Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Additional effect of erenumab for patients with chronic migraine treated with onabotulinumtoxin A-real-world data from a preliminary cohort study

Background

This preliminary retrospective cohort study investigates the potential additive prophylactic effect of erenumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, in combination with ongoing onabotulinumtoxin A (onaBoNT-A) treatment in patients suffering from chronic migraine.

Methods

The study included 218 patients and investigated the effects of adding erenumab to the existing treatment regimen. The primary outcome was the MIDAS (Migraine Disability Assessment) score assessed 3 months after the introduction of erenumab.

Results

The results indicated a significant improvement of the MIDAS score, suggesting a reduction in migraine-related disability following the addition of erenumab to onaBoNT-A. In the inter group comparison, dual therapy showed a significantly greater reduction of the MIDAS when compared to a switch from onaBoNT-A to erenumab monotherapy, but not compared to initiation of onaBoNT-A monotherapy. It is hypothesized that the observed additive effects are due to the independent modes of action of erenumab and onabotulinumtoxin A.

Conclusion

This study suggests that the combination of erenumab with onaBoNT-A may offer an improved approach for the treatment of chronic migraine in selected patients. However, the results highlight the need for prospective, controlled studies to validate these findings and determine the optimal combination of treatments tailored to the individual patient.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine: Focus on Drug Interactions

Calcitonin gene-related peptide neurotransmission was the target for recent development of monoclonal antibodies that effectively prevent attacks of both episodic and chronic migraine. The aim of this narrative review was to offer deeper insight into drug-drug, drug-food and drug-disease interactions of monoclonal antibodies approved for prevention of migraine attacks. For this narrative review, relevant literature was searched for in MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases, covering the 1966-2023 and 2006-2023 periods, respectively. The ClinicalTrials.gov database was also searched for relevant clinical studies whose results had not been published previously in medical journals, covering 2000-2023. Monoclonal antibodies (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab and eptinezumab) augment prophylactic action of gepants and onabotulinumtoxin A and somewhat increase efficacy of triptans used to abort migraine attacks; however, their adverse reactions may also be augmented. Pharmacokinetic interactions and interactions in general with drugs used for other indications except migraine are negligible, as are drug-food interactions. However, monoclonal antibodies may worsen diseases with already weakened CGRP neurotransmission, Raynaud phenomenon and constipation. Monoclonal antibodies used for prevention of migraine do not engage in significant pharmacokinetic interactions with other drugs; however, they do engage in pharmacodynamic interactions with other anti-migraine drugs, additively augmenting their prophylactic action, but also increasing frequency and severity of adverse reactions, which are a consequence of the CGRP neurotransmission interruption.

CGRP-targeted medication in chronic migraine - systematic review

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

Background

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

Objective

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

Data Sources

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

Study Selection and Data Extraction

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

Data Synthesis

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

Conclusions

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

Combination of anti-CGRP/CGRP-R mAbs with onabotulinumtoxin A as a novel therapeutic approach for refractory chronic migraine: a retrospective study of real-world clinical evidence and a protocol for a double-blind, randomized clinical trial to establish the efficacy and safety

Chronic migraine is a disabling neurovascular disorder that ranks amongst the top causes of years lived with disability worldwide. The duration and the frequency of migraine affect cognitive and affective domains, inducing worsening of memory, executive functions, orientation and causing anxiety. Population-based studies report a worrying level of resistance to treatments. Therefore, this study aims: 1) to assess efficacy of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed towards the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor (CGRP-R) for chronic migraine resistant to current preventatives; 2) to design a clinical trial protocol to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination therapy utilizing anti-CGRP/CGRP-R together with onabotulinumtoxin A in patients suffering from resistant chronic migraine; 3) to provide a molecular rationale for combination therapy. A controlled trial is warranted as pooled analysis of real-world data from our group highlighted that combined treatment provides ≥50% reduction vs. baseline (onabotulinumtoxin A) of monthly headache days (MHDs) in up to 58.8% of patients, but there has been only sparse application of this combined therapy to date. The mAbs chosen are: erenumab, because its combination effect with onabotulinumtoxin A improved symptoms in 65% of patients; eptinezumab, due to its faster action. The results highlight that early diagnosis of migraine improves therapeutic outcomes with mAbs alone, confirming their effectiveness and the need for an adequately powered clinical trial evaluating the safety and potential superior effectiveness of eptinezumab/erenumab and onabotulinumtoxin A together.

Onabotulinumtoxin-A: Previous Prophylactic Treatment Might Improve Subsequent Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies Response in Patients with Chronic Migraine

The aim of the present study was to evaluate whether previous preventive treatment with onabotulinumtoxin-A might influence subsequent clinical response following a switch to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). The present retrospective study was conducted at the Headache Centre-Neurology Clinic at the Spedali Civili Hospital of Brescia between November 2018 and May 2023. The primary objective was to assess clinical outcome (monthly headache days (MHDs), monthly migraine days (MMDs), mean analgesics consumption, and clinical disability according to Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS)) following three months (T3) of preventive treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs comparing patients who did and those who did not previously receive treatment with Onabotulinumtoxin-A. Moreover, we aimed to evaluate whether the clinical response to anti-CGRP mAbs was affected by the number of previous Onabotulinumtoxin-A administrations. At T3, compared to Onabotulinumtoxin-A naïve patients, patients who previously received Onabotulinumtoxin-A documented fewer MMDs (3.3 ± 3.7 versus 5.2 ± 5.0; p = 0.017) and a lower MIDAS score (23.2 ± 20.9 versus 37.4 ± 39.6; p = 0.013). Patients who received at least 3 onabotulinumtoxin-A administrations documented, at T3, lower MMDs compared to those who received fewer cycles (respectively, 2.1 ± 2.7 vs. 6.5 ± 4.4; p = 0.024). In conclusion, according to our data, previous treatment with onabotulinumtoxin-A might improve subsequent response to anti-CGRP mAbs preventive treatment.

Retreating migraine patients in the second year with monoclonal antibodies anti-CGRP pathway: the multicenter prospective cohort RE-DO study

BACKGROUND

The outcome of migraine patients retreated with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) or its receptor (anti-CGRPr) is not completely known.

METHODS

This multicentric prospective observational cohort study assessed monthly migraine days (MMDs), migraine acute medication intake (MAMI), and HIT-6 at baseline, after 90-112 days (Rev-1), after 84-90 days since Rev-1 (Rev-2) and 30 days after the last injection of anti-CGRP/CGRPr mAbs (Year-end), in the first and the second year after a discontinuation period.

RESULTS

We enrolled 226 patients (79.6% with chronic migraine; 55.3% on erenumab and 44.7% on galcanezumab or fremanezumab). MMDs, MAMI, and HIT-6-did not differ at the respective first and second-year evaluations in the entire cohort, and comparing anti-CGRP with anti-CGRPr Abs. MMDs (18.1 ± 7.8 vs. 3.4 ± 7.8), MAMI (26.7 ± 28.3 vs.17.7 ± 17.2), and HIT-6 scores (63.1 ± 5.9 vs. 67.1 ± 10.3) were lower in the second year than in the pre-treatment baseline (consistently, p < 0.0001). Second-year baseline MMDs were lower in patients on anti-CGRP mAbs (p = 0.001) and with lower pre-treatment baseline MMDs (p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Anti-CGRP/CGRPr mAbs are effective in the second as in the first year. The use of anti-CGRP or CGRPr mAbs influenced the second-year baseline MMDs, but their effectiveness did not differ during the two treatment years.

