Ubrogepant, an Acute Treatment for Migraine, Improved Patient-Reported Functional Disability and Satisfaction in 2 Single-Attack Phase 3 Randomized Trials, ACHIEVE I and II

Pharmacokinetics of Ubrogepant in Healthy Japanese and White Adults

Ubrogepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults. The objectives of this study were to evaluate (1) single-dose pharmacokinetics (PK) and dose proportionality of ubrogepant in Japanese participants, (2) the safety and tolerability of ubrogepant in healthy Japanese and White participants, and (3) to compare the PK of ubrogepant in Japanese versus White participants. A total of 48 participants were enrolled into 4 cohorts (N = 12 [9 active + 3 placebo] per cohort). A single dose was administered on Day 1 following an overnight fast to assess the PK of ubrogepant at 3 dose levels and test dose proportionality between 25 and 100 mg in Japanese participants. White participants were randomly assigned to ubrogepant (100 mg) or placebo. Dose proportionality was observed in the dose range of 25-100 mg in Japanese participants. Systemic exposure was 20% lower in Japanese participants as compared with White participants, but this difference is unlikely to be clinically relevant. Single doses of ubrogepant (25-100 mg) had a safety profile similar to placebo, and no differences in the safety profile of ubrogepant 100 mg were observed between Japanese versus White participants.

Photophobia is associated with lower sleep quality in individuals with migraine: results from the American Registry for Migraine Research (ARMR)

BACKGROUND

Patients with migraine often have poor sleep quality between and during migraine attacks. Furthermore, extensive research has identified photophobia as the most common and most bothersome symptom in individuals with migraine, second only to headache. Seeking the comfort of darkness is a common strategy for managing pain during an attack and preventing its recurrence between episodes. Given the well-established effects of daily light exposure on circadian activity rhythms and sleep quality, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between photophobia symptoms and sleep quality in a cohort of patients with migraine.

METHODS

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted using existing data extracted from the American Registry for Migraine Research (ARMR). Participants with a migraine diagnosis who had completed the baseline questionnaires (Photosensitivity Assessment Questionnaire (PAQ), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2)), and selected questions of the ARMR Sleep questionnaire were included. Models were created to describe the relationship of photophobia and photophilia with various sleep facets, including sleep quality (SQ), sleep disturbance (SDis), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep-related impairments (SRI), and insomnia. Each model was controlled for age, sex, headache frequency, anxiety, and depression.

RESULTS

A total of 852 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis (mean age (SD) = 49.8 (13.9), 86.6% (n = 738) female). Those with photophobia exhibited significantly poorer sleep quality compared to patients without photophobia (p < 0.001). Photophobia scores were associated with SQ (p < 0.001), SDis (p < 0.001), SOL (p = 0.011), SRI (p = 0.020), and insomnia (p = 0.005) after controlling for age, sex, headache frequency, depression, and anxiety, signifying that higher levels of photophobia were associated with worse sleep-related outcomes. Conversely, photophilia scores were associated with better sleep-related outcomes for SQ (p < 0.007), SOL (p = 0.010), and insomnia (p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

Results suggest that photophobia is a significant predictor of poor sleep quality and sleep disturbances in migraine. These results underscore the necessity for comprehensive and systematic investigations into the intricate interplay between photophobia and sleep to enhance our understanding and develop tailored solutions for individuals with migraine.

Evaluating Ubrogepant-related adverse events using the FDA adverse event reporting system

BACKGROUND

Migraine has a high prevalence in the population and accounts for 12% of primary headaches. Ubrogepant is used for the treatment of acute migraine, and although some clinical trials have demonstrated the safety of Ubrogepant, its long-term safety in a large sample of the population remains to be investigated.

METHODS

We collected data from the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. We used reporting odds ratio (ROR), the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), the information component (IC) and the empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM) to evaluate Ubrogepant-induced adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

We screened out 2,067 reports of Ubrogepant as primary suspected (PS) and 6,190 reports of Ubrogepant-induced AEs as PS. Our results showed that Ubrogepant-induced AEs targeted 4 system organ classes (SOCs), detected 32 Preferred terms (PTs) signals in 9 SOCs, including common Ubrogepant label consistent with Migraine, Nausea, Somnolence, Paraesthesia oral and Dizziness, It also includes the AEs of Hemiparesis, Mental impairment, Dysstasia, Tinnitus, Chest pain, Cold sweat, Neck pain, etc. that have not been demonstrated in previous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified new AEs that have not been reported, which provides a new guidance to deepen the comprehension of the safety of Ubrogepant.

Neurite Damage in Patients with Migraine

We examined neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging in patients with migraine. We found that patients with medication overuse headache exhibited lower orientation dispersion than those without. Moreover, orientation dispersion in the body of the corpus callosum was statistically negatively correlated with migraine attack frequencies. These findings indicate that neurite dispersion is damaged in patients with chronic migraine. Our study results indicate the orientation preference of neurite damage in migraine.

Real-World Use of Ubrogepant as Acute Treatment for Migraine with an Anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody: Results from COURAGE

INTRODUCTION

Although acute and preventive treatments for migraine are commonly given in combination, data on the real-world effectiveness of ubrogepant as an acute treatment when used with an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (with or without onabotulinumtoxinA) are limited. This analysis sought to evaluate the real-world effectiveness, treatment satisfaction, and optimization of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine when used in combination with an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody, with or without concomitant onabotulinumtoxinA.

METHODS

This prospective, multiple-attack, open-label, observational study (COURAGE) assessed meaningful pain relief (MPR), return to normal function (RNF), treatment satisfaction, and acute treatment optimization of ubrogepant (50 or 100 mg) when combined with an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody, onabotulinumtoxinA, or both in adult users of Migraine Buddy, a migraine tracking application.

