Indirect Comparison of Topiramate and Monoclonal Antibodies Against CGRP or Its Receptor for the Prophylaxis of Episodic Migraine: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Voltage-gated Calcium Channels as Potential Therapeutic Targets in Migraine

Migraine is a complex and highly incapacitating neurological disorder that affects around 15% of the general population with greater incidence in women, often at the most productive age of life. Migraine physiopathology is still not fully understood, but it involves multiple mediators and events in the trigeminovascular system and the central nervous system. The identification of calcitonin gene-related peptide as a key mediator in migraine physiopathology has led to the development of effective and highly selective antimigraine therapies. However, this treatment is neither accessible nor effective for all migraine sufferers. Thus, a better understanding of migraine mechanisms and the identification of potential targets are still clearly warranted. Voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) are widely distributed in the trigeminovascular system, and there is accumulating evidence of their contribution to the mechanisms associated with headache pain. Several drugs used in migraine abortive or prophylactic treatment target VGCCs, which probably contributes to their analgesic effect. This review aims to summarize the current evidence of VGGC contribution to migraine physiopathology and to discuss how current pharmacological options for migraine treatment interfere with VGGC function. PERSPECTIVE: Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) represents a major migraine mediator, but few studies have investigated the relationship between CGRP and VGCCs. CGRP release is calcium channel-dependent and VGGCs are key players in familial migraine. Further studies are needed to determine whether VGCCs are suitable molecular targets for treating migraine.

A role of NLRP3 and MMP9 in migraine progression: a systematic review of translational study

Background

Migraines affect one billion individuals globally, with a higher occurrence among young adults and women. A significant survey in the United States indicated that 17.1% of women and 5.6% of men suffer from migraines. This study seeks to investigate the potential connection between NLRP3 and MMP9 in migraine pathology.

Methods

The research involved searching databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Proquest, with the search concluding on March 31, 2024. Following PRISMA guidelines, PICO data were collected, focusing exclusively on animal models induced by Nitroglycerine (10 mg/kg), while excluding clinical studies.

Results

The study, originally registered in Prospero Reg. No. CRD42022355893, conducted bias analysis using SYRCLE's RoB tool and evaluated author consensus using GraphPad v9.5.1. Out of 7,359 search results, 22 papers met the inclusion criteria. Inter-rater reliability among reviewers was assessed using Cohen's kappa statistics.

Conclusion

This review summarizes 22 preclinical studies on Nitroglycerin (NTG), NLRP3, MMP9, and related biomarkers in migraine. They reveal that NTG, especially at 10 mg/kg, consistently induces migraine-like symptoms in rodents by activating NLRP3 inflammasome and stimulating proinflammatory molecule production.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, CRD42022355893.

Results of a Web-Based Survey on 2565 Greek Migraine Patients in 2023: Demographic Data, Imposed Burden and Satisfaction to Acute and Prophylactic Treatments in the Era of New Treatment Options

Objective: The Greek Society of Migraine and Headache Patients conducted its third in-line population web-based survey in 2023 to ascertain if the burden of the disease and the patients' satisfaction with conventional and novel migraine therapies are changing compared to our previous findings from 2018 and 2020. Methods: The sampling process was based on a random call to participants to reply to a specific migraine-focused self-administered questionnaire, including 83 questions in Greek, which was distributed nationwide through the online research software SurveyMonkey. Results: We eventually enrolled 2565 patients, the majority of which were females. Our findings clearly demonstrate that migraine is still a burdensome condition. The degree of its impact on all aspects of productivity depends on the monthly frequency of migraine and the response rates to acute and prophylactic treatments. A total of 1029 (42.4%) of the patients had visited the emergency room mainly for unresponsiveness to acute treatments or aura-related symptoms. Triptans seem to be partly effective as acute therapies. OnabotulinumtoxinA seems to be effective for almost half of chronic migraine patients (43.9%) to report adequate satisfaction with this treatment (27.8% were "fairly happy", 10.6% were "very happy", and 5.5% were "extremely happy"). Due to their high rates of preventative effectiveness, most respondents treated with anti-CGRP Mabs expressed their optimism concerning their future while living with their migraine (88.25%), as well as towards further improvements in their quality of life (82.8%) status, mostly with fremanezumab. Conclusions: The patients recognize the usefulness of anti-CGRP Mabs in migraine prevention and consequently seem to be more optimistic than before about living with migraine. Considering the market change that is anticipated with the use of gepants and ditans, larger longitudinal population-based studies are warranted to further explore if the new era of migraine therapeutics might further lessen the burden of the disease.