Multimodal Migraine Management and the Pursuit of Migraine Freedom: A Narrative Review

Migraine is a neurologic disease with a complex pathophysiology that can be controlled with current treatment options but not cured. Therefore, treatment expectations are highly variable. The concept of migraine freedom was recently introduced and can mean different things, with some, for example, expecting complete freedom from headache and associated symptoms and others accepting the occasional migraine attack if it does not impact functioning. Therefore, migraine management should be optimized so that patients can have the best opportunity to achieve their optimal treatment goals. With migraine freedom as a goal and, given the complex pathophysiology of migraine and the high incidence of comorbidities among individuals with migraine, treatment with a single modality may be insufficient, as it may not achieve migraine freedom in those with more frequent or disabling attacks. In this clinical perspective article, we have identified four key, partially overlapping principles of multimodal migraine treatment: (1) manage common comorbidities; (2) control modifiable risk factors for progression by addressing medication and caffeine overuse; (3) diagnose and treat secondary causes of headache, if present; and (4) individualize acute and preventive treatments to minimize pain, functional disability, and allodynia. There are many barriers to pursuing migraine freedom, and strategies to overcome them should be optimized. Migraine freedom should be an aspirational goal both at the individual attack level and for the disease overall. We believe that a comprehensive and multimodal approach that addresses all barriers people with migraine face could move patients closer to migraine freedom.

Towards precision medicine in migraine: Recent therapeutic advances and potential biomarkers to understand heterogeneity and treatment response

After 35 years since the introduction of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD), we are living in the era of the second great revolution in migraine therapies. First, discoveries of triptans provided a breakthrough in acute migraine treatment utilizing bench-to-bedside research results on the role of serotonin in migraine. Next, the discovery of the role of neuropeptides, more specifically calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in migraine attack led to the development of anti-CGRP therapies that are effective both in acute and preventive treatment, and are also able to reduce migraine-related burden. Here, we reviewed the most recent clinical studies and real-world data on available migraine-specific medications, including triptans, ditants, gepants and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies. Novel drug targets, such as PACAP and amylins were also discussed. To address the main challenges of migraine therapy, the high heterogeneity of people with migraine, the prevalent presence of various comorbid disorders, and the insufficient medical care of migraine patients were covered. Promising novel approaches from the fields of omics, blood and saliva biomarker, imaging and provocation studies might bring solutions for these challenges with the potential to identify further drug targets, distinguish more homogeneous patient subgroups, contribute to more optimal drug selection strategies, and detect biomarkers in association with headache features or predicting treatment efficacy. In the future, the combined analysis of data of different biomarker modalities with machine learning algorithms may serve precision medicine in migraine treatment.

Long-Term Effect of Switching From an Anti-CGRP Receptor to an Anti-CGRP Ligand Antibody in Treatment-Refractory Chronic Migraine: A Prospective Real-World Analysis

In migraine patients with a poor response to a calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody against the receptor, switching to a calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies against the ligand may be beneficial. This was a long-term real-world prospective analysis conducted in treatment-refractory chronic migraine patients coming from two large tertiary referral headache centres, who did not achieve a meaningful response to erenumab and were switched to fremanezumab. Responders to fremanezumab were considered those who achieved at least 30% reduction in monthly migraine days by month 3, compared to the post-erenumab baseline. Secondary efficacy and disability outcomes were analysed. Thirty-nine patients (female n = 32, 82.1%; median age: 49 years old, IQR = 29.0-56.0) were included. After three months of treatment with fremanezumab, ten out of 39 patients (25.6%) were considered responders. Four of the 11 patients who continued fremanezumab became responders at month 6, increasing the number of responders to 14 patients (35.9%). Responders received a median of 12 injections (IQR = 9.0-18.0) at the time of the analysis. After the last treatment, 13 patients (33.3%) remained responders. The number of mean monthly migraine days significantly decreased from 21.4 at baseline (IQR = 10.7-30.0) to 8.6 (IQR = 3.8-13.9) at the last follow-up. Painkillers intake and HIT-6 score were significantly reduced at the last follow-up. About 1/3 of patients with treatment refractory chronic migraine who have a disappointing response to erenumab and switch to fremanezumab, obtained a meaningful and sustained improvement of their migraine load over time, supporting the appropriateness of this therapeutic approach in clinical practice.

Real-world effectiveness, satisfaction, and optimization of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine in combination with onabotulinumtoxinA: results from the COURAGE Study

BACKGROUND

Individuals using onabotulinumtoxinA as a preventive migraine treatment often use acute treatments for breakthrough attacks. Data on real-world effectiveness of the small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist ubrogepant in combination with onabotulinumtoxinA are limited.

METHODS

COURAGE, a prospective, multiple attack, observational study, evaluated the real-world effectiveness of ubrogepant (50 or 100 mg) for acute treatment of migraine in people receiving onabotulinumtoxinA, an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody (mAb), or both. This analysis focused only on onabotulinumtoxinA users. The Migraine Buddy app was used to identify eligible participants and track response to treated attacks. For each ubrogepant-treated attack, meaningful pain relief (MPR) and return to normal function (RNF) at 2 and 4 h post-dose over 30 days was assessed. MPR was defined as a level of relief that is meaningful to the participant, usually occurring before the pain is all gone. After 30 days, satisfaction was reported on a 7-point scale and overall acute treatment optimization was evaluated using the migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire-4 (mTOQ-4).

RESULTS

This analysis included 122 participants who received ubrogepant and onabotulinumtoxinA and reported on 599 ubrogepant-treated attacks. Following the first ubrogepant-treated attack, MPR was achieved in 53.3% of participants 2 h post-dose and in 76.2% of participants 4 h post-dose. RNF was achieved in 25.4% of participants 2 h post-dose and in 45.9% of participants 4 h post-dose. MPR and RNF results were similar across up to 10 ubrogepant-treated attacks. After 30 days, satisfaction with ubrogepant in combination with onabotulinumtoxinA was reported by 69.8% of participants and acute treatment optimization (defined as mTOQ-4 score ≥ 4) was achieved in 77.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective real-world effectiveness study, ubrogepant treatment in onabotulinumtoxinA users with self-identified migraine was associated with high rates of MPR and RNF at 2 and 4 h as well as satisfaction and acute treatment optimization. Although the lack of a contemporaneous control group limits causal inference, these findings demonstrate the feasibility of using a novel, app-based design to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and satisfaction of treatments.

Ten open questions in migraine prophylaxis with monoclonal antibodies blocking the calcitonin-gene related peptide pathway: a narrative review

The monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) blocking the calcitonin-gene related peptide (CGRP) pathway, collectively called here "anti-CGRP/rec mAbs", have dramatically improved preventive migraine treatment. Although their efficacy and tolerability were proven in a number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and, maybe even more convincingly, in real world settings, a number of open questions remain. In this narrative review, we will analyze published data allowing insight in some of the uncertainties related to the use of anti-CGRP/rec mAbs in clinical practice: their differential efficacy in migraine subtypes, outcome predictors, switching between molecules, use in children and adolescents, long-term treatment adherence and persistence, effect persistence after discontinuation, combined treatment with botulinum toxin or gepants, added-value and cost effectiveness, effectiveness in other headache types, and potential contraindications based on known physiological effects of CGRP. While recent studies have already provided hints for some of these questions, many of them will not find reliable and definitive answers before larger studies, registries or dedicated RCTs are available.

Switching of monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide in chronic migraine in clinical practice: a case series

A multicentre case series of patients with chronic migraine (CM) treated with monoclonal antibodies directed against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP-mAbs) switching were developed. The effectiveness and safety of CGRP-mAbs switching as a preventive treatment for CM in clinical practice were recorded. Effectiveness was measured by ≥50% reduction of monthly migraine days in respect to baseline and reduction in pain intensity. Safety was analysed through adverse events (AEs) and treatment discontinuations. Seven patients were included. The reason for switching was non-response in all cases. Two patients presented a response to the first CGRP-mAb, but the effect was lost after 3 months. The remaining five patients were non-responders. Response to the second CGRP-mAb was observed in three patients, one of them for >3 months. Less than half of the patients previously treated with a CGRP-mAb responded to switching with a second CGRP-mAb. AEs were rare, with no treatment discontinuations.

A Retrospective Real-Life Multicenter Study on Concurrent Oral Preventive Treatments in Patients with Chronic Migraine Treated with OnabotulinumtoxinA

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) is a relatively safe and effective treatment for chronic migraine. The local mode of action of BoNTA favors the combination of oral treatments with systemic action. However, little is known about the possible interactions with other preventive treatments. The objective of the study was to describe the use of oral preventive treatments in patients with chronic migraine treated with BoNTA in routine clinical care and discuss the tolerability and efficacy according to the presence or absence of concomitant oral treatments.