RESULTS

In the ubrogepant and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody arm (n = 245), following the first ubrogepant-treated attack, 61.6% (151/245) and 80.4% (197/245) of ubrogepant-treated participants achieved MPR at 2 and 4 h post-dose, respectively, and 34.7% (85/245) and 55.5% (136/245) achieved RNF at 2 and 4 h post-dose, respectively. Across up to 10 ubrogepant-treated attacks (N = 1153), MPR was achieved in 51.3% (592/1153) and 73.5% (847/1153) at 2 and 4 h post-dose, respectively. RNF was achieved by 32.2% (371/1153) and 53.2% (613/1153) at 2 and 4 h post-dose. After 30 days, 72.7% (168/231) of participants reported satisfaction (using a 7-point scale) with ubrogepant when used in combination with an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody, and 79.7% (184/231) of participants achieved acute treatment optimization (defined as moderate-maximum treatment efficacy using the Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire-4).

CONCLUSION

Real-world ubrogepant use with an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody was associated with MPR, RNF, satisfaction, and acute treatment optimization.

Clinical guidance for choosing the right pharmacotherapy for migraine attacks

INTRODUCTION

Migraine as headache attacks with autonomic symptoms is a serious condition and it is important to treat a single attack effectively in order to improve not only the patient's quality of life at a given moment but also to prevent the migraine from becoming a chronic one.

AREA COVERED

The article briefly presents the guidance in selecting the most appropriate pharmacological treatment of migraine attack, indicating a personalized approach to migraine patient.

EXPERT OPINION

In this short paper, we show the implementation of new drugs into everyday clinical practice. Good cooperation between the physician and the patient and having the patient's trust is one of the elements of a personalized therapeutic approach and the key to achieving satisfaction of both the patient and the doctor.

Evaluating therapeutic benefits of ubrogepant via latent class models: A post hoc exploratory analysis of the ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an alternative method of defining acute treatment success in migraine by combining multiple indicators into a single dichotomous measure of success.

BACKGROUND

Migraine is characterized by a symptom complex; combining these features as a single endpoint may improve the measurement of treatment effects and better predict patient satisfaction with treatment.

METHODS

We used a confirmatory latent class model (LCM) with two latent classes interpreted as treatment success and treatment failure. Pooled data for placebo and ubrogepant 50 mg from the ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II trials and data for ubrogepant 100 mg from ACHIEVE I were used. LCM inputs included pre-dose and 2-h post-dose measures of pain severity (0-3), the presence/absence of associated symptoms (nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia [0 or 1]), and functional disability (0-3). All definitions were validated against satisfaction with study medication (SWSM) at 24 h post-dose; results were compared with 2-hour pain freedom (2hPF).

RESULTS

This pooled analysis included 2247 participants. At 2 h post-dose in the ubrogepant 50 and 100 mg dose groups, 53.2% (472/887) and 54.9% (246/448) of participants, respectively, were classified as achieving treatment success using the LCM-based approach, compared to 39.0% (356/912) of participants in the placebo group. The results for treatment success using the 2hPF endpoint were 20.7% (184/887) and 21.5% (96/447) in the ubrogepant 50 and 100 mg dose groups, respectively, compared to 12.7% (116/912) for placebo. Using 24-h SWSM as an external validator, the LCM approach sensitivity and correct classification rates were higher than for 2hPF.

CONCLUSION

The LCM approach led to higher rates of treatment success and greater separation between ubrogepant and placebo and was a more sensitive predictor of treatment satisfaction than the regulatory endpoint of 2hPF.

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.

Impact of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies on migraine attack accompanying symptoms: A real-world evidence study

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials on anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies poorly investigated their impact on migraine accompanying symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of basal accompanying symptoms on anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies treatment response and their evolution after six months of treatment in migraine patients.

METHODS

Patients with migraine diagnosis seen in the Headache Clinic and treated with erenumab, galcanezumab or fremanezumab were prospectively recruited. They completed a daily eDiary which provided data on headache frequency and the following accompanying symptoms of each day: photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, dizziness, and aura. Patients were classified as responders or non-responders based on 50% or greater reduction in headache days per month at month 6 (≥50% response rate). Accompanying symptoms ratios based on headache days per month were assessed per patient at baseline and after three and six months. Comparisons for basal characteristics, basal accompanying symptoms ratios and their evolution after six months between responders and non-responders were performed.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-eight patients were included, 44% (69/158) showed ≥50% response rate after six months. A significant reduction in headache days per month in both groups was found at month 6 (-9.4 days/month in ≥50% response rate group; p < 0.001, -2.2 days/month in <50% response rate group; p = 0.004). Additionally, significant decreases in photophobia (-19.5%, p < 0.001), phonophobia (-12.1%, p = 0.010) and aura ratios (-25.1%, p = 0.008) were found in ≥50% response rate group. No statistically significant reductions were found in nausea and dizziness in any group since their reduction was correlated with the decrease in headache days per month. Higher photophobia ratios at baseline were predictive of an increased response between months 3 and 6 (Incidence Risk Ratio = 0.928, p = 0.040).

CONCLUSIONS

The days per month with photophobia, phonophobia and aura decreased at a higher rate than headache days per month after six months in the ≥50% response group. Higher photophobia ratios were associated with higher response rates between three and six months. It could indicate an involvement of peripheral CGRP in photophobia as well as a central modulation of migraine through these treatments which mainly act on the periphery.