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

Background

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

Method

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42021265993.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeting therapies are a first-line option for the prevention of migraine: An American Headache Society position statement update

OBJECTIVE

To provide a position statement update from The American Headache Society specifically regarding therapies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) for the prevention of migraine.

BACKGROUND

All migraine preventive therapies previously considered to be first-line treatments were developed for other indications and adopted later for migraine. Adherence to these therapies is often poor due to issues with efficacy and tolerability. Multiple new migraine-specific therapies have been developed based on a broad foundation of pre-clinical and clinical evidence showing that CGRP plays a key role in the pathogenesis of migraine. These CGRP-targeting therapies have had a transformational impact on the management of migraine but are still not widely considered to be first-line approaches.

METHODS

Evidence regarding migraine preventive therapies including primary and secondary endpoints from randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials, post hoc analyses and open-label extensions of these trials, and prospective and retrospective observational studies were collected from a variety of sources including PubMed, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The results and conclusions based upon these results were reviewed and discussed by the Board of Directors of The American Headache Society to confirm consistency with clinical experience and to achieve consensus.

RESULTS

The evidence for the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of CGRP-targeting migraine preventive therapies (the monoclonal antibodies: erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab, and the gepants: rimegepant and atogepant) is substantial, and vastly exceeds that for any other preventive treatment approach. The evidence remains consistent across different individual CGRP-targeting treatments and is corroborated by extensive "real-world" clinical experience. The data indicates that the efficacy and tolerability of CGRP-targeting therapies are equal to or greater than those of previous first-line therapies and that serious adverse events associated with CGRP-targeting therapies are rare.

CONCLUSION

The CGRP-targeting therapies should be considered as a first-line approach for migraine prevention along with previous first-line treatments without a requirement for prior failure of other classes of migraine preventive treatment.

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

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

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Oral CGRP Antagonists, Atogepant and Rimegepant, for the Preventative Treatment of Episodic Migraine: Results from a US Societal Perspective Model

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Two oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists, atogepant and rimegepant, were approved in 2021 for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine (EM), yet no formal cost-effectiveness analysis has been published. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atogepant 60 mg and rimegepant 75 mg compared with placebo.

METHODS

A decision tree model was constructed over a 1-year time horizon from a US societal perspective. Patient cohorts were simulated using baseline and change from baseline monthly migraine days (MMDs) reported in the trials to incorporate responder rates and within patient response into the model. Due to heterogeneity between the trial populations, each medication was compared with its respective trial's placebo group. Direct healthcare resource costs, productivity costs, acute medication costs, and quality-of-life values were obtained from the literature.

RESULTS

The atogepant cohort experienced an incremental increase in healthcare plus productivity costs of $11,978 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.026 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of more than $450,000/QALY. The rimegepant cohort experienced an incremental increase of $21,692 when compared with placebo, with a gain of 0.024 QALYs. This yields an ICER of more than $890,000/QALY when comparing rimegepant with placebo. Cost savings between atogepant and atogepant placebo were greatest with respect to acute medication costs at $735 of savings over 1 year, followed by savings of $135 for healthcare resource utilization and $34 for productivity costs. A similar relationship was seen between rimegepant and rimegepant placebo. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis found that monthly acquisition costs of atogepant and rimegepant had the largest impact on the ICER, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Atogepant and rimegepant were both unable to meet generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds < 150,0000/QALY. Additional studies are needed to better guide decision making regarding oral CGRPs' place in therapy.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Supporting the Young Adulthood Transitions in Women With Migraine

