHIEVE I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02828020; ACHIEVE II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02867709.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of ubrogepant when coadministered with calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted monoclonal antibody migraine preventives in participants with migraine: A randomized phase 1b drug-drug interaction study

Objective

To evaluate the impact of two calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP)‐targeted monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), erenumab and galcanezumab, on the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant.

Background

People taking CGRP‐targeted mAbs for migraine prevention sometimes take ubrogepant, an oral small‐molecule CGRP receptor antagonist, for acute treatment of breakthrough migraine attacks.

Design

In this two‐arm, multicenter, open‐label, phase 1b trial, adults with migraine were randomized to arm 1 (ubrogepant ± erenumab) or arm 2 (ubrogepant ± galcanezumab). The PK profile of ubrogepant was characterized for administration before and 4 days after CGRP‐targeted mAb injection. Participants received single‐dose ubrogepant 100 mg on day 1, subcutaneous erenumab 140 mg (arm 1) or galcanezumab 240 mg (arm 2) on day 8, and ubrogepant 100 mg once daily on days 12–15. In each study arm, serial blood samples were drawn on days 1 and 12 for measurement of plasma ubrogepant concentrations. The primary outcomes were area under the plasma ubrogepant concentration–time curve (AUC) from time 0 to t post‐dose (AUC_0–t) and from time 0 to infinity (AUC_0–inf), and maximum plasma concentration (C_max) of ubrogepant when ubrogepant was administered before or after a single dose of erenumab or galcanezumab. Vital signs and laboratory parameters were monitored.

Results

Forty participants enrolled (20 per arm; mean [standard deviation] ages, 32.2 [8.9] and 38.4 [8.8] years; 50% [10/20] and 60% [12/20] female in arms 1 and 2, respectively). There were no significant differences in ubrogepant C_max after versus before erenumab administration (geometric least‐squares mean [LSM] ratio, 1.04 [90% CI, 0.93–1.16]), and no significant differences in AUC_0–t (1.06 [0.96–1.16]) or AUC_0–inf (1.05 [0.96–1.15]). Similarly, ubrogepant C_max (1.00 [90% CI, 0.82–1.20]), AUC_0–t (1.05 [0.90–1.23]), and AUC_0–inf (1.05 [0.90–1.22]) geometric LSM ratios were statistically equivalent after galcanezumab versus ubrogepant alone. Treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar to those reported with each treatment alone. No serious TEAEs, TEAEs leading to discontinuation, or clinically relevant changes in laboratory parameters or vital signs were reported.

Conclusions

The PK profile of ubrogepant was not significantly changed and no safety concerns were identified when ubrogepant was coadministered with erenumab or galcanezumab.

Synthetic Approaches to the New Drugs Approved during 2019

New drugs introduced to the market are privileged structures having affinities for biological targets implicated in human diseases and conditions. These new chemical entities (NCEs), particularly small molecules and antibody-drug conjugates, provide insight into molecular recognition and simultaneously function as leads for the design of future medicines. This review is part of a continuing series presenting the most likely process-scale synthetic approaches to 40 NCEs approved for the first time anywhere in the world in 2019.

Characterization and preclinical evaluation of a protease activated receptor 2 (PAR2) monoclonal antibody as a preventive therapy for migraine

AIM

Migraine pain is thought to result from activation of meningeal nociceptors that might involve dural mast cell degranulation and release of proteases and pronociceptive mediators. Tryptase, the most abundant dural mast cell protease, has been demonstrated to stimulate dural mast cells, as well as trigeminal nociceptors by activating the protease activated receptor 2. Mast cell or neuronal protease activated receptors 2 may therefore represent a novel target for migraine treatment. In this study, we characterized and evaluated a novel protease activated receptor 2 monoclonal antibody as a preventive anti-migraine pain therapy in preclinical models.