Molecular Mechanisms of Migraine: Nitric Oxide Synthase and Neuropeptides

Migraine is a common condition with disabling attacks that burdens people in the prime of their working lives. Despite years of research into migraine pathophysiology and therapeutics, much remains to be learned about the mechanisms at play in this complex neurovascular condition. Additionally, there remains a relative paucity of specific and targeted therapies available. Many sufferers remain underserved by currently available broad action preventive strategies, which are also complicated by poor tolerance and adverse effects. The development of preclinical migraine models in the laboratory, and the advances in human experimental migraine provocation, have led to the identification of key molecules likely involved in the molecular circuity of migraine, and have provided novel therapeutic targets. Importantly, the identification that vasoconstriction is neither necessary nor required for headache abortion has changed the landscape of migraine treatment and has broadened the therapy targets for patients with vascular risk factors or vascular disease. These targets include nitric oxide synthase (NOS) and several neuropeptides that are involved in migraine. The ability of NO donors and infusion of some of these peptides into humans to trigger typical migraine-like attacks has supported the development of targeted therapies against these molecules. Some of these, such as those targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), have already reached clinical practice and are displaying a positive outcome in migraineurs for the better by offering targeted efficacy without significant adverse effects. Others, such as those targeting pituitary adenylate cyclase activating polypeptide (PACAP), are showing promise and are likely to enter phase 3 clinical trials in the near future. Understanding these nitrergic and peptidergic mechanisms in migraine and their interactions is likely to lead to further therapeutic strategies for migraine in the future.

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.

Acute Treatment of Headache (Focus on Migraine)

Acute treatments for migraine and cluster headache are necessary to abort attacks, relieve pain and associated symptoms, and restore an individual's ability to function. Acute headache treatments consist of a variety of medication and nonmedication options. In this article, we discuss the approach to acute treatment of migraine and cluster headache. We summarize the level of evidence to support each acute medication class according to recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well as guideline recommendations from the American Headache Society, American Academy of Neurology, and European Federation of Neurological Society.

A systematic review with expert opinion on the role of gepants for the preventive and abortive treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

Gepants are small molecules targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) that have been recently introduced and are under additional clinical development as preventive and abortive treatment options for migraine.

AREAS COVERED

After providing a narrative overview of current preventive and acute treatment options for migraine and summarizing the pathophysiology of migraine attack and the role of CGRP, we performed a systematic review, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, on trials on gepants in preventive and acute treatment of migraine. Studies and results were reviewed and discussed, and expert opinion was presented. We also collected data on relevant ongoing trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Whether direct targeting CGRP pathways within the central nervous system or indirectly modulating them from the peripheral nervous system is more effective and safer in migraine remains still unclear. The available data on the efficacy and safety of gepants suggest they may represent an abortive, and to some extent, preventive treatment option for migraine, in patients who do not respond or have adverse effects to first/second line treatments or at high risk for medication overuse headache; thus opening new therapeutic horizons.

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.

Functionality, satisfaction, and global impression of change with ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine in triptan insufficient responders: a post hoc analysis of the ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II randomized trials

Background

Triptans are the first-line option for the acute treatment of migraine attacks; however, triptans are contraindicated in people with certain underlying cardiovascular risk factors and are associated with inadequate efficacy or poor tolerability in some individuals. Ubrogepant is an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine.

Methods

This post hoc analysis of the phase 3 ACHIEVE trials examined the impact of ubrogepant on the Functional Disability Scale (FDS), satisfaction with medication, and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) in participants who were self-reported triptan insufficient responders (TIRs), defined as those who are unable to take triptans due to contraindications, tolerability issues, or insufficient efficacy. Responder definitions for the FDS, satisfaction measures, and PGIC were based on qualitative interpretation of the respective response options for the pooled ubrogepant 50 mg and placebo groups.

Results

In the pooled analysis population (n = 1799), 451 (25%) participants were TIRs, with most (80%) reporting insufficient efficacy with triptan use. A significantly higher proportion of TIRs treated with ubrogepant vs placebo reported being able to function normally from 2 to 8 h post dose (P < 0.05). Notably, significance was demonstrated at the time of the primary outcome assessments (2 h post dose), where rates of normal function were 38% for ubrogepant vs 29% for placebo (P = 0.048). A greater proportion of TIRs in the ubrogepant arm vs the placebo arm were satisfied with treatment at 2 (33% vs 21%, P = 0.006) and 24 h (58% vs 28%, P < 0.001) and indicated that their migraine improved at 2 h vs placebo (30% vs 18%, P = 0.006). Results were generally similar in the insufficient efficacy subpopulation of TIRs as in the overall TIRs group. Ubrogepant was safe and well tolerated in TIRs, with no new safety signals identified.

Conclusions

In people with migraine who are TIRs, individuals treated with ubrogepant had favorable 2-h outcomes, as measured by the FDS, satisfaction with medication, and PGIC, compared with placebo.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02828020 (ACHIEVE I), registered July 11, 2016; NCT02867709 (ACHIEVE II), registered August 16, 2016.

Role of Atogepant in the Treatment of Episodic Migraines: Clinical Perspectives and Considerations

Advances in molecular biology and neuroscience have led to the discovery of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a 37 amino-acid neuropeptide that plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of migraine. CGRP receptor antagonist, also known as gepant, is an oral medication that inhibits the CGRP-related nociceptive signaling pathway. To date, three gepants are approved by the FDA for migraine treatment. Atogepant is a 2nd-generation gepant that non-competitively antagonizes CGRP receptors inhibiting neurogenic inflammation and pain sensitization. With its long half-life and minimal cardiovascular or liver toxicity, it is the first in its class approved primarily for migraine prevention. This article will discuss the evidence, safety, and rationale of atogepant for use in clinical practice.

