Real-world efficacy, tolerability, and safety of ubrogepant

Safety of Rimegepant in Adults with Migraine and Cardiovascular Risk Factors: Analysis of a Multicenter, Long-Term, Open-Label Study

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular (CV) risk factors can limit treatment options for migraine. Rimegepant is an orally administered small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that does not induce vasoconstriction. The aim of these post hoc subgroup analyses was to assess the safety of rimegepant according to CV risk.

METHODS

In a multicenter, long-term, open-label, phase II/III safety study, participants with a history of 2-14 migraine attacks per month of moderate or severe pain intensity self-administered rimegepant 75 mg, orally, to treat migraine up to once daily for up to 52 weeks. Uncontrolled, unstable, or recently diagnosed CV disease was part of the exclusion criteria. Safety was assessed across subgroups according to number of CV risk factors (0, 1, or ≥ 2) and Framingham Risk Score (< 10% or ≥ 10%).

RESULTS

Of 1800 treated participants, 28.8% had one CV risk factor and 12.1% had ≥ 2 CV risk factors; 7.0% had Framingham Risk Score ≥ 10%. Across the subgroups with 0, 1, and ≥ 2 CV risk factors and Framingham Risk Score < 10% and ≥ 10%, respectively, proportions of participants reporting adverse events (AEs; 59.6%, 61.4%, 62.2%, 59.9%, 67.5%) and serious AEs (2.7%, 2.5%, 2.3%, 2.6%, 2.4%) were consistent, and AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were low (1.9%, 3.1%, 5.5%, 2.5%, 4.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant showed favorable safety and tolerability in adults with migraine and CV risk factors, including those with moderate to high CV risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03266588.

Revolutionizing migraine management: advances and challenges in CGRP-targeted therapies and their clinical implications

Migraine, a prevalent neurological disorder, affects approximately 14.1% of the global population and disproportionately impacts females. This debilitating condition significantly compromises quality of life, productivity, and incurs high healthcare costs, presenting a challenge not only to individuals but to societal structures as a whole. Despite advances in our understanding of migraine pathophysiology, treatment options remain limited, necessitating ongoing research into effective therapies. This review delves into the complexity of migraine management, examining the roles of genetic predisposition, environmental influences, personalized treatment approaches, comorbidities, efficacy and safety of existing acute and preventive treatments. It further explores the continuum between migraine and tension-type headaches and discusses the intricacies of treating various migraine subtypes, including those with and without aura. We emphasize the recent paradigm shift toward trigeminovascular activation and the release of vasoactive substances, such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which offer novel therapeutic targets. We assess groundbreaking clinical trials, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic perspectives, safety, tolerability, and the real-world application of CGRP monoclonal antibodies and gepants. In the face of persisting treatment barriers such as misdiagnosis, medication overuse headaches, and limited access to specialist care, we discuss innovative CGRP-targeted strategies, the high cost and scarcity of long-term efficacy data, and suggest comprehensive solutions tailored to Turkiye and developing countries. The review offers strategic recommendations including the formulation of primary care guidelines, establishment of specialized outpatient clinics, updating physicians on novel treatments, enhancing global accessibility to advanced therapies, and fostering patient education. Emphasizing the importance of lifestyle modifications and holistic approaches, the review underscores the potential of mass media and patient groups in disseminating critical health information and shaping the future of migraine management.

Pharmacological management of migraine: current strategies and future directions

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a complex neurological disorder that affects a significant portion of the global population. As traditional pharmacological approaches often fall short in alleviating symptoms, the development of innovative therapies has garnered significant interest. This text aims to summarize the current pharmacological options for managing migraine and to explore the potential impact of novel therapies.

AREAS COVERED

We focused on conventional treatments, emerging therapies, and novel compounds in clinical development, including therapies targeting the trigeminovascular system, cannabis-based therapies, hormonal and metabolic therapies, and other options. English peer-reviewed articles were searched in PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases.

EXPERT OPINION

Several novel treatment options for migraine have become available in recent years. Emerging pharmacological therapies targeting the trigeminovascular system, cannabis-based therapies, hormonal and metabolic interventions, and other emerging treatment modalities, may prove to be valuable for the treatment of migraine. Further research, clinical trials, and substantiated evidence are necessary to validate the efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes of these therapeutic options.