METHODS

Flow cytometry, immunocytochemistry, calcium imaging, Homogeneous Time Resolved Technology (HTRF) epitope competition assay and serum pharmacokinetic (PK) assay in rats were performed to confirm the activity, specificity and in vivo stability of PAR650097, a novel anti- protease activated receptor 2 monoclonal antibody. In vivo assessment was performed in female C57BL/6J mice by evaluation of PAR650097 in preventing cutaneous allodynia elicited by (a) supradural injection of the protease activated receptor 2 agonist, Ser-Leu-Ile-Gly-Arg-Leu-amide trifluoroacetate (SLIGRL), or calcitonin gene-related (CGRP) peptide, and (b) induction of latent sensitization by priming with three daily episodes of restraint stress followed by challenge with a subthreshold inhalational exposure to umbellulone (UMB), a transient receptor potential ankyrin 1 (TRPA1) agonist. PAR650097 was administered as a pretreatment prior to the first restraint stress, umbellulone exposure, SLIGRL or calcitonin gene-related peptide injection. Additionally, fremanezumab, a calcitonin gene-related peptide antibody was administered as pre-treatment prior to supradural administration of calcitonin gene-related peptide or SLIGRL.

RESULTS

In vitro, PAR650097 demonstrated rapid interaction with protease activated receptor 2, enabling it to fully inhibit protease-induced protease activated receptor 2 activation, in human and mouse cells, with high potency. Furthermore, PAR650097 was highly selective for protease activated receptor 2, demonstrating no affinity for protease activated receptor 1 protein and no functional effect on the activation of cellular protease activated receptor 1 with thrombin. In addition, PAR650097 had an acceptable PK profile, compatible with testing the effects of selective protease activated receptor 2 inhibition in vivo. In vivo, PAR650097 blocked cutaneous allodynia induced by either supradural SLIGRL or calcitonin gene-related peptide. Fremanezumab abolished cutaneous allodynia induced by supradural CGRP, and partially attenuated cutaneous allodynia induced by SLIGRL. Administration of PAR650097, before the first restraint stress episode, did not prevent the acute stress-induced cutaneous allodynia or restraint stress priming revealed by cutaneous allodynia induced by inhalational umbellulone. In contrast, PAR650097 prevented expression of cutaneous allodynia when given before the umbellulone challenge in restraint stress-primed animals.

CONCLUSION

PAR650097 specifically inhibits endogenously expressed protease activated receptor 2 in human and mouse cells with high potency. This antibody has an acceptable PK profile in rodents and effectively blocked SLIGR-induced cutaneous allodynia. PAR650097 additionally prevented cutaneous allodynia induced by supradural calcitonin gene-related peptide, indicating that the protease activated receptor 2 receptor is a downstream consequence of calcitonin gene-related peptide actions. Fremanezumab effectively blocked calcitonin gene-related peptide-induced cutaneous allodynia and only partially reduced cutaneous allodynia induced by a protease activated receptor 2 activator, suggesting both calcitonin gene-related peptide-dependent and -independent mechanisms in promoting migraine pain. While PAR650097 did not prevent stress-induced cutaneous allodynia or priming, it effectively prevented cutaneous allodynia induced by a TRPA1 agonist in animals with latent sensitization. Activation of protease activated receptor 2, therefore, contributes to both calcitonin gene-related peptide-dependent and -independent mechanisms in promoting migraine-like pain. Therapeutic targeting of protease activated receptor 2 receptors may represent an anti-migraine pain strategy with a potentially broad efficacy profile.

ICER's assessment of lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant for acute migraine

DISCLOSURES: No funding supported the writing of this commentary. The authors have nothing to disclose.

Rimegepant Orally Disintegrating Tablet for Acute Migraine Treatment: A Review

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety, and place in therapy of rimegepant for treatment of migraine.

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive PubMed and Cochrane search (1985 to May 2020) was performed utilizing the keywords rimegepant, Nurtec, orally disintegrating tablet, migraine, migraine headache, migraine disorder, calcitonin gene-related peptide, and calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist. Additional data were obtained from the references of identified articles, manufacturer's product labeling and website, ClinicalTrials.gov, and governmental sources.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All English-language trials evaluating oral rimegepant were included for this review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) is Food and Drug Administration approved for the treatment of migraine. According to data from 3 phase 3 randomized controlled trials, rimegepant has been shown to significantly improve freedom from pain at 2 hours after the dose and freedom from the most bothersome symptom 2 hours postdose. Additional outcomes improved include freedom from photophobia and phonophobia at 2 hours postdose and pain relief 2 hours after the dose. Adverse effects of rimegepant include nausea, urinary tract infection, and dizziness.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

Orally disintegrating rimegepant provides a novel mechanism of action for the treatment of acute migraine. When patients experience inadequate relief from other therapies, have contraindications to triptans, or are unable to tolerate the adverse effects of triptans, rimegepant is a promising therapeutic option.