New Oral Drugs for Migraine

Migraine is a common and disabling neurological disorder, with several manifestations, of which pain is just one. Despite its worldwide prevalence, there remains a paucity of targeted and effective treatments for the condition, leaving many of those affected underserved by available treatments. Work over the last 30+ years has recently led to the emergence of the first targeted acute and preventive treatments in our practice since the triptan era in the early 1990s, which are changing the landscape of migraine treatment. These include the monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor. Evolving work on novel therapeutic targets, as well as continuing to exploit drugs used in other disorders that may also have a therapeutic effect in migraine, is likely to lead to more and more treatments being able to be offered to migraineurs. Future work involves the development of agents that lack vasoconstrictive effects, such as lasmiditan, do not contribute to medication overuse, such as the gepants, and do not interact with other drugs that may be used for the disorder, as well as agents that can act both acutely and preventively, thereby utilising the quantum between acute and preventive drug effects which has been demonstrated with different migraine drugs before. Here we discuss the evolution of oral migraine treatments over the last 5 years, including those that have gained regulatory approval and reached clinical practice, those in development and potential other targets for the future.

Newer Horizon for Treatment of Acute Attack of Migraine: Lasmiditan and Ubrogepant

Migraine is characterized by severe, intermittent headache attacks with associated symptoms including nausea, vomiting, phonophobia, and photophobia. Still Triptans (selective 5-HT_1B/D agonists) are considered as the first-line therapy in acute attack of migraine. Recently two new drugs Lasmiditan and Ubrogepant were approved by United States Food and Drug Administration in acute attack of migraine with or without aura in adults. Lasmiditan is a highly selective 5-HT_1F receptor agonist which demonstrated superiority to placebo in the acute treatment of migraine in adults with moderate/severe migraine disability in two similarly designed phase-3 trials, SAMURAI and SPARTAN. Ubrogepant is a novel small molecule oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist. The approval was supported by two pivotal phase-3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II) that evaluated the efficacy, safety, tolerability. Hopefully, these two drugs may soon be a new addition to the mounting armory of drugs against migraine and may fulfill a substantial unmet need.

A close association of freedom from pain, migraine-related functional disability, and other outcomes: results of a post hoc analysis of randomized lasmiditan studies SAMURAI and SPARTAN

BACKGROUND

While pain freedom at 2 h is a key primary outcome for current trials for acute treatment of migraine, the relationship between the degree of head pain and other efficacy measures at 2 h has rarely been explored. Following lasmiditan treatment of a migraine attack with moderate or severe head pain, we contrast those who achieve pain freedom with those who achieve mild pain but not pain freedom 2 h post dosing.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled across studies and treatment arms from two Phase 3 trials comparing lasmiditan and placebo, SAMURAI and SPARTAN. This post hoc analysis assessed freedom from the most bothersome symptom (MBS), freedom from migraine-related functional disability (disability), and improved patient global impression of change (PGIC) in patients who achieved 2 h pain freedom compared to those who experienced 2 h mild pain. Mild pain differs from pain relief which is defined as either mild pain or pain freedom.

RESULTS

Patients who achieved 2 h pain freedom (N = 913), in comparison with those with 2 h mild pain (N = 864), were significantly more likely to experience MBS freedom (91.9% vs. 44.9%), disability freedom (87.1% and 13.4%), and improved PGIC (86.5% and 31.5%) (p < 0.001 for all combinations). In addition, more patients who were pain free experienced both 2 h MBS freedom and 2 h functional disability freedom (83.6%) compared to those with mild pain (10.8%; p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with pain freedom who did not achieve either MBS or disability freedom (4.6%) was lower than in patients with mild pain (52.4%). Lastly, 55.2% of patients experienced mild pain before disability freedom compared to 72.1% who experienced pain freedom and disability freedom at the same time.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that, at 2 h post treatment, patients who were pain free were more likely to achieve other outcomes including freedom from their MBS, freedom from migraine-related functional disability, and improved PGIC compared to those with mild pain, confirming that 2 h pain freedom is more robustly associated with other clinical outcomes than the 2 h mild pain endpoint.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

SAMURAI ( NCT02439320 ); SPARTAN ( NCT02605174 ).

Multiple imputation analysis of Miettinen-Nurminen interval for difference in proportions

The standard multiple imputation technique focuses on parameter estimation and assumes that the parameter estimator is asymptotically normally distributed with a Wald-type confidence interval for the parameter of interest. On the other hand, the Miettinen-Nurminen (MN) method for difference in proportions (Miettinen O, Nurminen M. Stat Med. 1985;4:213-226) constructs the confidence interval using an asymptotic score method and hence is not directly amenable to the standard multiple imputation technique. We propose a multiple imputation analysis that is applicable to the MN method for difference in proportions. We use simulation studies to compare the proposed method with that of Li, Mehrotra and Barnard (LMB), which is based on effective sample sizes (Li X, Mehrotra DV, Barnard J. Stat Med. 2006;25:2107-2124). We show that both methods produce confidence intervals with adequate coverage, while the proposed method produces slightly shorter confidence intervals than the LMB method. In addition, the proposed method is evaluable for all datasets, while the LMB method cannot be used when the imputed cell counts are zero across imputations for a treatment group.

Effects of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibition or induction on the pharmacokinetics of ubrogepant in healthy adults: Two phase 1, open-label, fixed-sequence, single-center, crossover trials

Background:

Ubrogepant is metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) and is a P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrate.

Objective:

To assess effects of multiple-dose moderate-strong CYP3A4 and strong P-gp inhibitors and inducers on ubrogepant pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters.