Update on gepants for the treatment of chronic migraine

Chronic migraine (CM) is a profoundly debilitating condition that has detrimental clinical and social outcomes. Over the past two decades, novel small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, known as gepants, and CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been developed, ushering in a new era of migraine-specific treatment. In this review, we discuss the literature investigating the role of gepants for the treatment of CM. Numerous completed and ongoing clinical studies have conclusively demonstrated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of several gepants for the acute treatment of migraine. However, preventive trials involving gepants have focused on patients with episodic migraine, with atogepant being the only gepant approved for CM prevention by the US Food and Drug Administration at the time of writing. Although some preliminary positive results have been reported, further research is still required to achieve additional advancements in the future. In summary, the effectiveness of gepants for treating individuals with CM are highly expected. This review highlights the development and current progress of gepants for the treatment of CM, focusing both on their role as acute abortive agents and preventive measures and on their concomitant use with other antimigraine medications, such as CGRP mAbs or triptans.

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.

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.

Ubrogepant: Mechanism of action, clinical and translational science

In recent years, the treatment of migraine has experienced a breakthrough in the development of drugs that target the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) signaling pathway. Monoclonal antibodies against the receptor or ligand have been developed for the preventive treatment of migraine; whereas, orally administered small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists, called gepants, have been developed for both acute and/or preventive treatment. Both modalities have demonstrated safe and effective treatment of migraine, reducing the number of migraine days for patients as well as reducing symptoms and improving patient function and overall quality of life. Here, we provide an abridged review of ubrogepant, an oral CGRP receptor antagonist, approved for the acute treatment of migraine. We briefly summarize the role of CGRP in migraine pathophysiology, describing the mechanism of action of ubrogepant in the context of this pathway, the clinical pharmacology properties and the clinical development and outcomes, including safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics, that supported ubrogepant's approval.

Simultaneous Comparisons of 25 Acute Migraine Medications Based on 10 Million Users' Self-Reported Records From a Smartphone Application

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Many acute treatment options exist for migraine. However, large-scale, head-to-head comparisons of treatment effectiveness from real-world patient experience reports are lacking.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of 10,842,795 migraine attack records extracted from an e-diary smartphone application between June 30, 2014, and July 2, 2020. We analyzed 25 acute medications among 7 classes-acetaminophen, nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), triptans, combination analgesics, ergots, antiemetics, and opioids. Gepants and ditan were not included in this analysis. Different doses and formulations of each medication, according to the generic names, were combined in this analysis. We used a 2-level nested logistic regression model to analyze the odds ratio (OR) of treatment effectiveness of each medication by adjusting concurrent medications and the covariance within the same user. Subgroup analyses were conducted for users in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.

RESULTS

Our final analysis included 4,777,524 medication-outcome pairs from 3,119,517 migraine attacks among 278,006 users. Triptans (mean OR 4.8), ergots (mean OR 3.02), and antiemetics (mean OR 2.67) were the top 3 classes of medications with the highest effectiveness, followed by opioids (mean OR 2.49), NSAIDs (other than ibuprofen, mean OR 1.94), combination analgesics (acetaminophen/acetylsalicylic acid/caffeine) (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.67-1.71), others (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.47-1.50), and acetaminophen (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.83-0.84), using ibuprofen as the reference. Individual medications with the highest ORs were eletriptan (OR 6.1, 95% CI 6.0-6.3), zolmitriptan (OR 5.7, 95% CI 5.6-5.8), and sumatriptan (OR 5.2, 95% CI 5.2-5.3). The ORs of acetaminophen, NSAIDS, combination analgesics, and opioids were mostly around or less than 1, suggesting similar or lower reported effectiveness compared with ibuprofen. The ORs for 24 medications, except that of acetylsalicylic acid, achieved statistical significance with p < 0.0001, and our nested logistic regression model achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.849. Country-specific subgroup analyses revealed similar ORs of each medication and AUC (United States 0.849, United Kingdom 0.864, and Canada 0.842), demonstrating the robustness of our analysis.

DISCUSSION

Using a big data approach, we analyzed patient-generated real-time records of 10 million migraine attacks and conducted simultaneous head-to-head comparisons of 25 acute migraine medications. Our findings that triptans, ergots, and antiemetics are the most effective classes of medications align with the guideline recommendations and offer generalizable insights to complement clinical practice.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with migraine, selected acute medications (e.g., triptans, ergots, antiemetics) are associated with higher odds of user-rated positive response than ibuprofen.