CONCLUSION

Rimegepant ODT is an efficacious migraine treatment option with a novel mechanism of action, convenient dosage form, and limited adverse effect profile.

Novel Analgesics with Peripheral Targets

A limited number of peripheral targets generate pain. Inflammatory mediators can sensitize these. The review addresses targets acting exclusively or predominantly on sensory neurons, mediators involved in inflammation targeting sensory neurons, and mediators involved in a more general inflammatory process, of which an analgesic effect secondary to an anti-inflammatory effect can be expected. Different approaches to address these systems are discussed, including scavenging proinflammatory mediators, applying anti-inflammatory mediators, and inhibiting proinflammatory or facilitating anti-inflammatory receptors. New approaches are contrasted to established ones; the current stage of progress is mentioned, in particular considering whether there is data from a molecular and cellular level, from animals, or from human trials, including an early stage after a market release. An overview of publication activity is presented, considering a IuPhar/BPS-curated list of targets with restriction to pain-related publications, which was also used to identify topics.

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetic Interaction of Ubrogepant Coadministered With Sumatriptan and of the Safety of Ubrogepant With Triptans

Objective

To evaluate the potential for pharmacokinetic interaction and the safety and tolerability when ubrogepant and sumatriptan are coadministered in a Phase 1 study in healthy participants, and to inform the safety and tolerability of ubrogepant alone and in combination with triptans in Phase 3 trials in participants with migraine.

Background

Calcitonin gene–related peptide is a potent vasodilatory neurotransmitter believed to play a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Ubrogepant (UBRELVY™) is a potent and selective antagonist of the human calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor approved for the acute treatment of migraine. Sumatriptan is a serotonin receptor agonist and the most commonly used triptan for the acute treatment of migraine. Ubrogepant could be prescribed with triptans.

Design

The Phase 1 study was a single‐center, open‐label, randomized, 3‐way crossover, single‐dose, pharmacokinetic interaction study, where participants received each of 3 oral treatments with a 7‐day washout period between treatments: single dose of ubrogepant 100 mg, single dose of sumatriptan 100 mg, and ubrogepant 100 mg plus sumatriptan 100 mg. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using a model‐independent approach. The ACHIEVE I and II trials were 2 multicenter, single‐attack, randomized, Phase 3 trials in adults with a history of migraine with or without aura. Participants had the option to take a second dose of study medication or rescue medication to treat a nonresponding migraine or a migraine recurrence from 2 to 48 hours after the initial dose of study medication. Rescue medication options included acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs, opioids, anti‐emetics, or triptans. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were evaluated up to 30 days after the last dose in the Phase 1 and Phase 3 studies.

Results

Ubrogepant median time to maximum plasma concentration was delayed (3 hours [range: 1‐5 hours] vs 1.5 hours [range: 1‐4 hours]), mean maximum plasma concentration was reduced by 24% (coefficient of variation: 37.4%) when ubrogepant was coadministered with sumatriptan (n = 29) compared with ubrogepant administered alone (N = 30). No significant effect was observed on the area under the plasma concentration‐time curve of ubrogepant. Sumatriptan area under the curve and maximum plasma concentration showed no significant change when sumatriptan was coadministered with ubrogepant (n = 29), but the sumatriptan time to maximum plasma concentration was delayed (1 hour [range: 0.5‐5 hours] vs 3 hours [range: 0.5‐6 hours]. No treatment‐emergent adverse events were reported with the coadministration of ubrogepant 100 mg and sumatriptan 100 mg in the Phase 1 study. The pooled safety data from ACHIEVE trials (N = 1938) showed similar rates of treatment‐related treatment‐emergent adverse events between participants who took ubrogepant alone and participants who took ubrogepant and a triptan as a rescue medication (14.9% [53/355] vs 12.8% [5/39] in the ubrogepant 100 mg treatment group, respectively).