Methods:

Two phase 1, open-label, fixed-sequence, single-center, crossover trials enrolled healthy adults to receive ubrogepant 20 mg with/without verapamil 240 mg (a moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor) or ketoconazole 400 mg (a strong CYP3A4 and P-gp transporter inhibitor) (Study A), or ubrogepant 100 mg with/without rifampin 600 mg (a strong CYP3A4 inducer and P-gp inducer) (Study B). Outcomes included ubrogepant PK parameters (area under plasma concentration-time curve, time 0 through infinity [AUC0-∞], peak plasma concentration [Cmax]), and safety (treatment-emergent adverse events [TEAEs]). PK parameters were compared between ubrogepant with/without coadministered medications using linear mixed-effects models. Cmax and AUC0-∞ least-squares geometric mean ratios (GMR) of ubrogepant with/without coadministration were constructed.

Results:

Twelve participants enrolled in Study A and 30 in Study B. AUC0-∞ and Cmax GMR (90% CI) were 3.53 (3.32–3.75) and 2.80 (2.48–3.15), respectively, for ubrogepant with verapamil; 9.65 (7.27–12.81) and 5.32 (4.19–6.76) with ketoconazole; and 0.22 (0.20–0.24) and 0.31 (0.27–0.36) with rifampin. TEAEs were predominantly mild; no treatment-related serious TEAEs or TEAE-related discontinuations occurred.

Conclusion:

The PK of ubrogepant were significantly affected by the concomitant use of CYP3A4 moderate-strong inhibitors and strong inducers.

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Antagonists: A comprehensive review of safety, efficacy and prescribing information

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVES

Migraine is a disabling disorder that affects individuals of all ages. To date, there are multiple limitations to using guidelines-recommended treatments and preventive therapies. The goal of this review was to provide a comprehensive clinical review of the safety, efficacy and prescribing information of the emerging calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists. Agents in this new pharmacologic class were approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of acute migraine attack pain and the management of episodic and chronic migraine.

METHODS

A total of 12 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials were identified and included in the review utilizing databases such as clinicaltrial.gov, PubMed and EMBASE. The trials collectively evaluated six CGRP antagonists starting from the orally administered CGRPs such as rimegepant and ubrogepant, to the quarterly IV administered CGRP such as eptinezumab, and the monthly/quarterly subcutaneously administered agents such as erenumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

All agents displayed significant efficacy compared with placebo, measured by reduction in mean monthly migraine days (MMD). In addition, CGRP antagonists displayed a great tolerability profile with few adverse effects. These medications were neither associated with any cardiovascular-related adverse effects, nor do they currently have specific contraindications to pre-existing cardiovascular conditions. This can present a safe alternative to a wide range of patients who cannot be appropriately treated with first-line treatments such as triptans. No treatment-related death was reported in any of the clinical trials outlined and discussed.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists are safe and efficacious medications both in treating acute migraine headache pain and the management of episodic and chronic migraine. Head-to-head comparative studies with current guideline-recommended treatments are needed. However, CGRP antagonists are promising agents that present an alternative solution for patients living with migraine.

The American Headache Society Consensus Statement: Update on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice

OBJECTIVE

To incorporate recent research findings, expert consensus, and patient perspectives into updated guidance on the use of new acute and preventive treatments for migraine in adults.

BACKGROUND

The American Headache Society previously published a Consensus Statement on the use of newly introduced treatments for adults with migraine. This update, which is based on the expanded evidence base and emerging expert consensus concerning postapproval usage, provides practical recommendations in the absence of a formal guideline.

METHODS

This update involved four steps: (1) review of data about the efficacy, safety, and clinical use of migraine treatments introduced since the previous Statement was published; (2) incorporation of these data into a proposed update; (3) review and commentary by the Board of Directors of the American Headache Society and patients and advocates associated with the American Migraine Foundation; (4) consideration of these collective insights and integration into an updated Consensus Statement.

RESULTS

Since the last Consensus Statement, no evidence has emerged to alter the established principles of either acute or preventive treatment. Newly introduced acute treatments include two small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (ubrogepant, rimegepant); a serotonin (5-HT1F ) agonist (lasmiditan); a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (celecoxib oral solution); and a neuromodulatory device (remote electrical neuromodulation). New preventive treatments include an intravenous anti-CGRP ligand monoclonal antibody (eptinezumab). Several modalities, including neuromodulation (electrical trigeminal nerve stimulation, noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation, single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation) and biobehavioral therapy (cognitive behavioral therapy, biofeedback, relaxation therapies, mindfulness-based therapies, acceptance and commitment therapy) may be appropriate for either acute and/or preventive treatment; a neuromodulation device may be appropriate for acute migraine treatment only (remote electrical neuromodulation).

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of new treatments into clinical practice should be informed by the potential for benefit relative to established therapies, as well as by the characteristics and preferences of individual patients.

Chronic Migraine: An Update on Diagnosis and Management

Background

Chronic migraine is an under-recognized and under-treated disorder. A greater understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine and transformation to chronic migraine has led to the first targeted treatments for chronic migraine. In this review, we review current approaches to the diagnosis and management of chronic migraine and discuss recent and emerging novel therapies.

Objective

The aim of this study was to provide an update on the diagnosis and management of chronic migraine.

Methods and Material

The PubMed database was searched for relevant articles published on or before October 2020.

Results and Conclusions

Chronic migraine is an under-recognized and under-treated disorder. Prompt diagnosis and appropriate management can lead to a significant improvement in the quality of life with subsequent socioeconomic benefits.