METHODS

In this multicenter, observational, retrospective, cohort study, we collected data from patients with chronic migraine receiving prophylactic treatment with BoNTA. Patients were eligible if aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with chronic migraine according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, Third Edition criteria, and treated with BoNTA according to the PREEMPT paradigm. We documented the proportion of patients with at least one concomitant treatment prescribed specifically for migraine (CT+M) and their side effects during four BoNTA treatment cycles. Additionally, we collected monthly headache days and monthly acute medication days from the patients' headache diaries. Patients with CT+M were compared to those without concomitant treatment (CT-) using a nonparametric approach.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 181 patients taking BoNTA, of whom 77 (42.5%) received a CT+M. The most frequently prescribed concomitant treatments were antidepressants and antihypertensive drugs. Side effects in the CT+M group occurred in 14 patients (18.2%). Only in three of them (3.9%), the side effects had a significant interference with the patient's functioning (all in topiramate 200-mg/day users). Both CT+M and CT- groups had a significant reduction in monthly headache days of respectively - 6 (95% confidence interval - 9, - 3; p < 0.001; w = 0.200) during cycle 4 compared with baseline versus - 9 (95% confidence interval - 13, -6; p < 0.001; w = 0.469). However, the reduction in monthly headache days was significantly smaller in patients with CT+M after the fourth treatment cycle compared with patients with CT- (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Prescription of oral concomitant preventive treatment is common in patients with chronic migraine receiving BoNTA. We did not identify any unexpected safety or tolerability issues in patients receiving BoNTA and a CT+M. However, patients with a CT+M experienced a smaller reduction in monthly headache days when compared with those with CT-, which might be associated with a higher resistance to treatment in that subgroup of patients.

Quantitative and Qualitative Pain Evaluation in Response to OnabotulinumtoxinA for Chronic Migraine: An Observational Real-Life Study

(1) Background: Randomized controlled trials and real-life studies demonstrated the efficacy of OnabotulinumtoxinA (OBT-A) for CM prevention. However, no studies specifically addressed its effect on pain's quantitative intensity and qualitative characteristics. (2) Methods: This is an ambispective study: a post-hoc retrospective analysis of real-life prospectively collected data from two Italian headache centers on CM patients treated with OBT-A over one year (i.e., Cy1-4). The primary endpoint was the changes in pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS; the Present Pain Intensity (PPI) scale, the 6-point Behavioral Rating Scale (BRS-6)) and quality scale (the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ)) scores. We also assessed the relationship between changes in intensity and quality of pain and disability scale (MIDAS; HIT-6) scores, monthly headache days (MHDs), and monthly acute medication intake (MAMI) (3) Results: We retrieved 152 cases (51.5 years SD 11.3, 80.3% females). From baseline to Cy-4, MHDs, MAMI, NRS, PPI, and BRS-6 scores decreased (consistently p < 0.001). Only the throbbing (p = 0.004), splitting (p = 0.018), and sickening (p = 0.017) qualities of pain collected in the SF-MPQ were reduced. Score variations in MIDAS related to those in PPI scales (p = 0.035), in the BRS-6 (p = 0.001), and in the NRS (p = 0.003). Similarly, HIT-6 score changes related to PPI score modifications (p = 0.027), in BRS-6 (p = 0.001) and NRS (p = 0.006). Conversely, MAMI variation was not associated with qualitative or quantitative pain score modifications except BRS-6 (p = 0.018). (4) Conclusions: Our study shows that OBT-A alleviates migraine by reducing its impact on multiple aspects, such as frequency, disability, and pain intensity. The beneficial effect on pain intensity seems specific to pain characteristics related to C-fiber transmission and is associated with a reduction in migraine-related disability.

CGRP physiology, pharmacology, and therapeutic targets: migraine and beyond

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a neuropeptide with diverse physiological functions. Its two isoforms (α and β) are widely expressed throughout the body in sensory neurons as well as in other cell types, such as motor neurons and neuroendocrine cells. CGRP acts via at least two G protein-coupled receptors that form unusual complexes with receptor activity-modifying proteins. These are the CGRP receptor and the AMY1 receptor; in rodents, additional receptors come into play. Although CGRP is known to produce many effects, the precise molecular identity of the receptor(s) that mediates CGRP effects is seldom clear. Despite the many enigmas still in CGRP biology, therapeutics that target the CGRP axis to treat or prevent migraine are a bench-to-bedside success story. This review provides a contextual background on the regulation and sites of CGRP expression and CGRP receptor pharmacology. The physiological actions of CGRP in the nervous system are discussed, along with updates on CGRP actions in the cardiovascular, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, immune, hematopoietic, and reproductive systems and metabolic effects of CGRP in muscle and adipose tissues. We cover how CGRP in these systems is associated with disease states, most notably migraine. In this context, we discuss how CGRP actions in both the peripheral and central nervous systems provide a basis for therapeutic targeting of CGRP in migraine. Finally, we highlight potentially fertile ground for the development of additional therapeutics and combinatorial strategies that could be designed to modulate CGRP signaling for migraine and other diseases.

Real Life Data on OnabotulinumtoxinA for Treatment of Chronic Migraine in Pediatric Age

BACKGROUND

The use of OnabotulinumtoxinA (OBT-A) for the treatment of chronic migraine (CM) in adults represents a therapy with the greatest efficacy and safety data. However, we have little evidence on the use of OBT-A in children or adolescents. The present study aims to describe the experience with OBT-A in the treatment of CM in adolescents in an Italian third-level headache center.

METHODS

The analysis included all patients under the age of 18 treated with OBT-A for CM at the Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital. All patients received OBT-A following the PREEMPT protocol. Subjects were classified as good responders if a greater than 50% reduction in the monthly frequency of attacks was observed, partial responders if the reduction was between 30 and 50%, and non-responders if it was <30%.

RESULTS

The treated population consisted of 37 females and 9 males with a mean age of 14.7 years. Before starting OBT-A, 58.7% of the subjects had attempted prophylactic therapy with other drugs. From OBT-A initiation to the last clinical observation, the mean duration of follow-up was 17.6 ± 13.7 SD (range: 1-48) months. The number of OBT-A injections were 3.4 ± 3 SD. Sixty eight percent of the subjects responded to treatment within the first three administrations of OBT-A. Proceeding with the number of administrations, a progressive improvement in frequency was further observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of OBT-A in pediatric age can have benefits in terms of reduction in the frequency and intensity of headache episodes. Furthermore, treatment with OBT-A has an excellent safety profile. These data support the use of OBT-A in the treatment of childhood migraine.

Switching OnabotulinumtoxinA to Monoclonal Anti-CGRP Antibodies in Drug-Resistant Chronic Migraine

BACKGROUND

OnabotulinumtoxinA (BTX-A) and anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP mAbs) are approved drugs for chronic migraine (CM), a difficult-to-treat condition. Optimization of CM patient management by choosing the best options and determining appropriate time for switching or adding concomitant treatments are highly needed.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate clinical response to anti-CGRP mAbs in patients who switched from BTX-A due to ineffectiveness defined by different cut-offs and assess the retention rate, effectiveness, and safety of both drugs within the first 9 months of treatment.

METHODS

A monocentric, cohort study, enrolling patients with CM, resistant to several preventive treatments, first treated with BTX-A and then with anti-CGRP mAbs with two observational phases of 9 months preceded by respective baseline. First, the retention rate and effectiveness of both treatments were measured in all patients. A second analysis assessed effectiveness in patients stratified according to <50 or <30% response rate to BTX-A. The absolute change from baseline in monthly headache days (MHDs), response rate, analgesic use, and persistence in medication overuse (MO) at 3, 6, and 9 months of treatment were recorded. Last observation carried forward (LOCF) analyses, including all patients and assuming no further changes after discontinuation, were performed for all outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 78 enrolled patients (80.8% female, and 89.7% with MO at baseline), 32 (41.0%) received erenumab, 32 (41.0%) galcanezumab, and 14 (18.0%) fremanezumab. Retention rate was 62.2 and 91.0% for BTX-A and 76.9 and 96.2%, for anti-CGRP mAbs at 3 and 9 months of treatment, respectively. At 9 months of treatment, 22.4% of BTX-A patients and 65.0% of anti-CGRP mAbs patients achieved a ≥50% response rate. Anti-CGRP mAbs reduced MHDs, AMN, and AMDs, and decreased the number of MO patients at 9 months. In patients stratified according to <50 or <30% response rate to BTX-A, response rate (≥50% response at 9 months) to anti-CGRP was 62.9 and 57.9%, respectively. LOCF analyses confirmed these findings. No serious adverse events (AEs) were recorded and only two patients discontinued treatment due to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Difficult-to-treat CM patients who discontinued BTX-A and received anti-CGRP mAbs showed a substantial clinical improvement in migraine-related outcomes. Switching to an anti-CGRP mAb appears to be a viable option in patients with insufficient response after the first 2 cycles with BTX-A. The appropriate variables, cut-offs, and timing to define ineffectiveness and the best time to switch or combine therapies for difficult-to-treat CM need to be investigated further.