Migraine is a painful neurological disorder that disproportionately affects women and has a significant impact on quality of life. This article summarizes the critical role of women's health nurses in supporting young adult women with migraine during major life transitions. Nurses can advocate for workplace or school disability accommodations for women with migraine. Nurses can also support young adult women with migraine by providing education about available treatment that becomes available after an individual's 18th birthday. Women's health nurses can also provide counseling on healthy lifestyle habits to sustain through life transitions, such as guidance on safe alcohol consumption and wellness approaches to migraine management. Through these interventions, women's health nurses can help women with migraine to succeed personally, professionally, and academically while effectively managing migraine symptoms.

OnabotulinumtoxinA for Pediatric Migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a painful, prevalent, and problematic condition among children. Children need access to safe and effective treatment options to alleviate the impact of this chronic condition on their wellbeing.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Nurses have a crucial role in supporting patient access to BTX-A. Given the results of this and other studies demonstrating the safety and efficacy of BTX-A in children, nurses can support policy change for health plans to fund this intervention for pediatric migraineurs. Allowing children to receive the safe and effective BTX-A injections will lessen the already significant impact of chronic migraine on their physical, emotional and mental health. Nurses can also play a key role in providing education to patients regarding safe administration of BTX-A for migraine.

AIM

The objective of this study was to define the experiences, effects, and clinical response of children to onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX-A) for migraine prevention.

METHODS

Clinical documentation for patients aged 13-17 years presenting for BTX-A treatment for chronic migraine between 2016-2022 in a community-based specialty clinic within a large, urban, pediatric academic medical center were included. A series of one-way repeated measures (analysis of variance [ANOVA]) were conducted to compare headache frequency, severity, and duration at baseline, and following first and second injections of BTX-A.

RESULTS

Of 32 eligible participants, administration of BTX-A demonstrated a decrease in headache frequency and severity. Participants reported nearly seven fewer headache days per month. Participants reported neck stiffness, fever or flu-like symptoms, fatigue, and worsening pain following BTX-A administration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric migraineurs need therapies that are safe, effective, and accessible. BTX-A was a safe and effective treatment for migraine among the children included in this study.

European Headache Federation (EHF) critical reappraisal and meta-analysis of oral drugs in migraine prevention - part 3: topiramate

OBJECTIVE

Topiramate is a repurposed first-line treatment for migraine prophylaxis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to critically re-appraise the existing evidence supporting the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate.

METHODS

A systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for trials of pharmacological treatment in migraine prophylaxis as of August 13, 2022, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Randomized controlled trials in adult patients that used topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of migraine, with placebo as active comparator, were included. Two reviewers independently screened the retrieved studies and extracted all data. Outcomes of interest were the 50% responder rates, the reduction in monthly migraine days, and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation. Results were pooled and meta-analyzed, with sensitivity analysis based on the risk of bias of the studies, the monthly migraine days at baseline, and the previous use of other prophylactic treatments. Certainty evidence was judged according to the GRADE framework.

RESULTS

Eight out of 10,826 studies fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria, accounting for 2,610 randomized patients. Six studies included patients with episodic migraine and two with chronic migraine. Topiramate dose ranged from 50 to 200 mg/day, and all studies included a placebo arm. There was a high certainty that topiramate: 1) increased the proportion of patients who achieved a 50% responder rate in monthly migraine days, compared to placebo [relative risk: 1.61 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-2.01); absolute risk difference: 168 more per 1,000 (95% CI: 80 to 278 more)]; 2) was associated with 0.99 (95% CI: 1.41-0.58) fewer migraine days than placebo; 3) and had a higher proportion of patients with adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation [absolute risk difference 80 patients more per 1,000 (95% CI: 20 to 140 more patients)].

CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence of the efficacy of topiramate in the prophylaxis of migraine, albeit its use poses a risk of adverse events that may lead to treatment discontinuation, with a negative effect on patient satisfaction and adherence to care.

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.