Ubrogepant: An Oral Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Receptor Antagonist for Abortive Migraine Treatment

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of ubrogepant as an abortive migraine treatment.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search of MEDLINE and PubMed was performed (January 2006 through May 2021) using the following search terms: ubrogepant, calcitonin gene related peptide, and abortive migraine therapy.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant studies evaluating ubrogepant's pharmacology, efficacy, and safety in humans for the treatment of migraine were considered.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ubrogepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the acute treatment of migraine via data from ACHIEVE I and II. From ACHIEVE I, ubrogepant demonstrated superiority to placebo in freedom from migraine pain at 2 hours postdose (50-mg dose: odds ratio [OR] = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.25-2.66; 100-mg dose: OR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.41-2.95) and freedom from most bothersome symptom (MBS; 50-mg dose: OR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.27-2.28; 100-mg dose: OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.22-2.17). ACHIEVE II trial demonstrated efficacy of ubrogepant 50 mg compared with placebo (2-hour pain freedom: OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.14-2.29; 2-hour MBS freedom: OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.25-2.20).

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

Ubrogepant is a viable option for patients who are unable to tolerate nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or triptan therapy because of ineffective relief or contraindications that limit use.

CONCLUSIONS

Ubrogepant is a well-tolerated effective abortive migraine treatment that bridges a gap in therapy for many patients who previously could not tolerate other first-line treatments.

Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine: Pooled Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability From the ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II Phase 3 Randomized Trials

INTRODUCTION

Ubrogepant is an oral, small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine. The efficacy and safety of ubrogepant were demonstrated in two pivotal phase 3, single-attack, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II).

METHODS

We conducted a post hoc analysis of pooled data from the ACHIEVE trials to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant 50 mg (the only dose evaluated in both trials) versus placebo across a large population of participants with migraine. The coprimary efficacy outcomes were pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom (including photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea) at 2 h post dose. Secondary outcomes included pain relief at 2 h post dose, sustained pain relief and pain freedom from 2 to 24 h, and absence of specific migraine-associated symptoms at 2 h post dose.

RESULTS

A total of 2240 eligible participants were randomized to placebo (n = 1122) or ubrogepant 50 mg (n = 1118) in the ACHIEVE trials. Pain freedom at 2 h was reported in 13.0% of participants in the pooled placebo group and 20.5% in the pooled ubrogepant 50 mg group (odds ratio [OR] 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34, 2.22; P < 0.001). Absence of the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 h was reported by 27.6% in the pooled placebo group and by 38.7% in the pooled ubrogepant 50 mg group (OR 1.68; 95% CI 1.37, 2.05; P < 0.001). Adverse events (AEs) within 48 h after the initial or optional second dose were reported by 11.5 and 11.2% of participants in the pooled placebo and pooled ubrogepant 50 mg groups, respectively. The most common AE was nausea (1.8 and 1.9%, respectively). No serious AEs related to treatment or discontinuations due to AEs were reported.

CONCLUSION

These results further support the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: ACHIEVE I: NCT02828020; ACHIEVE II: NCT02867709.

Photophobia: shared pathophysiology underlying dry eye disease, migraine and traumatic brain injury leading to central neuroplasticity of the trigeminothalamic pathway

BACKGROUND

Photophobia is a potentially debilitating symptom often found in dry eye disease (DE), migraine and traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

We conducted a review of the literature via a PubMed search of English language articles with a focus on how photophobia may relate to a shared pathophysiology across DE, migraine and TBI.

RESULTS

DE, migraine and TBI are common conditions in the general population, are often comorbid, and share photophobia as a symptom. Across the three conditions, neural dysregulation of peripheral and central nervous system components is implicated in photophobia in various animal models and in humans. Enhanced activity of the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is closely linked to photophobia. Current therapies for photophobia include glasses which shield the eyes from specific wavelengths, botulinum toxin, and inhibition of CGRP and its receptor. Many individuals have persistent photophobia despite the use of these therapies, and thus, development of new therapies is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of photophobia in DE, migraine and TBI suggests shared trigeminothalamic pathophysiologic mechanisms, as explained by central neuroplasticity and hypersensitivity mediated by neuropeptide CGRP. Treatment strategies which target neural pathways (ie, oral neuromodulators, transcutaneous nerve stimulation) should be considered in patients with persistent photophobia, specifically in individuals with DE whose symptoms are not controlled with traditional therapies.

Migraine with Brainstem Aura Accompanied by Disorders of Consciousness

Migraine with brainstem aura (MBA) accompanied by disorders of consciousness (DOC) is a rare subtype of migraine. The pathophysiology of MBA with DOC has not been elucidated yet. Some patients have a family history of migraine, and women are more affected than men. The aura symptoms are diverse; however, when MBA is combined with DOC, the clinical manifestations are more complicated. Coma is the most common clinical manifestation. The overall duration of the patient’s DOC is short and can often return to normal within half an hour. Headache often occurs after regaining consciousness and can also occur at the same time as DOC. The most common headache is located at the occipital region. Although DOC is reversible, considering the current small number of cases, we still need to improve our understanding of the disease to avoid misdiagnosis. The MBA patient’s electroencephalogram and cerebral blood flow perfusion may have transient changes and may return to normal in the interictal period or after the DOC. Although triptans have traditionally been contraindicated in MBA under drug instructions, the evidence of basilar artery constriction, as postulated in MBA, is lacking. Lasmiditan is currently the first and only 5-HT 1F receptor agonist approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists and monoclonal antibody therapies may be the most promising for future consideration. Here, the pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnostic tools, and treatment progress for MBA with DOC are reviewed.