Maintenance of response and predictive factors of 1-year GalcanezumAb treatment in real-life migraine patients in Italy: The multicenter prospective cohort GARLIT study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To evaluate the 1-year effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab in real life and the prognostic indicators of persistent response.

METHODS

High-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) and chronic migraine (CM) patients treated with galcanezumab who completed a 1-year observation were enrolled. The primary outcomes assessed during the 12 months (V1-V12) were the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs) from baseline and the response rates ≥50% in MMDs (MMD ≥50% RR). The secondary outcomes were changes in pain intensity (numerical rating scale [NRS]) and in monthly acute medication intake (MAMI).

RESULTS

We enrolled 191 patients (77.5% CM). Twenty-three patients (12%) dropped out, two for nonserious adverse events. At least 40% of patients took add-on standard preventives from baseline to V12. At V12, MMDs were reduced by 6.0 days in HFEM and by 11.9 days in CM patients (both p < 0.00001); NRS and MAMI were also decreased in both groups (p < 0.00001). One-hundred eight (56.5%) patients presented MMD ≥50% RR for 9 cumulative months (interquartile range=8): we defined this value as the cutoff for a persistent response. Persistent responders were less likely to have a higher body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.007) but more frequently had a good response to triptans (p = 0.005) and MMD ≥50% RR at V1 (p < 0.0000001). Patients without a persistent response were on add-on therapy for longer periods of time (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Galcanezumab was effective and well-tolerated in the 1-year term, with most patients presenting MMD ≥50% RR for at least 9 months. Triptan response, lower BMI, and MMD ≥50% RR in the first month emerged as predictive factors for a persistent response.

Assessment of the relative effectiveness of erenumab compared with onabotulinumtoxinA for the prevention of chronic migraine

OBJECTIVE

To assess the available clinical and economic evidence of erenumab vs onabotulinumtoxinA for chronic migraine (CM) and present de-novo indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) based on available clinical trial data.

METHODS

We conducted ITCs based on results from the pivotal 295 trial (NCT02066415) of erenumab vs placebo and published aggregate data from the PREEMPT 1 (NCT00156910) and PREEMPT 2 (NCT00168428) trials of onabotulinumtoxinA vs placebo. ITCs were conducted for CM patients with and without prior administration of onabotulinumtoxinA and among CM patients with ≥3 prior preventive treatment failures. Efficacy was assessed based on responder rates of ≥50% reductions in monthly headache days (MHDs) and monthly migraine days (MMDs) as well as change from baseline in both MHDs and MMDs.

RESULTS

Among patients with CM, 140 mg erenumab was associated with a reduction of 1.2 MHD (p = .092) and a reduction of 1.0 MMD (p = .174) compared to onabotulinumtoxinA at Week 12. Among onabotulinumtoxinA-naïve patients, erenumab was associated with a reduction of 1.8 MHD (p = .026) and 1.4 MMD (p = .080) at Week 12. Among patients that had received ≥3 prior preventive treatments, the odds ratios comparing erenumab vs onabotulinumtoxinA were 1.7 for ≥50% responder rates based on reductions in MHD (p = .155) and 1.7 for ≥50% responder rates based on reductions in MMD (p = .140).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest directional benefits (although not reaching the threshold of statistical significance) associated with erenumab vs onabotulinumtoxinA for the preventive treatment of CM. Evidence from this study may inform healthcare stakeholders in treatment selection and optimization for patients with CM.

Review of Tolerability of Fremanezumab for Episodic and Chronic Migraine

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were the first class of medication specifically developed for the prevention of migraine. Fremanezumab is one of four CGRP mAbs currently available and is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the preventative treatment of episodic and chronic migraines. This narrative review summarizes the history of fremanezumab development, the trials that led to its approval, and the later studies published evaluating its tolerability and efficacy. Evidence of fremanezumab for clinically significant efficacy and tolerability in patients with chronic migraine is especially important when considering the high level of disability, lower quality of life scores, and higher levels of health-care utilization associated with this condition. Multiple clinical trials demonstrated superiority of fremanezumab over placebo in terms of efficacy while demonstrating good tolerability. Treatment-related adverse reactions did not differ significantly compared to placebo and dropout rates were minimal. The most commonly observed treatment-related adverse reaction was mild-to-moderate injection site reaction, described as erythema, pain, induration, or swelling at the injection site.

Monoclonal Antibodies against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide for Migraine Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review of Real-World Data

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of real-world outcomes for anti-CGRP-mAbs.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed for real-world data of erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, or eptinezumab in patients with migraines.

RESULTS

We identified 134 publications (89 retrospective), comprising 10 pharmaco-epidemiologic and 83 clinic-based studies, 38 case reports, and 3 other articles. None of the clinic-based studies provided follow-up data over more than one year in more than 200 patients. Findings suggest that there are reductions in health insurance claims and days with sick-leave as well as better treatment adherence with anti-CGRP-mAbs. Effectiveness, reported in 77 clinic-based studies, was comparable to randomized controlled trials. A treatment pause was associated with an increase in migraine frequency, and switching to another antibody resulted in a better response in some of the patients. Adverse events and safety issues were addressed in 86 papers, including 24 single case reports.

CONCLUSION

Real-world data on anti-CGRP-mAbs are limited by retrospective data collection, small patient numbers, and short follow-up periods. The majority of papers seem to support good effectiveness and tolerability of anti-CGRP-mAbs in the real-world setting. There is an unmet need for large prospective real-world studies providing long-term follow-ups of patients treated with anti-CGRP-mAbs.

OnabotulinumtoxinA Add-On to Monoclonal Anti-CGRP Antibodies in Treatment-Refractory Chronic Migraine

We sought to assess the effectiveness of combining dual therapy with onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX) add-on to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP MAbs) in treatment-refractory patients with chronic migraine (CM). We retrospectively reviewed the medical files of 19 treatment-refractory patients with CM who had failed to two oral migraine preventatives, at least three consecutive BTX cycles (less than 30% response rate), at least three consecutive sessions with either fremanezumab or erenumab (less than 30% response rate), and were eventually switched to dual therapy with BTX add-on to any of the already-given anti-CGRP MAbs. We then assessed from baseline to each monotherapy or dual intervention predefined efficacy follow-up the changes in the following efficacy outcomes: (i) monthly headache days (MHD), (ii) monthly days with moderate/severe peak headache intensity, and (iii) monthly days with intake of any acute headache medication. Response (50% reduction in MHD) rates, safety, and tolerability were also determined. In the majority of cases (n = 14), dual targeting proved effective and was associated with clinically meaningful improvement in all efficacy variables; 50% response rates (also disability and QOL outcomes) coupled with favorable safety/tolerability. Our results advocate in favor of the view that dual therapy is effective and should be considered in difficult-to-treat CM patients who have failed all available monotherapies.

Two-year effectiveness of erenumab in resistant chronic migraine: a prospective real-world analysis

Background

Controlled and real-world evidence have demonstrated the efficacy of calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (MABs) in migraine. However, data on the over-one-year sustained effectiveness of CGRP MABs in resistant chronic migraine (CM) is sparse. 