Conclusions

Although there were slight alterations in ubrogepant pharmacokinetic parameters when coadministered with sumatriptan, such changes are expected to have minimal clinical relevance, especially because no changes were seen in sumatriptan area under the curve and maximum plasma concentration when coadministered with ubrogepant. Coadministration of ubrogepant with sumatriptan was well tolerated in healthy participants in the Phase 1 study, and coadministration of ubrogepant with triptans was well tolerated in participants with migraine in the Phase 3 trials. No new safety concerns for ubrogepant were identified across all trials.

Atogepant Has No Clinically Relevant Effects on the Pharmacokinetics of an Ethinyl Estradiol/Levonorgestrel Oral Contraceptive in Healthy Female Participants

The incidence of migraine is higher among women than men and peaks during the reproductive years, when contraceptive medication use is common. Atogepant, a potent, selective antagonist of the calcitonin gene‒related peptide receptor—in development for migraine prevention—is thus likely to be used by women taking oral contraceptives. This phase 1, open‐label, single‐center, 2‐period, fixed‐sequence study examined the effect of multiple‐dose atogepant 60 mg once daily on the single‐dose pharmacokinetics of a combination oral contraceptive, ethinyl estradiol 0.03 mg and levonorgestrel 0.15 mg (EE/LNG), in healthy postmenopausal or oophorectomized women. For participants in period 1, a single dose of EE/LNG was followed by a 7‐day washout. In period 2, atogepant was given once daily on days 1‐17; an oral dose of EE/LNG was coadministered with atogepant on day 14. Plasma pharmacokinetic parameters for EE and LNG were assessed following administration with and without atogepant. Twenty‐six participants aged 45‐64 years enrolled; 22 completed the study in accordance with the protocol. The area under the concentration‐time curve extrapolated to infinity (AUC_0‐∞) of LNG was increased by 19% when administered with atogepant. Coadministration of atogepant and a single dose of EE/LNG did not substantially alter the pharmacokinetics of EE; the ∼19% increase in plasma AUC_0‐∞ of LNG is not anticipated to be clinically significant. Overall, atogepant alone and in combination with EE/LNG was generally well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified.

The effect of multiple doses of ubrogepant on the pharmacokinetics of an oral contraceptive in healthy women: Results of an open-label, single-center, two-period, fixed-sequence study

Background:

Ubrogepant is a novel, oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist for acute treatment of migraine. This study evaluated potential drug–drug interactions between ubrogepant and an oral contraceptive containing ethinyl estradiol (EE) and norgestimate (NGM).

Methods:

This open-label, single-center, two-period, fixed-sequence study enrolled healthy, postmenopausal or oophorectomized, adult women. In period 1, participants received a single oral dose of EE 0.035 mg/NGM 0.25 mg (EE-NGM) followed by a 7-day washout. In period 2, participants received oral ubrogepant 50 mg daily on days 1–14; single-dose EE-NGM was coadministered with ubrogepant on day 10. Pharmacokinetic parameters for plasma EE and norelgestromin (NGMN) were compared with and without ubrogepant.

Results:

Twenty-two participants aged 46–66 years were enrolled; 21 completed the study. Geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals for the comparison of EE-NGM + ubrogepant to EE-NGM alone were contained within 0.80 and 1.25 for area under the plasma drug concentration–time curve (AUC) from time zero to infinity (AUC0–∞; 0.96 [0.91, 1.01]) and C max (0.91 [0.82, 1.004]) of NGMN and AUC0–∞ (0.97 [0.93, 1.01]) of EE, but not C max of EE (0.74 [0.69, 0.79]). Median t max of EE was delayed following EE-NGM + ubrogepant (3.0 h) versus EE-NGM alone (median of 1.5 h), whereas median t max of NGMN was unchanged (1.5 h). Geometric mean apparent terminal half-life ( t ½) was similar with and without ubrogepant for EE (23 vs. 21 h) and NGMN (36 h both conditions). All ubrogepant-related adverse events were mild or moderate.