Targeting Adrenomedullin in Oncology: A Feasible Strategy With Potential as Much More Than an Alternative Anti-Angiogenic Therapy

The development, maintenance and metastasis of solid tumors are highly dependent on the formation of blood and lymphatic vessels from pre-existing ones through a series of processes that are respectively known as angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis. Both are mediated by specific growth-stimulating molecules, such as the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and adrenomedullin (AM), secreted by diverse cell types which involve not only the cancerogenic ones, but also those constituting the tumor stroma (i.e., macrophages, pericytes, fibroblasts, and endothelial cells). In this sense, anti-angiogenic therapy represents a clinically-validated strategy in oncology. Current therapeutic approaches are mainly based on VEGF-targeting agents, which, unfortunately, are usually limited by toxicity and/or tumor-acquired resistance. AM is a ubiquitous peptide hormone mainly secreted in the endothelium with an important involvement in blood vessel development and cardiovascular homeostasis. In this review, we will introduce the state-of-the-art in terms of AM physiology, while putting a special focus on its pro-tumorigenic role, and discuss its potential as a therapeutic target in oncology. A large amount of research has evidenced AM overexpression in a vast majority of solid tumors and a correlation between AM levels and disease stage, progression and/or vascular density has been observed. The analysis presented here indicates that the involvement of AM in the pathogenesis of cancer arises from: 1) direct promotion of cell proliferation and survival; 2) increased vascularization and the subsequent supply of nutrients and oxygen to the tumor; 3) and/or alteration of the cell phenotype into a more aggressive one. Furthermore, we have performed a deep scrutiny of the pathophysiological prominence of each of the AM receptors (AM₁ and AM₂) in different cancers, highlighting their differential locations and functions, as well as regulatory mechanisms. From the therapeutic point of view, we summarize here an exhaustive series of preclinical studies showing a reduction of tumor angiogenesis, metastasis and growth following treatment with AM-neutralizing antibodies, AM receptor antagonists, or AM receptor interference. Anti-AM therapy is a promising strategy to be explored in oncology, not only as an anti-angiogenic alternative in the context of acquired resistance to VEGF treatment, but also as a potential anti-metastatic approach.

Real-world Experience with Remote Electrical Neuromodulation in the Acute Treatment of Migraine

OBJECTIVE

Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) is a nonpharmacological acute migraine treatment that stimulates upper-arm peripheral nerves. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of REN for acute treatment of migraine in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Real-world data were collected from patients who were using REN (Nerivio®, Theranica Bio-Electronics Ltd., Israel) between October 1, 2019, and March 31, 2020. Patients recorded their symptoms at baseline, two hours, and 24 hours post-treatment. Patients were stratified based on the type of visit and provider; in-person visits with headache specialists (HS group) or virtual visits with nonheadache specialists (NHS group). Efficacy outcome focused on intra-individual consistency of response across multiple attacks.

RESULTS

We found that 58.9% (662/1,123) of the patients in the HS group and 74.2% (23/31) of the patients in the NHS group experienced pain relief at two hours in at least 50% of their treated attacks and 20.0% (268/1,339) of the patients in the HS group and 35.6% (16/45) of the patients in the NHS group experienced pain freedom at two hours in at least 50% of their treated attacks. The effects of REN on associated symptoms and improvement in function were also consistent in both groups. The incidence of device-related adverse events was very low (0.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world data confirm that REN results in meaningful clinical benefits with minimal side effects. REN may provide an effective drug-free treatment option for achieving consistent relief from migraine symptoms and may reduce the use of acute medications.

Noninvasive Neuromodulation in Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The past two decades has seen an influx of noninvasive neuromodulation devices aimed at treatment of various primary headache disorders, including cluster headache and migraine. This narrative review is to summarize the current options in noninvasive neuromodulation in migraine.

RECENT FINDINGS

A variety of noninvasive neuromodulation devices have been FDA cleared and marketed for use in migraine, including single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (sTMS), noninvasive vagal nerve stimulators (nVNS), and external trigeminal nerve stimulators (eTNS). Newer devices include peripheral electrical stimulation devices (PES), caloric stimulation, and others. Each has varying levels of evidence supporting its use in migraine, tolerability profiles, and access issues. Noninvasive neuromodulation devices can be beneficial when used in patients with migraine, with minimal side effects. As more devices are developed, approved, and marketed in the future, rigorous research on efficacy and safety remain a top priority.

Combined onabotulinumtoxinA/atogepant treatment blocks activation/sensitization of high-threshold and wide-dynamic range neurons

Background

OnabotulinumtoxinA and agents that block calcitonin gene‒receptor peptide action have both been found to have anti-migraine effects, but they inhibit different populations of meningeal nociceptors. We therefore tested the effects of combined treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA and the calcitonin gene‒receptor peptide antagonist atogepant on activation/sensitization of trigeminovascular neurons by cortical spreading depression.

Material and methods

Single-unit recordings were obtained of high-threshold and wide-dynamic-range neurons in the spinal trigeminal nucleus, and cortical spreading depression was then induced in anesthetized rats that had received scalp injections of onabotulinumtoxinA 7 days earlier and intravenous atogepant infusion 1 h earlier. The control group received scalp saline injections and intravenous vehicle infusion.

Results

OnabotulinumtoxinA/atogepant pretreatment prevented cortical spreading depression-induced activation and sensitization in both populations (control: Activation in 80% of high-threshold and 70% of wide-dynamic-range neurons, sensitization in 80% of high-threshold and 60% of wide-dynamic-range neurons; treatment: activation in 10% of high-threshold and 0% of wide-dynamic-range neurons, sensitization in 0% of high-threshold and 5% of wide-dynamic-range neurons).