Treatment patterns for patients initiating novel acute migraine specific medications (nAMSMs) in the context of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway

BACKGROUND

New acute and preventive migraine medications are available, but data on current treatment patterns are limited. This study describes migraine treatment patterns among patients initiating novel acute migraine specific medications (nAMSMs), overall and by prior use of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway monoclonal antibodies (mAbs).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study using IQVIA open-source pharmacy and medical claims data, we identified patients with ≥ 1 claim for a nAMSM (ubrogepant, rimegepant, lasmiditan) between 01/01/2020 and 09/30/2020 (index period). Patients were indexed on their first nAMSM claim and stratified into 2 cohorts: patients with prior mAb use (≥ 1 claim for erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab in the 6-month pre-index period) or patients without prior mAb use. Treatment patterns were assessed during the 6-month post-index period.

RESULTS

Overall, 78,574 patients were identified (63% indexed on ubrogepant, 34% on rimegepant, and 3% on lasmiditan) with 26,656 patients (34%) having had prior mAb use. In the pre-index period, 79% of patients used non-mAb preventive medications and 75% of patients used acute medications. Following the index nAMSM claim, 65% of patients had ≥ 1 refill and 21% had ≥ 4 refills of their index nAMSM; 10% of patients switched to another nAMSM. Post-index mAb use was observed in 82% of patients with a prior mAb and 15% of patients without. Among patients with pre- and post-index use of acute medications, 38% discontinued ≥ 1 acute medication class in the post-index period. Among patients with concomitant use of traditional preventive medications at index, 30% discontinued ≥ 1 concomitant preventive anti-migraine medication in the post-index period.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients initiating nAMSMs had prior treatment with acute and preventive medications. Approximately one-third of patients had prior treatment with anti-CGRP pathway mAbs. After starting nAMSMs, more than one-third of patients discontinued at least one traditional acute medication and one-third of patients discontinued at least one traditional preventive medication. Despite nAMSM initiation, most patients with prior anti-CGRP pathway mAb use continued mAb use. Around 15% of patients without a prior mAb newly started a mAb. These results provide insight into how nAMSMs and mAbs have been integrated into clinical management of migraine in the real-world.

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.

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

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

Phase Ib, open-label, fixed-sequence, drug-drug interaction, safety, and tolerability study between atogepant and ubrogepant in participants with a history of migraine

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate potential drug-drug interactions of ubrogepant and atogepant.

BACKGROUND

Ubrogepant and atogepant, calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists, are recently approved drugs for acute and preventive treatment of migraine, respectively. For patients with migraine who are prescribed atogepant for the preventive treatment of migraine, health care providers could prescribe ubrogepant for the acute treatment of breakthrough migraine attacks.

METHODS

A phase Ib, multi-center, open-label, fixed-sequence study was conducted in participants diagnosed with migraine for at least 1 year. To assess the primary objective of pharmacokinetic interactions in this phase I trial, the highest United States Food and Drug Administration-approved individual dose strengths of atogepant (60 mg once daily) and ubrogepant (100 mg) were utilized, with ubrogepant being administered on a fixed-dose schedule every 3 days, regardless of whether a participant was experiencing a migraine attack. Secondary endpoints included safety and tolerability. Clinical safety measurements were monitored throughout the study.

RESULTS

Of the 31 participants enrolled, 26 completed the study. A single dose of ubrogepant had no statistically significant effect on atogepant pharmacokinetics. Co-administration of ubrogepant with atogepant resulted in a 19% increase (geometric mean ratio 118.80, 90% confidence interval [CI] 108.69-129.84) in the ubrogepant area under the plasma concentration-time curve and a 26% increase (geometric mean ratio 125.63, 90% CI 105.58-149.48) in the ubrogepant maximum plasma concentration. These statistically significant changes in ubrogepant exposure were not clinically meaningful, and no new safety concerns were identified for the combination.

CONCLUSION

The combination use of atogepant and ubrogepant was safe and well tolerated in adult participants with a history of migraine enrolled in the study. Pharmacokinetic changes during co-administration were not clinically meaningful.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Ubrogepant and rimegepant: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of clinical studies

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed at providing pooled estimates of the incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) of ubrogepant and rimegepant and to use meta-regression to identify correlations between the occurrence of selected ADRs, socio-demographic, and clinical characteristics from data published in clinical studies.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE (up to 03/02/2022) was searched along with the references listed in the reviews identified with the research query. Random intercept and slope logistic regression models were used to estimate the logit transformation of the pooled incidence. To examine how selected clinical and socio-demographic characteristics correlated with the pooled incidence rates, we performed random-effects meta-regression.

RESULTS

Significant heterogeneity of incidence estimates was observed in clinical studies along with correlations between ADRs and the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients exposed to ubrogepant. In particular, we observed a correlation between ubrogepant dosage and muscle strain and between Body Mass Index (BMI) and liver function values. For rimegepant, significant correlations were observed between age and infections and having aura symptoms at baseline and nausea/dizziness/diarrhea/muscle strain.