Methods

This is a two-year real-world prospective analysis of an ongoing single centre audit conducted in patients with resistant CM. Patients received monthly erenumab for six months before assessing its effectiveness. Responders were considered those who achieved at least 30% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) by month 6, compared to baseline. Secondary outcomes were also analysed, including changes of the Headache Impact Test version 6 (HIT-6).

Results

One hundred sixty-four patients [135 (82.3%) females; mean age 46 SD 14) years] were included in the audit and 160 patients analysed. Patients had failed a mean of 8.4 preventive treatments at baseline. At month 6, 76 patients (48%) were 30% responders to erenumab, 50 patients (31%) were 50% responders and 25 (15%) were 75% responders. The mean reduction in MMD at month 6 was 7.5 days compared to baseline (P < 0.001). At month 12 and month 18, 61 patients (38%) and 52 patients (33%) remained 30% responders respectively. At month 24, 36 patients (23%) remained 30% responders, 25 patients (16%) and 13 patients (8%) were respectively 50% and 75% responders. Compared to 95% of patients at baseline, at months 6, 12 and 24, 46%, 29% and 16% of responders respectively had severe disability. At least one adverse event at month 6, 12, 18 and 24 was reported by 49%, 19%, 11% and 3% of patients. By month 6, 13% of patients discontinued the treatment because of side effects, often constipation.

Conclusions

Long-term sustained effectiveness of erenumab was reported only by a minority of resistant CM patients. Although more research in resistant migraine is needed, Erenumab can provide long-term meaningful reduction in migraine load and migraine-related disability in some patients.

Prevention of Migraine

Migraine, a primary headache disorder is a chronic and complex neurological disease that affects millions of people worldwide, impacting their quality of life. It is one of the most common reasons why individuals seek the advice of their physician, and is one of the most common referrals seen in the offices of general neurologists and headache specialists. In the past decade, there has been robust research on not only the pathophysiology of migraine but in the efforts to treat and, importantly, prevent. The introduction of calcitonin gene related peptide antagonists (CGRP-A) have opened new doors for preventive treatment options. OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) has remained a staple in the treatment of chronic migraine with data emerging with combination therapy. Neurostimulation has offered additional nonpharmacologic approaches to migraine treatment. In addition to lifestyle and behavioral modifications, these have changed the landscape of migraine prevention.

Real-World Patient Experience of CGRP-Targeting Therapy for Migraine: a Narrative Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize available calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeting therapies for migraine and discuss their use in real-world populations.

BACKGROUND

CGRP has long been a topic of interest in migraine pathophysiology, with new therapies targeting CGRP since 2018 for both the preventive and acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

We searched PubMed using keywords including "migraine," "CGRP," "real-world," "erenumab," "galcanezumab," "fremanezumab," "eptinezumab," "ubrogepant," "rimegepant," and "atogepant." We reviewed all pertinent studies and summarized main findings. We also compiled detailed patient characteristics (e.g., migraine diagnoses, medication overuse, prior treatment failures) and treatment outcome measures, such as 50% responder rates, reduction in migraine days, and adverse event rates in several tables. Overall, studies reporting real-world patient experiences of CGRP-targeting therapies suggested meaningful effectiveness for migraine treatment with response rates comparable to the numbers reported in clinical trials. Furthermore, studies suggested benefit in patients with multiple prior unsuccessful treatment trials, medication overuse, and complex medical comorbidities. In some studies, adverse event rates have been notably higher than reported in clinical trials. Additional long-term data is needed to further evaluate sustained efficacy, predictors of treatment response, and adverse events.

The association between onabotulinumtoxinA and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a reliable option for the optimal treatment of chronic migraine

Chronic migraine (CM) is a great challenge for physicians dealing with headaches. Despite the introduction of the monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) acting against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) that has revolutionized the treatment of CM, some patients still experience an incomplete relief. So, the association of two preventive treatments may be a reliable option for these patients. So, onabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) and anti-CGRP mAbs may be used together, and some pre-clinical and clinical evidence of an additive action of the 2 drugs is emerging. In particular, since BT-A acts mainly on C-fibers and anti-CGRP mAbs on Aδ ones, their association may prevent the wearing-off phenomenon of BT-A, thus giving an additional benefit in those patients experiencing an incomplete response to BT-A alone. Despite this, the clinical studies available in the literature have a small sample size, often a retrospective design, and are heterogeneous in terms of the outcomes chosen. Considering this, the evidence of a favorable effect of the association between BT-A and anti-CGRP mAbs is still scarce. Furthermore, this association is explicitly forbidden by many National regulatory agencies, due to the high costs of both treatments. Anyway, their association could help in reducing the burden associated with the most severe cases of CM, thus relieving the direct and indirect costs of this condition. More well-designed studies with big samples are needed to unveil the real therapeutic gain of this association. Moreover, pharmacoeconomics studies should be performed, to assess the economic suitability of this association.

Pooled Analysis of Real-World Evidence Supports Anti-CGRP mAbs and OnabotulinumtoxinA Combined Trial in Chronic Migraine

OnabotulinumtoxinA, targeting the CGRP machinery, has been approved for the last two decades for chronic migraine prevention. The recently approved monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed towards the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway open a new age for chronic migraine control. However, some 40% patients suffering from chronic migraine is still resistant to treatment. The aim of this work is to answer the following PICOS (participants intervention comparator outcome study design) question: Is there evidence of efficacy and safety of the combined administration of anti-CGRP mAbs and onabotulinumtoxinA in chronic migraine? A systematic review and meta-analysis [Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 recommendations] was made up to 19 April 2022. The results are encouraging: the combined treatment proved to afford ≥50% monthly headache days (MHDs)/frequency reduction respect to baseline in up to 58.8% of patients; in comparison, anti-CGRP mAbs reduce MHDs of 1.94 days from baseline and botulinum toxin of 1.86 days. Our study demonstrates for the first time that the combination therapy of onabotulinumtoxinA with anti-CGRP mAbs affords a reduction of 2.67 MHDs with respect to onabotulinumtoxinA alone, with moderate certainty of evidence. Adequately powered, good-quality studies are needed to confirm the response to combination therapy in terms of efficacy and safety. PROSPERO registration: CRD42022313640.

Reducing the Burden of Migraine: Safety and Efficacy of CGRP Pathway-Targeted Preventive Treatments

Migraine is a highly disabling and often chronic neurological disease that affects more than one billion people globally. Preventive migraine treatment is recommended for individuals who have frequent and/or disabling attacks; however, many of the medications used for migraine prevention (e.g., antiepileptics, antidepressants, antihypertensives) were not specifically developed for migraine, and often have limited efficacy or poor tolerability. Four monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway, which is believed to play a crucial role in the pathophysiology of migraine, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. All four migraine-specific treatments have demonstrated efficacy based on reductions in monthly days with migraine for patients with both episodic and chronic migraine, including those with comorbidities. They have also demonstrated favorable safety and tolerability profiles. Based on these accounts, CGRP pathway-targeted monoclonal antibodies have the potential to revolutionize preventive treatment for patients with migraine.

Advances in pharmacotherapy for the prophylactic treatment of resistant and refractory migraine

INTRODUCTION

Refractory migraine is associated with low quality of life and great socioeconomic burden. Despite high need for effective, tolerable preventive therapies, there has been little research on potential therapeutic options. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) are the first preventive therapeutic approach for migraine based on the underlying pathophysiology.

AREAS COVERED

Following a brief introduction into the term 'refractory migraine,' the authors reviewavailable treatment options, focusing on current phase III trials of substances acting on the CGRP pathway.

EXPERT OPINION

No uniform definition for refractory migraine is available. The vast majority of proposals recommend treatment failure of 2-4 drug classes as a key diagnostic criterion. Phase III studies on CGRP-(receptor) mAbs demonstrated excellent efficacy and tolerability in patients with chronic and episodic migraine including subjects with multiple unsuccessful conventional therapy attempts. However, more comparator trials showing superiority of mAbs versus oral preventatives, such as the HER-MEs study are needed. In summary, with the CGRP antibodies, a group of drugs has entered the market which will most likely not only significantly improve the quality of life of many individual migraine patients but could also reduce indirect health-care costs associated with migraine by reducing recurrent medical consultations.