The Role of Step Therapy in the Treatment of Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines recent evidence and applies bioethical principles to evaluate the benefits and risks of using step therapy in the treatment of migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

With the CGRP mAbs, gepants, and lasmiditan now on the market for up to 5 years, new research, including network meta-analyses and long-term use studies, can evaluate the comparative efficacy, tolerability, and adherence of these medications relative to older acute and preventive medications for the treatment of migraine. Deciding how medications are chosen for patients requires accounting for many factors including sustainability, efficacy, tolerability, and preference. Newer research can help give clarity on the appropriateness of gating certain treatment options behind others.

Galcanezumab in patients with episodic migraine: results from the open-label period of the phase 3 PERSIST study

BACKGROUND

The phase 3 randomized PERSIST study demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of galcanezumab, a humanized anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody for prevention of episodic migraines. We present findings from the open-label extension (OLE) of PERSIST, which evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in patients from China, India, and Russia.

METHODS

Patients completing the 3-month double-blind period of PERSIST were eligible for the 3-month OLE. Patients previously randomized to galcanezumab (GMB/GMB group) continued to receive galcanezumab 120 mg at all three visits during the OLE whereas patients randomized to placebo received a 240 mg loading dose of galcanezumab and then two 120 mg doses (PBO/GMB group). The primary outcome was the mean change (from double-blind baseline) in the number of monthly migraine headache days (MHDs) to month 6. Other endpoints included percent reduction in monthly MHDs from double-blind baseline to month 6, functional outcomes, safety and tolerability.

RESULTS

Overall, 99% of patients completing the double-blind period entered the OLE, and 96% completed through month 6. Patients in the GMB/GMB group achieved continued improvements in efficacy, with the reduction from baseline in the mean number of monthly MHDs, and slightly increasing from 4.01 days at the end of the double-blind period to 4.62 at the end of the OLE. Of patients who were ≥ 50% responders to galcanezumab at month 3, 66% maintained this response through to month 6. Patients in the PBO/GMB group experienced a rapid reduction in the number of monthly MHDs after initiation of galcanezumab, with a mean reduction from baseline of 4.56 days by month 6. The long-term benefits of galcanezumab were also supported by improvements in other efficacy and functional endpoints. All safety findings were consistent with the known long-term safety profile of galcanezumab; no patients experienced a treatment-related serious adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Galcanezumab was efficacious and well-tolerated in patients with episodic migraine from China, India and Russia, for up to 6 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrisABSTRACT_pals.gov NCT03963232, registered May 24, 2019.

Emerging experimental drugs in clinical trials for migraine: observations and key talking points

INTRODUCTION

There have been significant advances in the treatment of migraine. In response to the clinical success of monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide, there is interest in the clinical trial outcomes of alternative emerging drugs that act on novel targets associated with migraine pathophysiology. As approximately 50% of patients do not respond to CGRP therapies, there is significant value in future drug innovation. Emerging drugs in clinical trials for the treatment of migraine aim to fill this need.

AREAS COVERED

The emerging drugs that will be discussed in this review include zavegepant, lasmiditan, delta opioid receptor agonists, neuronal nitric oxide synthase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies targeting pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) and its receptor, dual orexin receptor antagonists, metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 antagonists, and inducers of ketosis.

EXPERT OPINION

When considering the preclinical and clinical research related to the emerging drug classes discussed in this review, most therapies are derived from highly supported targets of migraine pathogenesis. Although the individual drugs discussed in this review may be of dubious clinical value, the importance of the therapeutic targets on which they act cannot be understated. Future research is necessary to appropriately target the pathways elucidated by preclinical studies.

Real-world effectiveness of fremanezumab in patients with migraine switching from another mAb targeting the CGRP pathway: a subgroup analysis of the Finesse Study

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway are effective and safe for prophylactic treatment of episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM). In case of treatment failure of a CGRP pathway targeting mAb, physician has to decide whether using another anti-CGRP pathway mAb is useful. This interim analysis of Finesse Study evaluates effectiveness of the anti-CGRP mAb fremanezumab in patients with a history of other prior anti-CGRP pathway mAb treatments (switch patients).