Conclusion:

Ubrogepant did not demonstrate potential for clinically meaningful drug–drug interactions with an EE-NGM oral contraceptive.

Trial registration:

Not applicable (phase 1 trial)

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Antagonists for the Prevention of Migraine: Highlights From Pivotal Studies and the Clinical Relevance of This New Drug Class

Objective: To review the new drug class of calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists (monoclonal antibodies) and their clinical relevance in migraine prophylaxis. Data Sources: A literature search was performed in PubMed (January 2009 to November 2019) using the terms migraine, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab for clinical trials and studies. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Reports from human studies in English were evaluated for clinical evidence supporting pharmacology, efficacy, and adverse events. Initial pharmacokinetic and preclinical studies were excluded. Data Synthesis: In chronic and episodic migraine, prophylaxis with injections of monoclonal antibodies antagonizing CGRP reduced monthly migraine days with minimal clinically significant adverse events. In addition, there is evidence supporting efficacy in refractory migraine despite optimal prophylaxis. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This is the first target-specific migraine prophylaxis treatment to show efficacy with minimal adverse effects. A higher drug cost is a barrier but is balanced by improved quality of life. Current therapies have limited efficacy and tolerability because of poor side effect profiles. CGRP antagonists represent a shift to more precise migraine treatments. Conclusions: Monoclonal antibodies inhibiting CGRP are effective in migraine prophylaxis with minimal adverse effects. Targeting CGRP is a novel clinical strategy in managing migraine.

Ubrogepant for the treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a neurovascular disorder involving neurogenic inflammation and transmission of trigeminovascular nociceptive pathways mediated by Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP). Several small molecules antagonizing the CGRP receptor have been developed as migraine-specific acute medications. The CGRP receptor antagonist ubrogepant, also known as MK-1602, has been recently evaluated in phase III clinical trials for clinical efficacy and long-term safety as an abortive migraine treatment.

AREAS COVERED

This paper discusses the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability profile of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura.

EXPERT OPINION

Ubrogepant, a selective CGRP antagonist belonging to the gepants family, has been evaluated in large short- and long-term Phases 2 and 3 clinical trials aimed to assess clinical efficacy and safety as acute migraine medication. It did not significantly affect liver function and was not associated with other serious adverse events. Long-term non-serious adverse events were similar between placebo and ubrogepant. The efficacy was evaluated in large placebo-controlled studies and ubrogepant 50 mg and 100 mg was superior, even if the therapeutic gain seems to be low. Nevertheless, the favorable safety profile compared to other abortive drugs makes ubrogepant a promising option for the acute treatment of migraine.

Ubrogepant: First Approval

Ubrogepant (Ubrelvy™) is an orally administered, small molecule, highly-selective, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist that was developed by Allergan under license to Merck & Co. as an acute treatment for migraine. In December 2019, ubrogepant received its first global approval in the USA for the acute treatment of migraine (± aura) in adults. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of ubrogepant leading to its first global approval for the acute treatment of migraine (± aura) in adults.

The future of pharmacogenetics in the treatment of migraine

Migraine is considered one of the most disabling neurological disorder with a high socioeconomic burden. Pharmacological management includes many classes of drugs which in the most cases, are administrated in polytherapy. The therapeutic scheme of migraineurs is often affected by comorbidities which need concomitant medications, thus increasing the risk of side effects related to drug-drug interactions. Pharmacogenetics is a promising tool to achieve a personalized cure based on individual genetic profile while the availability of free online knowledge bases allows to check the potential DDIs of selected medications. Combining, these approaches may offer to clinicians a useful tool to improve the appropriateness of migraine polytherapy choice, aiming to increase the efficacy and reduce the toxicity of pharmacological treatments.

Novel Medications for the Treatment of Migraine

OBJECTIVE

To describe the new classes of medication for headache management and their roles in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a key component in the underlying pathophysiology of migraine. Research focused on targeting CGRP for headache treatment has led to the development of entirely new classes of medications - the gepants and the CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) - for both acute and preventive treatment. A third class, the ditans, is being developed to target the 5-HT1F receptor to provide acute treatment without vasoconstrictive effects.