Treatment satisfaction with calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies as a new patient-reported outcome measure: A real-life experience in migraine

BACKGROUND

To evaluate treatment satisfaction with galcanezumab as a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in migraine.

METHODS

Patients with ≥8 headache days/month that had failed at ≥3 medications were included. Demographic and medical history were collected. Patient´s satisfaction (effectiveness, safety, convenience, and global satisfaction [GS]) was assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version 1.4 (TSQM-1.4©).

RESULTS

We included 30 patients with migraine (76.7% chronic migraine). After 12 weeks of galcanezumab treatment, median monthly headache days (MHDs) decreased 11.5 (IQR 14.0) and median monthly migraine days (MMDs) 9.0 (IQR 7.5); at 24 weeks, the change was 15.0 (IQR 12.0) and 8.0 days (IQR 6.0). HIT-6 score decreased from 68.0 (IQR 7.5) to 54.0 (IQR 9.5) at 12 weeks (p < .001) and to 52.0 (IQR12.0) at 24 weeks (p < .001) and MIDAS from 60.0 (IQR 62.7) to 25.5 (IQR 41.2, p = .004) and 7.0 (IQR 18.5, p < .001), respectively. TSQM-1.4© at 12 weeks was higher compared to other preventive therapy in effectiveness (80.6/50.4, p < .001), convenience (83.3/66.7, p = .001), and GS (78.6/50.0, p < .001). These rates of satisfaction were similar at 24 weeks of galcanezumab treatment. Reductions in HIT-6 (r = -.444, p = .014), MIDAS (r = -.423, p = .020), MMDs (r = -.515, p = .004), and MHDs (r = -.477, p = .008) were associated significantly with GS at 12 weeks. This correlation was significantly associated with changes in HIT-6 and MHDs at 24 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that migraine patients receiving galcanezumab are significantly more satisfied compared to other preventive therapies, associating treatment GS with meaningful reductions in frequency, impact, and disability caused by migraine.

Real-world effectiveness after initiating fremanezumab treatment in US patients with episodic and chronic migraine or difficult-to-treat migraine

Background

Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb; IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for migraine prevention have been demonstrated in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Real-world effectiveness data are needed to complement clinical trial data. This study assessed the effectiveness of fremanezumab across different subgroups of adult patients with episodic migraine (EM), chronic migraine (CM), or difficult-to-treat (DTT) migraine in real-world clinical settings.

Methods

This retrospective, panel-based online chart review used electronic case report forms. Patient inclusion criteria were a physician diagnosis of EM or CM; age ≥ 18 years at the time of first fremanezumab initiation; ≥ 1 dose of fremanezumab treatment; ≥ 1 follow-up visit since first initiation; and ≥ 2 measurements of monthly migraine days (MMD; with 1 within a month before or at first initiation and ≥ 1 after first initiation). Changes in MMD and monthly headache days were assessed during the follow-up period. These endpoints were evaluated in subgroups of patients by migraine type (EM/CM) and in subgroups with DTT migraine (diagnosis of medication overuse [MO], major depressive disorder [MDD], generalized anxiety disorder [GAD], or prior exposure to a different CGRP pathway–targeted mAb [CGRP mAb]).

Results

Data were collected from 421 clinicians and 1003 patients. Mean (percent) reductions from baseline in MMD at Month 6 were − 7.7 (77.0%) in EM patients, − 10.1 (68.7%) in CM patients, − 10.8 (80.6%) in the MO subgroup, − 9.9 (68.3%) in the MDD subgroup, − 9.5 (66.4%) in the GAD subgroup, and − 9.0 (68.7%) in the prior CGRP mAb exposure subgroup. Improvements in MDD or GAD severity were reported by 45.5% and 45.8% of patients with comorbid MDD or GAD, respectively.

Conclusions

In this real-world study, fremanezumab demonstrated effectiveness for migraine regardless of migraine type or the presence of factors contributing to DTT migraine (MO, GAD, MDD, or prior exposure to a different CGRP mAb).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01415-x.

CGRP Targeting Therapy for Chronic Migraine-Evidence from Clinical Trials and Real-world Studies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor have become part of the standard treatment for migraine in clinical practice. The current review focuses on the clinical evidence of CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients with chronic migraine (CM), including more challenging cases.

RECENT FINDINGS

CGRP monoclonal antibodies were more effective than placebo in reducing the number of monthly migraine days (MMDs), and the change relative to placebo in the treatment group was between - 1.2 and - 2.7 days at 3 months. CGRP monoclonal antibodies resulted in ≥ 50% response in 27.5 to 61.4% of patients, and doubled the odds for having ≥ 50% response. The findings were generally consistent in patients with coexisting medication overuse or with treatment failures to multiple preventive medications, including onabotulinumtoxinA. The results from real-world studies (RWS) were similar to those seen in clinical trials, and the changes from baseline in the number of MMDs and the response rates largely fell within the ranges of those reported in the treatment group in pivotal trials. The therapeutic effects typically started within a few days, and remained steady after regular treatment for up to 1 year. These agents were generally well tolerated, and the discontinuation rates due to adverse events in clinical trials and in many RWS were < 4.5%. CGRP monoclonal antibodies are effective and safe in the treatment of patients with CM, including clinical challenging cases. However, the role of CGRP monoclonal antibodies in a number of conditions, such as cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases, pregnancy, and overuse of opioids or barbiturates, needs to be further clarified.

Post-traumatic headache: Pathophysiology and management - A review

Background

Post-traumatic headache (PTH) is a common secondary headache due to traumatic brain injury. In the past, significant research has been conducted to understand the pathophysiology and treatment options for PTH. However, PTH still lacks evidence-based treatment, and most of the management depends on the primary phenotype observed in the patient.

Objective

The main objective of this review is to provide a single reference that covers the current understanding of the pathophysiology and the treatment options available for PTH.

Methods

A detailed literature search on PubMed was performed, and a narrative review was prepared.

Results

The pathophysiology of PTH is multifactorial. Acute PTH may be attributed to increased peripheral pain sensitization with impaired pain inhibiting pathways. Chronic or persistent PTH may be due to a chronic inflammatory response and peripheral as well as central sensitization. The mechanism responsible for the transition of acute to persistent PTH is unknown. The migraine-like phenotype is reported to be the most prevalent headache type seen in PTH. New targets for preventive treatment have been identified in recent years, such as neuropeptides like calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP), nitric oxide, and glutamate. The preventive pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies employed for migraine (e.g. anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies, onabotulinumtoxinA, physical therapy, cognitive and behavioral treatment, and neurostimulation techniques) have shown in preliminary studies that they are potentially efficacious, but large, randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trials are needed to further establish these as treatment options for PTH.

Conclusions

The lack of evidence-based treatment for PTH has created a need for future large trials to confirm the safety and efficacy of the currently employed treatments.

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-Targeted Monoclonal Antibodies and Antagonists in Migraine: Current Evidence and Rationale

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a 37 amino-acid neuropeptide found mostly in peptidergic sensory C-fibers, has been suggested to be implicated in the pathogenesis of migraine, which is one of the most common neurological disorders seen in medical practice, affecting almost 16% of the US population. While previously thought to be a vascular condition, migraine attacks are the result of neurogenic inflammation and peripheral/central sensitization through dysfunctional activation of the trigeminovascular system. To date, two classes of therapeutic agents have been developed to interrupt the function of CGRP: CGRP-targeted monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and small-molecule antagonists (gepants). There are currently four CGRP-targeted mAbs and three gepants that are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for the treatment of migraine. Multiple phase II and III studies have established the efficacies and tolerability of these treatments. Previously, we reviewed the fundamental role of CGRP in migraine pathogenesis. Here, we discuss in depth the clinical evidence (randomized controlled trials and real-world studies), safety, and tolerability of CGRP-targeted mAbs and gepants for treating migraine.