METHODS

FINESSE, a non-interventional, prospective, multicentre, two-country (Germany-Austria) study observing migraine patients receiving fremanezumab in clinical routine. This subgroup analysis presents data on documented effectiveness over 3 months after the first dose of fremanezumab in switch patients. Effectiveness was evaluated based on reduction in average number of migraine days per month (MMDs), MIDAS and HIT-6 scores changes as well as in number of monthly days with acute migraine medication use.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-three out of 867 patients with a history of anti-CGRP pathway mAb treatment prior to initiation of fremanezumab were analysed. Switch to fremanezumab led to ≥ 50% MMD reduction in 42.8% of migraine patients, with higher response rate in EM (48.0%) than in CM patients (36.5%). A ≥ 30% MMD reduction was achieved by 58.7% in CM patients. After three months, monthly number of migraine days decreased by 6.4 ± 5.87 (baseline: 13.6 ± 6.5; p < 0.0001) in all patients, 5.2 ± 4.04 in EM and 7.7 ± 7.45 in CM patients. MIDAS scores decreased from 73.3 ± 56.8 (baseline) to 50.3 ± 52.9 (after 3 months; p = 0.0014), HIT-6 scores decreased from 65.9 ± 5.0 to 60.9 ± 7.2 (p < 0.0001). Concomitant use of acute migraine medication had decreased from 9.7 ± 4.98 (baseline) to 4.9 ± 3.66 (3 months) (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that about 42.8% of anti-CGRP pathway mAb-non-responder benefit from switching to fremanezumab. These results suggest that switching to fremanezumab may be a promising option for patients experiencing poor tolerability or inadequate efficacy with prior other anti-CGRP pathway mAb use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

FINESSE Study is registered on the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (EUPAS44606).

Monoclonal antibodies against CGRP (R): non-responders and switchers: real world data from an austrian case series

OBJECTIVE

Assessement of the responder and non-responder rate to consecutive monoclonal CGRP-antibody (CGRP-mAb) treatment, the presence of side effects, analysis of predictors of response and loss-of-effectiveness evaluation over time.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis including 171 patients with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM), who received one, two or three different CGRP-mAbs. Non-response was defined as ≤ 50% reduction of monthly migraine days (MMDs) in EM and ≤ 30% reduction of MMDs in CM after 3 months of treatment.

RESULTS

123 (71.9%) responded to the first mAb. Side effects led to treatment discontinuation in 9 (5.3%) patients. Of the 26 patients who did not respond to the first mAb or experienced a loss of efficacy over time, 11 (42.3%) responded to the second and two (28.6%) of 7 to the third monoclonal antibody. Poor response to therapy was associated with a higher monthly migraine frequency (p = 0.028), a higher number of prior preventive migraine therapies (p = 0.011) and medication overuse (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support mAb-class switch in non-responders or in patients experiencing a loss of effectiveness. The use of a third CGRP-mAb could be beneficial for some patients.

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide and Adrenomedullin Levels During Ictal and Interictal Periods in Patients With Migraine

Background Peptides related to calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) have been suggested to have a role in migraine. Adrenomedullin (AM) might be a candidate molecule because it is related to pain pathways in the peripheral and central nervous systems and uses the same receptors as CGRP. Methodology In this study, we examined the serum CGRP and AM levels during unprovoked ictal and interictal periods of 30 migraine patients as well as 25 healthy controls. Another focus of this study was on the association of CGRP and AM levels with clinical features. Results Mean serum AM levels were 15.80 pg/mL (11.91-21.43 pg/mL) in the ictal and 15.85 pg/mL (12.25-19.29 pg/mL) in the interictal periods in the migraine group and 13.36 pg/mL (10.84-17.18 pg/mL) in the control group. Mean serum CGRP levels were 2.93 pg/mL (2.45-3.90 pg/mL) in the ictal and 3.25 pg/mL (2.85-4.67 pg/mL) in the interictal periods in the migraine group and 3.03 pg/mL (2.48-3.80 pg/mL) in the control group. There were no statistical differences between ictal and/or interictal AM and CGRP levels (p = 0.558 and p = 0.054, respectively) which were also comparable with the results of the control group (p = 0.230, p = 0.295, p = 0.987, p = 0.139, respectively). Ictal serum CGRP and/or AM levels did not correlate with any of the reported clinical features. Conclusions Serum AM and CGRP levels are similar in interictal and unprovoked ictal periods in migraine patients and as well in controls. These results do not indicate that these molecules do not have a role in migraine pathophysiology. Considering the broad mechanisms of action of peptides in the CGRP family, further studies are needed in larger cohorts.