METHODS

This article reviews the pathophysiology of migraine that has led to these new pharmacologic developments. Available information from randomized controlled trials, abstracts, press releases, and relevant preclinical studies is summarized for each class of medications.

RESULTS

At the time of this writing, one ditan has been submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval. One gepant is anticipated to be submitted within the first quarter of 2019, and others are in clinical trials. Three CGRP mAbs have been FDA approved and are now available in clinical practice, and a fourth was submitted in the first quarter of 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of new migraine-specific classes of medications provides more treatment options for both acute and preventive treatment of migraine.

CGRP-dependent and independent mechanisms of acute and persistent post-traumatic headache following mild traumatic brain injury in mice

Background

Acute and persistent post-traumatic headache are often debilitating consequences of traumatic brain injury. Underlying physiological mechanisms of post-traumatic headache and its persistence remain unknown, and there are currently no approved therapies for these conditions. Post-traumatic headache often presents with a migraine-like phenotype. As calcitonin-gene related peptide promotes migraine headache, we explored the efficacy and timing of intervention with an anti- calcitonin-gene related peptide monoclonal antibody in novel preclinical models of acute post-traumatic headache and persistent post-traumatic headache following a mild traumatic brain injury event in mice.

Methods

Male, C57Bl/6 J mice received a sham procedure or mild traumatic brain injury resulting from a weight drop that allowed free head rotation while under minimal anesthesia. Periorbital and hindpaw tactile stimulation were used to assess mild traumatic brain injury-induced cutaneous allodynia. Two weeks after the injury, mice were challenged with stress, a common aggravator of migraine and post-traumatic headache, by exposure to bright lights (i.e. bright light stress) and cutaneous allodynia was measured hourly for 5 hours. A murine anti- calcitonin-gene related peptide monoclonal antibody was administered after mild traumatic brain injury at different time points to allow evaluation of the consequences of either early and sustained calcitonin-gene related peptide sequestration or late administration only prior to bright light stress.

Results

Mice with mild traumatic brain injury, but not a sham procedure, exhibited both periorbital and hindpaw cutaneous allodynia that resolved by post-injury day 13. Following resolution of injury-induced cutaneous allodynia, exposure to bright light stress re-instated periorbital and hindpaw cutaneous allodynia in injured, but not sham mice. Repeated administration of anti-calcitonin-gene related peptide monoclonal antibody at 2 hours, 7 and 14 days post mild traumatic brain injury significantly attenuated the expression of cutaneous allodynia when evaluated over the 14-day post injury time course and also prevented bright light stress-induced cutaneous allodynia in injured mice. Administration of anti-calcitonin-gene related peptide monoclonal antibody only at 2 hours and 7 days after mild traumatic brain injury blocked injury-induced cutaneous allodynia and partially prevented bright light stress-induced cutaneous allodynia. A single administration of anti-calcitonin-gene related peptide monoclonal antibody after the resolution of the peak injury-induced cutaneous allodynia, but prior to bright light stress challenge, did not prevent bright light stress-induced cutaneous allodynia.

Conclusions

We used a clinically relevant mild traumatic brain injury event in mice along with a provocative stimulus as novel models of acute post-traumatic headache and persistent post-traumatic headache. Following mild traumatic brain injury, mice demonstrated transient periorbital and hindpaw cutaneous allodynia suggestive of post-traumatic headache-related pain and establishment of central sensitization. Following resolution of injury-induced cutaneous allodynia, exposure to bright light stress re-established cutaneous allodynia, suggestive of persistent post-traumatic headache-related pain. Continuous early sequestration of calcitonin-gene related peptide prevented both acute post-traumatic headache and persistent post-traumatic headache. In contrast, delayed anti-calcitonin-gene related peptide monoclonal antibody treatment following establishment of central sensitization was ineffective in preventing persistent post-traumatic headache. These observations suggest that mechanisms involving calcitonin-gene related peptide underlie the expression of acute post-traumatic headache, and drive the development of central sensitization, increasing vulnerability to headache triggers and promoting persistent post-traumatic headache. Early and continuous calcitonin-gene related peptide blockade following mild traumatic brain injury may represent a viable treatment option for post-traumatic headache and for the prevention of post-traumatic headache persistence.

