BMS-927711 for the acute treatment of migraine: a double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled, dose-ranging trial

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.

Intervening in the Premonitory Phase to Prevent Migraine: Prospects for Pharmacotherapy

Migraine is a common brain condition characterised by disabling attacks of headache with sensory sensitivities. Despite increasing understanding of migraine neurobiology and the impacts of this on therapeutic developments, there remains a need for treatment options for patients underserved by currently available therapies. The first specific drugs developed to treat migraine acutely, the serotonin-5-hydroxytryptamine [5-HT1B/1D] receptor agonists (triptans), seem to require headache onset in order to have an effect, while early treatment during mild pain before headache escalation improves short-term and long-term outcomes. Some patients find treating in the early window once headache has started but not escalated difficult, and migraine can arise from sleep or in the early hours of the morning, making prompt treatment after pain onset challenging. Triptans may be deemed unsuitable for use in patients with vascular disease and in those of older age and may not be effective in a proportion of patients. Headache is also increasingly recognised as being just one of the many facets of the migraine attack, and for some patients it is not the most disabling symptom. In many patients, painless symptoms can start prior to headache onset and can reliably warn of impending headache. There is, therefore, a need to identify therapeutic targets and agents that may be used as early as possible in the course of the attack, to prevent headache onset before it starts, and to reduce both headache and non-headache related attack burden. Early small studies using domperidone, naratriptan and dihydroergotamine have suggested that this approach could be useful; these studies were methodologically less rigorous than modern day treatment studies, of small sample size, and have not since been replicated. The emergence of novel targeted migraine treatments more recently, specifically calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists (gepants), has reignited interest in this strategy, with encouraging results. This review summarises historical and emerging data in this area, supporting use of the premonitory phase as an opportunity to intervene as early as possible in migraine to prevent attack-related morbidity.

The evolving landscape and research trend of calcitonin gene-related peptide in migraine: A bibliometric analysis and visualization

Background

Migraine is a global public health concern, affecting both social and individual well-being. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a crucial neuropeptide, holds important research value in understanding migraine pathogenesis. CGRP receptor antagonists and monoclonal antibodies that target CGRP or its receptors have shown efficacy in reducing migraine frequency and severity, presenting a promising therapeutic approach. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive bibliometric analysis to analyze the current state, research trends, and future directions of CGRP in migraine.

Methods

Bibliometric tools including CiteSpace, VOSviewer, etc., were utilized to extract and summarize publications related to CGRP in migraine from the Web of Science Core Collection Database (WOSCC) between 2004 and 2023, as of December 31, 2023. The analysis focused on trends in annual publications, leading countries/regions and institutions, prominent journals and references, influential authors, and high-frequency keywords in the field.

Results

A total of 1,821 articles and reviews involving 5,180 authors from 1,315 organizations across 64 countries were included in the study. These publications were distributed across 362 journals and accumulated 56,999 citations by December 31, 2023. An increasing trend was observed in annual publications on CGRP in migraine. The United States emerged as the leading nation in both publications and citations, with academic Peter Goadsby contributing the highest number of publications. The University of Copenhagen stood out as the institution with the most publications, and Cephalalgia emerged as the most influential journal. The most cited paper identified was "Calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist BIBN4096BS for the acute treatment of migraine" by Jes Olesen, published in the New Engl Med. Keyword frequency analysis revealed prevalent terms such as "migraine," "CGRP," and "episodic migraine," along with emerging topics represented by keywords including "trial," "monoclonal antibodies," "preventive treatment," and "safety."

Conclusion

CGRP is pivotal in migraine pathogenesis, and there is a robust research foundation exploring its role. The US leads in research output on CGRP in migraine. Investigating the mechanism of CGRP and its receptor in migraine remains a key area of interest, particularly focusing on signaling pathways. Future research should target identifying critical therapeutic targets in CGRP antagonist pathways for migraine treatment.

Efficacy and safety of ubrogepant for migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Introduction: The efficacy of ubrogepant 50 mg versus 100 mg daily for migraine remained controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ubrogepant 50 mg versus 100 mg daily on treatment in migraine patients.Methods: We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, Cochrane library databases and SCOPUS through 21 March 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of ubrogepant 50 mg versus 100 mg on treatment efficacy in migraine patients. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.Results: Three RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with ubrogepant 100 mg in migraine patients, ubrogepant 50 mg obtained comparable pain freedom at 2 h (OR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.64-1.15; p = 0.310), sustained pain freedom 2-24 h (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.54-1.07; p = 0.110), photophobia absence at 2 h (OR = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.63-1.02; p = 0.070), phonophobia absence at 2 h (OR = 1.07; 95% CI = 0.82-1.40; p = 0.620) and nausea absence at 2 h (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.79-1.32; p = 0.880). In terms of safety, adverse events were found to be increased in ubrogepant 100 mg as compared to ubrogepant 50 mg (OR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.67-0.99; p = 0.040), and there was no statistical difference of serious adverse events between two groups (OR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.40-1.91; p = 0.720).Conclusions: Ubrogepant 50 mg and 100 mg may be equally effective to alleviate migraine, but ubrogepant 100 mg led to increase incidence of adverse events.

A multicenter, open-label long-term safety study of rimegepant for the acute treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

The present study evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability of rimegepant, an orally administered small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, in people with migraine.