Discussion

We propose that the robust inhibition of high-threshold and wide-dynamic-range neurons by the combination treatment was achieved through dual blockade of the Aδ and C classes of meningeal nociceptors. Combination therapy that inhibits meningeal C-fibers and prevents calcitonin gene‒receptor peptide from activating its receptors on Aδ-meningeal nociceptors may be more effective than a monotherapy in reducing migraine days per month in patients with chronic migraine.

A novel, injury-free rodent model of vulnerability for assessment of acute and preventive therapies reveals temporal contributions of CGRP-receptor activation in migraine-like pain

AIM

Development and characterization of a novel injury-free preclinical model of migraine-like pain allowing mechanistic assessment of both acute and preventive treatments.

METHODS

A "two-hit" hyperalgesic priming strategy was used to induce vulnerability to a normally subthreshold challenge with umbellulone, a transient receptor potential ankyrin 1 (TRPA1) activator, in uninjured female and male C57BL/6 mice. Priming (i.e. the first hit) was induced by three consecutive daily episodes of restraint stress; repeated umbellulone was also evaluated for potential priming effects. Sixteen days after the first restraint stress, mice received inhalational umbellulone (i.e. the second hit) to elicit migraine-like pain. Medications currently used for acute or preventive migraine therapy including propranolol (a beta blocker) and sumatriptan (5HT1_B/D agonist), as well as olcegepant, an experimental calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist and nor-Binaltorphimine (nor-BNI), an experimental long-acting kappa opioid receptor (KOR) antagonist, were investigated for their efficacy to block priming and prevent or reverse umbellulone-induced allodynia in primed animals. To assess migraine-like pain, cutaneous allodynia was determined by responses to periorbital or hindpaw probing with von Frey filaments.

RESULTS

Repeated restraint stress, but not umbellulone exposure, produced transient cutaneous allodynia that resolved within 16 d. Restraint stress produced long-lasting priming that persisted beyond 16 d, as demonstrated by reinstatement of cutaneous allodynia following inhalational umbellulone challenge. Pretreatment with propranolol or nor-BNI prior to restraint stress prevented both transient cutaneous allodynia and priming, demonstrated by a lack of umbellulone-induced cutaneous allodynia. Following establishment of restraint stress priming, olcegepant, but not propranolol or nor-BNI, prevented umbellulone-induced cutaneous allodynia. When administered 1 h after umbellulone, sumatriptan, but not olcegepant, reversed umbellulone-induced cutaneous allodynia in restraint stress-primed rats.

CONCLUSION

We have developed a novel injury-free model with translational relevance that can be used to study mechanisms relevant to migraine-like pain and to evaluate novel acute or preventive treatments. Restraint stress priming induced a state of vulnerability to a subthreshold stimulus that has been referred to as "latent sensitization". The development of latent sensitization could be prevented by blockade of stress pathways with propranolol or with a kappa opioid receptor antagonist. Following establishment of latent sensitization, subthreshold stimulation with umbellulone reinstated cutaneous allodynia, likely from activation of meningeal TRPA1-expressing nociceptors. Accordingly, in restraint stress-primed animals, sumatriptan reversed umbellulone-induced cutaneous allodynia, supporting peripheral sites of action, while propranolol and nor-BNI were not effective. Surprisingly, olcegepant was effective in mice with latent sensitization when given prior to, but not after, umbellulone challenge, suggesting time-dependent contributions of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor signaling in promoting migraine-like pain in this model. Activation of the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor participates in initiating, but has a more limited role in maintaining, pain responses, supporting the efficacy of small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists as preventive medications. Additionally, the effectiveness of sumatriptan in reversal of established pain thus suggests modulation of additional, non-calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor-mediated nociceptive mechanisms. Kappa opioid receptor antagonists may represent a novel preventive therapy for stress-related migraine.

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

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

Remote Electrical Neuromodulation for the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Patients with Chronic Migraine: An Open-Label Pilot Study

INTRODUCTION

Remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) is a novel acute treatment of migraine. Upper arm peripheral nerves are stimulated to induce conditioned pain modulation (CPM)-an endogenous analgesic mechanism in which conditioning stimulation inhibits pain in remote body regions. The REN device (Nerivio^®, Theranica Bio-Electronics LTD., Israel) is FDA-authorized for acute treatment of migraine in adults who do not have chronic migraine. The current study assessed the consistency of response over multiple migraine attacks in people with chronic migraine who are typically characterized with severe pain intensity, high disability, and less robust response to triptans.

METHODS

This was an open-label, single-arm, dual-center study conducted on adults with chronic migraine. Participants underwent a 4-week treatment phase in which they treated their migraine headaches with the device for 45 min within 1 h of attack onset. Pain levels were recorded at baseline, 2 h, and 24 h post-treatment. Efficacy outcomes (pain relief and pain-free responses at 2 h, sustained pain relief and sustained pain-free responses at 24 h) focused on intra-individual consistency of response across multiple attacks, which was defined as response in at least 50% of the treatments.

RESULTS

Forty-two participants were enrolled, and 38 participants were evaluable for analyses; 73.7% (28/38) achieved pain relief at 2 h, 26.3% (10/38) were pain-free at 2 h, 84.4% (27/32) had sustained pain relief response at 24 h and 45.0% (9/20) had sustained pain relief response at 24 h in at least 50% of their treated attacks. The effects of REN on associated symptoms and improvement in function were also consistent. The incidence of device-related adverse events was low (1.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

REN used for a series of migraine attacks was effective and well tolerated across attacks. REN may offer a safe and effective non-pharmacological alternative for acute treatment in patients with chronic migraine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT04161807. Retrospectively registered on November 13, 2019.