The Arrival of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine

Remarkable advancements have been made in the field of migraine pathophysiology and pharmacotherapy over the past decade. Understanding the molecular mechanism of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has led to the discovery of a novel class of drugs, CGRP functional blocking monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), for migraine prevention. CGRP is a neuropeptide inherently involved in migraine physiology where its receptors are found dispersed throughout the central and peripheral nervous systems. CGRP-targeted mAbs are effective in the preventive treatment of both chronic and episodic migraine. The advantages of mAbs over oral migraine preventives are numerous. Favorable attributes of the mAbs include high affinity and selectivity for CGRP molecular targets, long-circulating plasma half-lives, and limited risk for nonspecific hepatic and renal toxicity. This pharmacological profile leads to fewer off-target (side) effects and drug-drug interactions rendering mAbs an attractive alternative to traditional small molecule therapies, especially for the preventive treatment of migraine. MAbs display minimal drug interaction thus are excellent for patients prescribed with multiple medications. However, the long-term safety of CGRP blockade is incompletely known, and CGRP mAbs use should be avoided during pregnancy. CGRP mAbs represent a radical shift in preventing chronic and episodic migraine.

Comparing the relative and absolute effect of erenumab: is a 50% response enough? Results from the ESTEEMen study

Background

Monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor have changed migraine preventive treatment. Those treatments have led to reconsidering the outcomes of migraine prevention. Available data mostly considered benefits in terms of relative efficacy (percent or absolute decrease in monthly migraine days [MMDs] or headache days compared with baseline). However, not enough attention has been paid to residual MMDs and/or migraine-related disability in treated patients. In the present study, we aimed at comparing the relative and absolute efficacy of erenumab.

Methods

ESTEEMen was a collaborative project among 16 European headache centers which already performed real-life data collections on patients treated with erenumab for at least 12 weeks. For the present study, we performed a subgroup analysis on patients with complete data on MMDs at baseline and at weeks 9-12 of treatment. Starting from efficacy thresholds proposed by previous literature, we classified patients into 0-29%, 30-49%, 50-74%, and ≥75% responders according to MMD decrease from baseline to weeks 9-12 of treatment. For each response category, we reported the median MMDs and Headache Impact test-6 (HIT-6) scores at baseline and at weeks 9-12. We categorized the number of residual MMDs at weeks 9-12 as follows: 0-3, 4-7, 8-14, ≥15. We classified HIT-6 score into four categories: ≤49, 50-55, 56-59, and ≥60. To keep in line with the original scope of the ESTEEMen study, calculations were performed in men and women.

Results

Out of 1215 patients, at weeks 9-12, 381 (31.4%) had a 0-29% response, 186 (15.3%) a 30-49% response, 396 (32.6%) a 50-74% response, and 252 (20.7%) a ≥75% response; 246 patients (20.2%) had 0-3 residual MMDs, 443 (36.5%) had 4-7 MMDs, 299 (24.6%) had 8-14 MMDs, and 227 (18.7%) had ≥15 MMDs. Among patients with 50-74% response, 246 (62.1%) had 4-7 and 94 (23.7%) 8-14 residual MMDs, while among patients with ≥75% response 187 (74.2%) had 0-3 and 65 (25.8%) had 4-7 residual MMDs.

Conclusions

The present study shows that even patients with good relative response to erenumab may have a clinically non-negligible residual migraine burden. Relative measures of efficacy cannot be enough to thoroughly consider the efficacy of migraine prevention.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01408-w.

Efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment of topiramate and greater occipital nerve block versus topiramate monotherapy for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment of topiramate and greater occipital nerve block to topiramate monotherapy in adult chronic migraine patients.

BACKGROUND

Options for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine are limited and costly. Combination treatments do not have an evidence base yet.

METHODS

This was a parallel group, 3 arms with 1:1:1 allocation ratio randomized controlled study in consecutive adult chronic migraine patients attending Headache Clinic in a tertiary care hospital. Patients received either topiramate monotherapy 100 mg/day (group A), or topiramate plus greater occipital nerve block with 40 mg lidocaine (2%) and 80mg (2 ml) methylprednisolone as the first injection followed by monthly injections of lidocaine for the next 2 months (group B) or topiramate plus greater occipital nerve block with 40 mg lidocaine (2%) injections monthly for 3 months (group C). The primary endpoint was the mean change in monthly migraine days at Month 3. Multiple secondary endpoints were assessed that included among others, achievement of ≥50% reduction in mean monthly headache days compared to baseline at Month 3 and assessment for any adverse events.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five patients were randomized; 41 to group A, 44 to group B, and 40 to group C. Efficacy assessments were done for 121 patients. Patients receiving combination treatment of topiramate and greater occipital nerve block with steroids and lidocaine and greater occipital nerve block with only lidocaine compared to topiramate monotherapy showed greater reductions in monthly migraine days at Month 3 (-9.6 vs -7.3 days; p = 0.003) and (-10.1 vs -7.3 days; p < 0.001) respectively. Greater proportion of patients in both the combination treatment groups (added greater occipital nerve block with and without steroid) achieved ≥50% reduction in mean monthly headache days [71.4% vs 39%; OR (95% CI) 3.9(1.6-9.8); p = 0.004] and [62.4% vs 39%; OR (95% CI) 2.7(1.1-6.7); p = 0.034] respectively, compared to those receiving topiramate monotherapy. Adverse effects between the groups were comparable although patients receiving combination treatment with added greater occipital nerve block reported transient adverse effects like post-injection dizziness, local site swelling, and pain. No serious adverse event was reported.

CONCLUSION

Combination treatments of topiramate with monthly injections of greater occipital nerve block were more effective in reducing monthly migraine days in chronic migraine than topiramate monotherapy at Month 3. Combination treatments were well tolerated.

Effectiveness and safety of erenumab and galcanezumab in the prevention of chronic and episodic migraine: A retrospective cohort study

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE?: Erenumab and galcanezumab have shown great results for migraine prevention. However, strict inclusion criteria, absence of concomitant medication and selective outcome report of clinical trials may sometimes be barely representative of the real-world daily practice. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate effectiveness and safety of these two monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide in real-world patients. METHODS: This observational, retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of erenumab 140 mg and galcanezumab 120 mg in 142 real-world patients who had previously not responded to three well-established pharmacological alternatives for migraine prevention. To do so, a combination of objective parameters (monthly headache days and acute migraine-specific medication days) and subjective measurements (Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire, Headache Impact Test and Visual Analogue Scale), validated for clinical research in migraine, were assessed during clinical interview. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Findings here reported show that erenumab and galcanezumab reduced monthly headache days, acute migraine specific medication days per month, Headache Impact Test score, Migraine Disability Assessment Test score and Visual Analogue Scale score after 3 and 6 doses (p < 0.01). Additionally, more than 25% of the patients enrolled in the study experienced a reduction by a half in monthly headache days, and more than 50% of the patients also reported a reduction by a half in the number of migraine specific medication days. Both treatments exhibited a great safety profile, rarely leading to discontinuation because of poor tolerance. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS?: Altogether, these results support previous real-life studies regarding effectiveness and safety and provide an interesting insight in how these preventive therapies are also effective in patients diagnosed with difficult to treat migraine who have previously failed, at least, three different drug classes stablished by current neurology guidelines for migraine prevention. Moreover, these data may suggest that erenumab and galcanezumab are able to not only diminish frequency, but also migraine intensity, and that it should be also considered as an effectiveness measure in line with other authors suggestion.

[CGRP antibodies in migraine prophylaxis : The new standard in migraine treatment?]

Migraine is associated with a high individual level of suffering. Therefore, an effective preventive treatment is highly important. The spectrum of classical prophylactic drugs has now been expanded to include monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and its receptor. These antibodies have shown reliable efficacy compared to placebo and a rapid onset of action with a low rate of side effects and negligible interactions in pivotal studies. Recently, the efficacy of the antibody was shown in many studies even on drug-refractory migraine and migraine associated with medication overuse. Comprehensive head to head comparisons with previously established drugs and among the antibodies are not yet available; however, initial studies suggest better tolerability and efficacy compared to conventional drugs and other antibodies. The role of antibodies in established treatment cascades still needs to be clarified.