Observational Analysis of the Costs Associated with Acute Treatment of Breakthrough Migraine Attacks in Medicaid Patients Using Preventive Therapies

INTRODUCTION

Medications for preventive treatment of migraine reduce migraine frequency, usually measured by a reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD), but generally do not eliminate the need for acute treatment. To assess the economic impact of treatment-related reductions in frequency, methodological guidance recommends capturing cost differences along the spectrum of MMD.

OBJECTIVE

Characterize monthly migraine medication costs along the spectrum of MMD for patients using calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) for prevention.

METHODS

Medicaid State Drug Utilization Data (SDUD) were used to identify formulations and per-unit costs for oral, intranasal, and parenteral migraine-specific medications for acute and preventive treatment used by fee-for-service (FFS) Medicaid enrollees in 2020. National drug codes of relevant therapies were used to match SDUD to formulation characteristics including substance, route of administration, and branded/generic marketing status. Mean per-unit cost and the formulation's share of total prescriptions were estimated. Monthly medication costs were modeled based on formulations' per-unit costs and frequency of acute medication use during clinical trials of CGRP mAbs.

RESULTS

In the SDUD, there were 563,338 prescriptions for migraine-specific acute medications; triptans accounted for 97.37%. Triptan formulations prescribed were 83.78% oral tablet, 10.89% orally disintegrating tablet, 2.60% intranasal, and 2.73% parenteral. Dihydroergotamine accounted for < 1% of total prescriptions and had the highest per-unit cost ($443.50, branded intranasal). There were 97,119 prescriptions for CGRP mAbs, the majority for erenumab (45.73%) or galcanezumab (45.24%). Modeled monthly acute and preventive medication costs ranged from approximately $550 in patients with the fewest MMD treated with oral triptans to > $1500 in patients with the most MMD treated with dihydroergotamine.

CONCLUSION

In consideration of the migraine-specific acute medications used in FFS Medicaid 2020, for patients using CGRP mAbs for prevention, medication costs may vary significantly with the number of breakthrough attacks treated per month and the type of migraine-specific acute therapy used.

A Pharmacological Review of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Biologics and Future Use for Chronic Pain

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist medications have become the mainstay of acute and chronic migraine management in the outpatient setting and look to become more widely utilized by clinicians once the medications become available in generic form. However, their role in practice has remained limited to the treatment of migraines despite the ubiquitous presence of the molecule throughout the body. The literature surrounding expansion of the utility of these medications is limited; however, there have been several promising publications, and further studies are in the process to quantify their utility in the treatment of other pain-related disorders. This is a qualitative review of the current literature surrounding CGRP, particularly in relation to the treatment of non-migraine pain conditions, and looks to suggest potential utility in the field of chronic pain.