Abbreviations

CA Cutaneous allodynia CGRP Calcitonin gene-related peptide mTBI Mild traumatic brain injury PTH Post-traumatic headache APTH Acute post-traumatic headache PPTH Persistent post-traumatic headache

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet for the acute treatment of migraine: a randomised, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant, a small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, has shown efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine using a standard tablet formulation. The objective of this trial was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel orally disintegrating tablet formulation of rimegepant at 75 mg with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with history of migraine of at least 1 year were recruited to 69 study centres in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned to receive rimegepant (75 mg orally disintegrating tablet) or placebo and instructed to treat a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. The randomisation was stratified by the use of prophylactic medication (yes or no), and was carried out using an interactive web response system that was accessed by each clinical site. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment group assignment. The coprimary endpoints were freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 h postdose. The efficacy analyses used the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who were randomly assigned, had a migraine attack with pain of moderate or severe intensity, took a dose of rimegepant or placebo, and had at least one efficacy assessment after administration of the dose. The safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03461757, and is closed to accrual.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 27 and Aug 28, 2018, 1811 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility. 1466 participants were randomly assigned to the rimegepant (n=732) or placebo (n=734) groups, of whom 1375 received treatment with rimegepant (n=682) or placebo (n=693), and 1351 were evaluated for efficacy (rimegepant n=669, placebo n=682). At 2 h postdose, rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet was superior to placebo for freedom from pain (21% vs 11%, p<0·0001; risk difference 10, 95% CI 6-14) and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (35% vs 27%, p=0·0009; risk difference 8, 95% CI 3-13). The most common adverse events were nausea (rimegepant n=11 [2%]; placebo n=3 [<1%]) and urinary tract infection (rimegepant n=10 [1%]; placebo n=4 [1%]). One participant in each treatment group had a transaminase concentration of more than 3 × the upper limit of normal; neither was related to study medication, and no elevations in bilirubin greater than 2 × the upper limit of normal were reported. Treated participants reported no serious adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

In the acute treatment of migraine, a single 75 mg dose of rimegepant in an orally disintegrating tablet formulation was more effective than placebo. Tolerability was similar to placebo, with no safety concerns.

FUNDING

Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Pathological Mechanisms and Therapeutic Targets for Trigeminal Neuropathic Pain

Trigeminal neuropathic pain is a chronic pain condition caused by damage or inflammation of the trigeminal nerve or its branches, with both peripheral and central nervous system dysfunction contributing to the disorder. Trigeminal pain conditions present with diagnostic and therapeutic challenges to healthcare providers and often require multiple therapeutic approaches for pain reduction. This review will provide the overview of pathophysiology in peripheral and central nociceptive circuits that are involved in neuropathic pain conditions involving the trigeminal nerve and the current therapeutics that are used to treat these disorders. Recent advances in treatment of trigeminal pain, including novel therapeutics that target ion channels and receptors, gene therapy and monoclonal antibodies that have shown great promise in preclinical studies and clinical trials will also be described.

Treatment patterns in patients using triptan and prophylactic medication: an analysis of clinical practice prior to the introduction of CGRP antagonists

Purpose

The newly developed calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists were recently launched on the US and European market, with Switzerland as the second country worldwide. To enable forthcoming comparisons with established migraine therapy, the aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive picture of migraine (prophylactic) treatment patterns. Recent data in daily clinical practice are lacking.

Patients and methods

This population-based cohort study included enrollees from a Swiss Healthcare Insurance Database with at least one triptan prescription in 2015. Treatment patterns were defined by assessing subsequent triptan and prophylactic medication use (after index prescription for triptan) within the following year, divided into four quarters.