CONCLUSION

This study provided pooled incidence estimates of ubrogepant and rimegepant's ADRs and highlighted new safety aspects of the pharmacological treatment with ubrogepants and rimigepants from correlations obtained from the meta-regression.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

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.

New Generation Gepants: Migraine Acute and Preventive Medications

Migraine is a debilitating disease whose clinical and social impact is out of debate. Tolerability issues, interactions, contraindications, and inefficacy of the available medications make new options necessary. The calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway has shown its importance in migraine pathophysiology and specific medications targeting this have become available. The first-generation CGRP receptor antagonists or gepants, have undergone clinical trials but their development was stopped because of hepatotoxicity. The new generation of gepants, however, are efficacious, safe, and well tolerated as per recent clinical trials. This led to the FDA-approval of rimegepant, ubrogepant, and atogepant. The clinical trials of the available gepants and some of the newer CGRP-antagonists are reviewed in this article.

Constipation Caused by Anti-calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Migraine Therapeutics Explained by Antagonism of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide's Motor-Stimulating and Prosecretory Function in the Intestine

The development of small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (gepants) and of monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP system has been a major advance in the management of migraine. In the randomized controlled trials before regulatory approval, the safety of these anti-CGRP migraine therapeutics was considered favorable and to stay within the expected profile. Post-approval real-world surveys reveal, however, constipation to be a major adverse event which may affect more than 50% of patients treated with erenumab (an antibody targeting the CGRP receptor), fremanezumab or galcanezumab (antibodies targeting CGRP). In this review article we address the question whether constipation caused by inhibition of CGRP signaling can be mechanistically deduced from the known pharmacological actions and pathophysiological implications of CGRP in the digestive tract. CGRP in the gut is expressed by two distinct neuronal populations: extrinsic primary afferent nerve fibers and distinct neurons of the intrinsic enteric nervous system. In particular, CGRP is a major messenger of enteric sensory neurons which in response to mucosal stimulation activate both ascending excitatory and descending inhibitory neuronal pathways that enable propulsive (peristaltic) motor activity to take place. In addition, CGRP is able to stimulate ion and water secretion into the intestinal lumen. The motor-stimulating and prosecretory actions of CGRP combine in accelerating intestinal transit, an activity profile that has been confirmed by the ability of CGRP to induce diarrhea in mice, dogs and humans. We therefore conclude that the constipation elicited by antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor results from interference with the physiological function of CGRP in the small and large intestine in which it contributes to the maintenance of peristaltic motor activity, ion and water secretion and intestinal transit.

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.

CGRP and CGRP-receptor as targets of migraine therapy: Brain Prize-2021

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a highly prevalent primary headache with an unclear pathomechanism. During the last 40 years numerous hypotheses have arisen, among them the theory of the trigeminovascular system is the primary one. It serves as a skeleton in successful preclinical studies and in the development of effective therapeutic options for migraine headache.

OBJECTIVE

The Brain Prize (awarded annually by the Lundbeck Foundation) is the most prestigious tribute in neuroscience. The winners in 2021 were Lars Edvinsson, Peter Goadsby, Michael Moskowitz and Jes Olesen. They are the fathers of the migraine pathomechanism which led to revolutionary new treatments. This review summarizes their landmark findings.

METHODS

Data related to this topic were reviewed from PubMed records published between 1979 and May 2021. Searches were based on preclinical and clinical studies in the covered field. The findings were listed in chronological order. From a therapeutic perspective, only randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis were discussed.

RESULTS

The calcitonin gene-related peptide-related pathogenesis of migraine is based on the activation of the trigeminovascular system. The therapeutic triad for migraine is triptans, gepants and calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted monoclonal antibodies.

CONCLUSION

In the past 40 years, the systematic work of leading headache scientists has resulted in robust theoretical and therapeutic knowledge in the preclinical and clinical study of migraine.

Ubrogepant in the Acute Management of Migraine: A Narrative Review

Ubrogepant is a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist that received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the acute treatment of migraine with and without aura in adults. The ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II Phase III clinical trials showed that ubrogepant was superior to placebo for pain freedom and freedom of the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours after medication intake. The 52-week open label extension of the Phase III trials demonstrated safety of ubrogepant. A real-world study conducted at a tertiary headache center also confirmed the efficacy and safety of ubrogepant. Adverse event rates were higher in the real-world population. Studies are needed to evaluate its long-term efficacy and safety, especially in the setting of co-administration with other CGRP modulating therapies such as the CGRP monoclonal antibodies.