Gel-forming antagonist provides a lasting effect on CGRP-induced vasodilation

Migraine affects ∼15% of the adult population, and the standard treatment includes the use of triptans, ergotamines, and analgesics. Recently, CGRP and its receptor, the CLR/RAMP1 receptor complex, have been targeted for migraine treatment due to their critical roles in mediating migraine headaches. The effort has led to the approval of several anti-CGRP antibodies for chronic migraine treatment. However, many patients still suffer continuous struggles with migraine, perhaps due to the limited ability of anti-CGRP therapeutics to fully reduce CGRP levels or reach target cells. An alternative anti-CGRP strategy may help address the medical need of patients who do not respond to existing therapeutics. By serendipity, we have recently found that several chimeric adrenomedullin/adrenomedullin 2 peptides are potent CLR/RAMP receptor antagonists and self-assemble to form liquid gels. Among these analogs, the ADE651 analog, which potently inhibits CLR/RAMP1 receptor signaling, forms gels at a 6-20% level. Screening of ADE651 variants indicated that residues at the junctional region of this chimeric peptide are important for gaining the gel-forming capability. Gel-formation significantly slowed the passage of ADE651 molecules through Centricon filters. Consistently, subcutaneous injection of ADE651 gel in rats led to the sustained presence of ADE651 in circulation for >1 week. In addition, analysis of vascular blood flow in rat hindlimbs showed ADE651 significantly reduces CGRP-induced vasodilation. Because gel-forming antagonists could have direct and sustained access to target cells, ADE651 and related antagonists for CLR/RAMP receptors may represent promising candidates for targeting CGRP- and/or adrenomedullin-mediated headaches in migraine patients.

Erenumab versus topiramate: post hoc efficacy analysis from the HER-MES study

OBJECTIVE

HER-MES was the first head-to-head, phase 4 trial to assess the tolerability and effectiveness of erenumab against standard of care treatment (topiramate). This post hoc analysis compared the efficacy of erenumab with topiramate in patients who completed the trial on study medication.

METHODS

Post hoc sensitivity analysis was performed using the full analysis set. Outcomes assessed included the proportion of patients with a ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) from baseline (50% responder rate), over the last 3 months (months 4, 5, and 6) of the double-blind treatment phase (DBTP), the 50% responder rate during the first month of the DBTP, and change from baseline in MMD during the DBTP. Multiple imputation was done for efficacy values of patients who discontinued study treatment.

RESULTS

Patients (N = 777) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either 70 or 140 mg/month erenumab (N = 389) or 50-100 mg/day topiramate (N = 388). Of these, 334 patients (85.9%) receiving erenumab, and 231 patients (59.5%) receiving topiramate completed the DBTP on study medication. Patients on study medication until the end of the DBTP received a mean dose of 119 mg/month for erenumab and 92 mg/day for topiramate. At month 1, a significantly greater proportion of patients receiving erenumab (39.2%) reported ≥50% reduction in MMD from baseline compared with those receiving topiramate (24.0%; p < 0.001). In the last 3 months, a significantly larger proportion of patients receiving erenumab (60.3%) achieved ≥50% reduction in MMD from baseline compared with those receiving topiramate (43.3%; p < 0.001). Patients receiving erenumab demonstrated significantly greater reductions in MMD during the last 3 months from baseline versus those receiving topiramate (- 6.13 vs - 4.90; 95% CI: - 1.87 to - 0.61; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis demonstrated significantly superior efficacy of erenumab versus topiramate in achieving a ≥50% reduction in MMD with an early onset of efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03828539 .

Migraine and Current Pharmacologic Management

In light of the multiple pharmacologic alternatives for migraine management, the adverse effects associated with different treatment regimens, and their varying efficacy, it is vital to undertake ongoing evaluations and seek a tailored therapeutic strategy. This case report describes two patients who presented with classic migraine headaches, with the first responding to both abortive and prophylactic migraine medications and the second, with status migrainosus-like presentation, responding to the newer antimigraine agents. We also examined current pharmacological therapeutic options and existing recommendations, analyzing their strengths and weaknesses. This case review exemplifies how treatment in the last 10 years and success in medications used for abortive and prophylactic therapy are evolving from the older agents to newer agents like the recently approved calcitonin gene receptor protein monoclonal antibody inhibitors.