Results

Triptans were used by 10,090 patients (1.3%) in 2015. Most of them used triptan only (82.6%), 12.9% changed the treatment between triptan and prophylactics, and 4.5% received both in combination within 1year. Among triptan users with ≥1 prophylactic prescription in the first quarter, 48.6% used beta-blockers (BB), 40.7% “other prophylactics than BB (eg, topiramate)”, and 10.7% “a combination of both”. Most patients who received both BB and other prophylactics in the first quarter used this drug combination continuously over all four quarters.

Conclusion

This study provides comprehensive data on treatment patterns prior to the introduction of a new drug class in migraine therapy. The majority of triptan users had no prophylactic medication therapy; however, a small, but relevant group used BB and other prophylactics concurrently in all quarters. Findings quantify the population in potential need for optimized migraine therapy, ie, the potential target population of the novel CGRP-targeted drugs.

New Medications in the Treatment of Acute Migraine

Migraine is a common disorder affecting 12% of the US population. Use of triptans results in migraine pain relief within 2 hours in 16% to 51% of patients. However, due to their vasoconstrictive properties, triptans are contraindicated in patients with cardiovascular disease, peripheral vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, and uncontrolled hypertension because of the potential for ischemia. This article will review 2 new classes of drugs being developed for the treatment of acute migraine without vasoconstrictive effects.

Getting to the Heart of the Matter: Migraine, Triptans, DHE, Ditans, CGRP Antibodies, First/Second-Generation Gepants, and Cardiovascular Risk

PREMISE

The science of migraine pathophysiology has advanced significantly since the 1930's. Imaging techniques, neurochemical analysis, clinical trials, and the clinical experience of providers treating migraine patients have not only sharpened our understanding of the disease, but have also led to the development of novel neural-based targets. Targeted therapies such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antibodies and "Second Generation" CGRP receptor antagonists (Gepants) have not only demonstrated efficacy, but have not resulted in any significant cardiovascular nor other serious adverse events. "First Generation" Gepants were associated with liver toxicity.

PROBLEM

Triptans and dihydroergotamine (DHE) are contraindicated in patients with hemiplegic and basilar migraine based on theories of migraine pathophysiology from the 1930s. While our understanding of migraine has evolved substantially, perceived concerns of safety from almost a century ago continue to preclude their use in certain patient populations.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION

While migraine aura was once thought to be primarily due to vasoconstriction, current evidence debunks this concept. For instance, hemiplegic migraine is the consequence of genetic mutations resulting in channelopathies without evidence of cerebral ischemia or infarction. Evidence of basilar artery constriction as postulated in basilar migraine is also lacking. This recognition has led the International Headache Society to rename basilar-type migraine to migraine with brainstem aura. The following discussion reviews current literature with respect to migraine as a neuronal disorder, as well as the published data on the safety of triptans, DHE, Ditans (a novel class of 5-HT_1f receptor agonists), CGRP antibodies, and Gepants.

Network Meta-Analysis of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists for the Acute Treatment of Migraine

Background: Research has indicated that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists can be effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Six major drugs are included within this category: telcagepant, olcegepant, BI 44370, rimegepant (BMS-927711), MK3207, and ubrogepant. However, no previous studies have performed network meta-analyses to directly compare the effects of these drugs. In the present study, we assessed the therapeutic qualities of these six different drugs to inform further clinical research. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through to October 2018. Two reviewers performed a network meta-analysis of efficacy and toxicity on the basis of odds ratios (ORs). Results: Ten randomized controlled trials involving 8,174 patients were included in our analysis. Olcegepant (OR: 4.09; CI: 1.81, 9.25), ubrogepant (OR: 2.11; CI: 1.10, 4.05), and BI 44370 (OR: 3.36; CI: 2.24, 5.04) were more effective in ensuring pain relief 2 h after treatment than was placebo treatment. BI 44370 was associated with an increased risk of adverse events when compared with placebo treatment (OR: 1.57; CI: 1.32, 1.88). Surface under the cumulative ranking curve analysis revealed that olcegepant was most effective and ubrogepant was associated with the lowest risk of adverse events among the six treatment options. Conclusion: Olcegepant was more effective, and ubrogepant had lower toxicity than the remaining treatments. CGRP antagonists are promising for the acute treatment of migraine, especially among patients who are unable to take triptans.