Real-World Evidence for the Safety and Efficacy of CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment for Migraine Prevention in Adult Patients With Chronic Migraine

Background: OnabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) target different migraine pathways, therefore, combination treatment may provide additional effectiveness for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM) than either treatment alone. The objective of this study was to collect real-world data to improve the understanding of the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of adding a CGRP mAb to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for the preventive treatment of CM. Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal study conducted using data extracted from a single clinical site's electronic medical records (EMR) of adult patients (≥18 years) with CM treated with ≥2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA before ≥1 month of continuous onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAb (erenumab, fremanezumab, or galcanezumab) combination treatment. Safety was evaluated by the rate of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE). The proportion of patients who discontinued either onabotulinumtoxinA, a CGRP mAb, or combination treatment, and the reason for discontinuation, if available, was collected. The effectiveness of combination preventive treatment was assessed by the reduction in monthly headache days (MHD). Outcome data were extracted from EMR at the first CGRP mAb prescription (index) and up to four assessments at ~3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-index. The final analyses were based on measures consistently reported in the EMR. Results: EMR were collected for 192 patients, of which 148 met eligibility criteria and were included for analysis. Erenumab was prescribed to 56.7% of patients, fremanezumab to 42.6%, and galcanezumab to 0.7%. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) MHD were 20.4 (6.6) prior to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment and 14.0 (6.9) prior to the addition of a CGRP mAb (baseline). After real-world addition of a CGRP mAb, there were significant reductions in MHD at the first assessment (~3 months) (mean -2.6 days/month, 95% CI -3.7, -1.4) and at all subsequent visits. After ~12 months of continuous combination treatment, MHD were reduced by 4.6 days/month (95% CI -6.7, -2.5) and 34.9% of patients achieved ≥50% MHD reduction from index. AEs were reported by 18 patients (12.2%), with the most common being constipation (n = 8, 5.4% [onabotulinumtoxinA plus erenumab only]) and injection site reactions (n = 5, 3.4%). No SAEs were reported. Overall, 90 patients (60.8%) discontinued one or both treatments. The most common reason for discontinuing either treatment was lack of insurance coverage (40%); few (~14%) patients discontinued a CGRP mAb and none discontinued onabotulinumtoxinA due to safety/tolerability. Conclusion: In this real-world study, onabotulinumtoxinA was effective at reducing MHD and the addition of a CGRP mAb was safe, well-tolerated and associated with incremental and clinically meaningful reductions in MHD for those who stayed on the combination treatment. No new safety signals were identified. Of those who discontinued, the majority reported lack of insurance coverage as a reason. Prospective real-world and controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the safety and potential benefits of this combination treatment paradigm for people with CM.

Long-Term Effectiveness of Three Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Resistant Chronic Migraine Patients Based on the MIDAS score

BACKGROUND

Criteria, including clinical features and effective outcomes, for access and persistence of novel but costly treatments may vary between countries, thus affecting the health of patients. Monoclonal antibodies against the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs) for migraine treatment are currently prescribed following strict criteria.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to assess the effectiveness and safety of three anti-CGRP mAbs (erenumab, galcanezumab, and fremanezumab) in consecutive resistant chronic migraine patients presenting at our Headache Center and the impact of criteria set by the Italian Medicines Agency to start and continue (achieving a ≥ 50% reduction in Migraine Disability Assessment [MIDAS] score) with treatment under the reimbursement program.

METHODS

A monocentric, prospective, cohort study was conducted, enrolling 203 severe (resistant to three or more preventive treatments) chronic migraine patients (84.7% with medication overuse) treated with erenumab (47.2%), galcanezumab (36.5%), or fremanezumab (16.3%), with up to 12 months follow-up. Patients completed a headache diary that included monthly migraine days (MMDs), number of analgesics and days with analgesic use, and patient-reported outcome questionnaires (MIDAS, Headache Impact Test 6 [HIT-6] questionnaires, and the Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC] scale). Moreover, percentages of patients showing ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100% reduction in MMDs (responder rates) were calculated at different follow-ups. A subgroup analysis was performed for patients with 12-month follow-up. Potential predictors of response were assessed at different follow-ups.

RESULTS

In the overall population, all three anti-CGRP mAbs were similarly effective and dropouts were 17.2%. The percentage of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in MMDs (min-max 36.4-56.8%) and in monthly analgesic consumption (51.1-75.7%) was inferior to the percentage of patients who reported a ≥ 50% reduction in MIDAS score (89.5-100%). HIT-6 score was also consistently reduced at all follow-ups. In patients with a 12-month follow-up, MIDAS and HIT-6 scores were also reduced at all follow-ups compared with baseline, with 84.4-100% of patients achieving a ≥ 50% reduction in MIDAS score, and patients with a ≥ 50% response rate ranging from 36.4 to 66.6%. No severe adverse events were recorded. Fewer migraine days at baseline were associated with ≥ 50% response rate at 1 month and fewer MMDs, years of chronic migraine, and monthly analgesic use at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

In resistant chronic migraine patients, anti-CGRP mAbs are effective and safe. A ≥ 50% reduction in MIDAS score seems to be the most advantageous outcome measure in this setting, which allows most severe migraine patients to persist with treatment.

Real-world evidence data on the monoclonal antibody erenumab in migraine prevention: perspectives of treating physicians in Germany

BACKGROUND

Erenumab, the first-in-class fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, was shown to be efficacious and safe for the prophylactic treatment of migraine in adults in randomized clinical trials. Large-scale, real-world evidence in multi-centre settings is still needed to confirm these results. Erenumab patient profiles outside clinical trials and physicians' treatment patterns, as well as data from patients treated in Germany, a severely impacted population, are not published yet.

METHODS

TELESCOPE was a multi-centre survey gathering real-world data from 45 German headache centres between July 2019 and December 2019. The project consisted of two parts. In the first part, treating physicians shared their experiences on current erenumab treatment with regard to patient profiles, treatment patterns and treatment responses. In the second part, a retrospective chart review was conducted of 542 migraine patients treated with erenumab for at least three months. Treatment responses focused on various aspects of patients' quality of life.

RESULTS

The analysis of 542 patients' charts revealed that three-month treatment with erenumab significantly reduced monthly headaches, migraine and acute medication days. Furthermore, headache intensity and frequency were reduced in over 75 % and accompanying aura in 35 % of patients. The clinical global impression scale revealed a general improvement in 91 % of patients. According to the treating physicians' professional judgement, 83 % of patients responded to erenumab and 80 % were satisfied with the treatment. Physicians evaluated restricted quality of life, the number of monthly migraine days and previous, prophylactic treatments as the main components of the current patient profile for monoclonal antibody recipients. Based on the assessment of physicians, erenumab reduced migraine symptoms in 65 % and increased quality of life in more than 75 % of their patients.

CONCLUSIONS

TELESCOPE confirms positive treatment responses with erenumab shown in clinical trials in a real-world multi-centre setting. The results show consistently positive experiences of physicians utilizing erenumab in clinical practice and underline that therapy with this monoclonal antibody is effective in migraine patients, particular in those, who have failed several prophylactic therapies.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for the prophylactic treatment of headaches in adult patients with chronic migraine: a safety evaluation

Introduction: Existing oral prophylaxis for chronic migraine (CM) are often ineffective or poorly tolerated. OnabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA) is approved for headache prophylaxis in CM and ameliorates headaches in patients refractory to multiple preventatives.Areas covered: We appraise evidence regarding action mechanisms, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of onabotA in CM prophylaxis. We critically evaluate salient clinical and real-world studies demonstrating its efficacy in improving multiple aspects of CM. We discuss onabotA safety, tolerability, and adverse events (AEs) for CM prophylaxis from clinical trials, post-authorization studies and meta-analyses, including novel pregnancy safety data and comparisons with oral prophylactics. We explore areas of future interest, particularly onabotA safety and efficacy in the context of novel antibody-based prophylaxis.Expert opinion: Clinical and real-world evidence demonstrate onabotA safety, tolerability and efficacy for CM prophylaxis. Most AEs are mild/moderate and self-limiting, with few serious AEs and no treatment-related deaths. Common AEs include neck pain, ptosis, muscle weakness, and stiffness. Modifying existing responder-criteria enables more patients to benefit from onabotA. OnabotA shows superior safety and efficacy to oral preventatives, and appears safe in pregnancy. Future pregnancy-risk register will clarify pregnancy and lactation safety further. Future research comparing onabotA safety and efficacy with newly emergent antibody-based prophylaxis is keenly awaited.