New Approaches to Shifting the Migraine Treatment Paradigm

The standard of care paradigm for migraine treatment has been based almost exclusively on approaches that grew out of the happenstance use of market pharmaceuticals. Only methysergide, which has long since been removed from use for safety concerns, the ergotamine family of drugs, and the triptans were explicitly developed with migraine and other vascular headaches in mind. While the forward and innovative thinking to utilize the broad array of agents to treat migraine served millions well, their therapeutic efficacy was often low, and adverse event profiles were troublesome in the least. Advances in biochemical and molecular biology and the application of advanced "designing drugs" methods have brought about a potentially significant shift in treatment. The gepants have efficacies similar to the triptans but without vascular safety or medication overuse concerns. Preventative gepants offer innovative approaches to prevention and efficacy that exceed even the CGRP monoclonal antibodies. Those monoclonal antibodies brought rapid and highly effective outcomes across the spectrum of migraine. They outpaced older oral medication efficacy and eliminated most adverse events while potentially improving compliance with monthly or quarterly dosing. Other serotonin receptors beyond the 5HT1B and1D receptors have been targeted for decades. They now lead us to better formulations of dihydroergotamine for efficacy, convenience, and tolerability, and a 5HT1F-specific acute treatment like the gepants opens new options for acute management. Neuromodulation goes back to the mid-1800's. Our improved understanding of applied biomedical engineering has brought forward several tantalizing devices, including the application of currents distant from the target and patient regulated. Whether these advances change the paradigm of migraine treatment and standards of care remains to be seen, and issues such as cost and patient acceptance will help mold it.

Galcanezumab in episodic migraine: the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled PERSIST study

Background

Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated efficacy and good tolerability in patients with episodic migraine in previous phase 3 trials. We report results from the PERSIST study, which was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in patients with episodic migraine from China, India, and Russia.

Methods

This phase 3 study was conducted at 40 centers in China (n = 26), India (n = 10), and Russia (n = 4). Eligible adult patients with episodic migraine were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive monthly galcanezumab 120 mg (with 240 mg loading dose) or placebo during a double-blind, 3-month treatment period. The primary endpoint was the overall mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days (MHDs). Key secondary endpoints were the mean proportion of patients with ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% reductions from baseline in MHDs and mean change in the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) Role Function-Restrictive domain score.

Results

In total, 520 patients were randomized and received at least one dose of galcanezumab (N = 261) or placebo (N = 259). The least squares (LS) mean reduction from baseline in monthly MHDs over 3 months was significantly greater with galcanezumab compared with placebo (-3.81 days vs. -1.99 days; p < 0.0001). Significantly greater mean proportions of patients with galcanezumab versus placebo had ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% reductions from baseline in MHDs (all p < 0.0001). The overall mean improvement from baseline in MSQ Role Function-Restrictive score over 3 months was significantly greater with galcanezumab versus placebo (p < 0.0001). There were no clinically meaningful differences between the galcanezumab and placebo group on any safety parameters except for a higher incidence of injection site pruritus (5.0% vs. 0.0%), injection site reaction (3.8% vs. 0.4%), and injection site discomfort (2.3% vs. 0.0%). TEAEs related to injection sites were mild in severity, except in 1 patient who had a moderate injection site reaction. Six serious adverse events were reported by 6 patients (2 galcanezumab, 4 placebo).

Conclusions

Galcanezumab 120 mg once monthly was effective and well tolerated in patients with episodic migraine from China, India, and Russia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03963232 (PERSIST), registered May 24, 2019.

It is time anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies be considered first-line prophylaxis for migraine

The result of more than thirty years of research, anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies are currently the state of the art for migraine preventive therapy. Their efficacy and safety, supported by an already large and growing body of evidence, are added by many other advantages: an early onset of action, favorable posology, negligible pharmacological interaction, and a broad-reaching efficacy in many challenging clinical contexts. When compared to standard prophylactics, these novel medications seem at least as efficacious, clearly more tolerable and, consequently, with a superior adherence profile. Furthermore, recently published analyses indicate that they are cost-effective, especially among those with chronic migraine. Yet, current guidelines endorse their use only after multiple other preventives have failed or have been deemed not tolerable. Although this recommendation may have been sensible at first, the now available data strongly point that time has come for anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies to be acknowledged as first-line treatments for migraine patients with severe disability. For these individuals, delaying treatment until several other alternatives have failed incurs in significant losses, both economically and to many relevant aspects of their lives.