METHODS

This multicenter, long-term, open-label safety study included adults (≥18 years) with ≥1 year history of migraine who were sequentially enrolled into three groups: participants in the first two groups had either 2-8 or 9-14 moderate to severe migraine attacks per month by history and treated as needed (pro re nata [PRN]) with one rimegepant 75 mg oral tablet up to once per calendar day for 52 weeks (PRN 2-8 and PRN 9-14); a third group, included to collect safety data during higher-frequency dosing, had 4-14 moderate to severe migraine attacks per month by history and who took one rimegepant tablet every other day as scheduled dosing plus PRN dosing of one rimegepant tablet for migraine attacks of any severity on nonscheduled dosing days for 12 weeks (every other day (EOD) + PRN).

RESULTS

Overall, 1800 participants self-administered rimegepant (PRN 2-8: n = 1033; PRN 9-14: n = 481; EOD + PRN: n = 286). The most common on-treatment adverse events (AEs) were upper respiratory tract infection (8.8%), nasopharyngitis (6.8%) and sinusitis (5.1%). Most AEs were mild or moderate and considered unrelated to rimegepant. Serious AEs considered possibly (n = 1) or unlikely (n = 9) related to rimegepant were reported in ten (0.6%) participants. No signal of drug-induced liver injury because of rimegepant was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant 75 mg up to once per day as EOD + PRN for 12 weeks or PRN for up to 52 weeks was safe and well tolerated. No signal of hepatotoxicity, potential drug abuse, or medication-overuse headache was identified.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03266588.

Underrepresented and Underserved Populations in Neurological Research

Underserved and underrepresented populations have historically been excluded from neurological research. This lack of representation has implications for translation of research findings into clinical practice given the impact of social determinants of health on neurological disease risk, progression, and outcomes. Lack of inclusion in research is driven by individual-, investigator-, and study-level barriers as well as larger systemic injustices (e.g., structural racism, discriminatory practices). Although strategies to increase inclusion of underserved and underrepresented populations have been put forth, numerous questions remain about the most effective methodology. In this article, we highlight inclusivity patterns and gaps among the most common neurological conditions and propose best practices informed by our own experiences in engagement of local community organizations and collaboration efforts to increase underserved and underrepresented population participation in neurological research.

No clinically relevant electrocardiogram effects in a randomized TQT study of single therapeutic/supratherapeutic rimegepant doses in healthy adults

A single-center, phase I, partially double-blind (double-blind regarding doses of rimegepant and placebo, and open label with respect to moxifloxacin), randomized, 12-sequence, four-period crossover study of therapeutic (75 mg) and supratherapeutic (300 mg) doses of rimegepant with placebo and moxifloxacin (400 mg) controls was designed to evaluate drug effect on the Fridericia corrected QT (QTcF) interval in healthy fasted adults. A total of 38 participants were randomized and dosed in the study. Electrocardiogram (ECG) data were available from 37 participants in the rimegepant 75-mg group, 38 participants in the rimegepant 300-mg group, and 36 participants in the moxifloxacin and placebo groups. Both the 75- and 300-mg doses of rimegepant had no clinically relevant effect on ECG parameters, including QTcF, heart rate, PR and QRS interval, T-wave morphology, and U-wave presence. All upper 90% confidence intervals for the QTcF effect with rimegepant were less than or equal to 4.69 ms, well below the 10-ms threshold for potential clinical significance. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated by the QT effect of moxifloxacin. Using both by-timepoint and concentration-QTc analysis, a placebo-corrected change-from-baseline QTcF greater than 10 ms could be excluded for rimegepant plasma concentrations up to ~10,000 ng/mL, representing concentrations at least 10.8-fold the maximum observed concentration of the 75-mg therapeutic dose of rimegepant.

Drug-related side effects and adverse reactions in the treatment of migraine: a bibliometric and visual analysis

Background

Migraine imposes a substantial global burden, impacting patients and society. Pharmacotherapy, as a primary treatment, entails specific adverse reactions. Emphasizing these reactions is pivotal for improving treatment strategies and enhancing patients' well-being. Thus, we conducted a comprehensive bibliometric and visual analysis of relevant literature.

Methodology

We conducted a comprehensive search on the Science Citation Index Expanded within the Web of Science, restricting the literature for analysis based on criteria such as document type, publication date, and language. Subsequently, we utilized various analytical tools, including VOSviewer, Scimago Graphica, the R package 'bibliometrix', CiteSpace, and Excel programs, for a meticulous examination and systematic organization of data concerning journals, authors, countries/regions, institutions, keywords, and references.

Results

By August 31, 2023, the literature was distributed across 379 journals worldwide, authored by 4,235 individuals from 1726 institutions. It featured 2,363 keywords and 38,412 references. 'HEADACHE' led in publication count, with 'SILBERSTEIN S' as the most prolific author. The United States ranked highest in publication volume, with 'UNIV COPENHAGEN' leading among institutions.

Conclusion

Our research findings indicate that researchers in the field continue to maintain a focus on the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) system and explore diverse mechanisms for drug development through the application of novel biotechnological approaches. Furthermore, it is imperative to enhance the assessment of clinical trial outcomes, consistently monitor the efficacy and safety of prominent drugs such as Erenumab and Fremanezumab. There is a need for further evaluation of acute and preventive treatments tailored to different populations and varying types of migraine.

Bioequivalence of rimegepant, a small molecule CGRP receptor antagonist, administered as an oral tablet, a sublingual orally disintegrating tablet, and a supralingual orally disintegrating tablet: two phase 1 randomized studies in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant is an orally administered small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine.

METHODS

Two single-center, phase 1, open-label, randomized bioequivalence studies were conducted in healthy adult non-smokers, aged 18-55 years. One study compared the rate and extent of absorption of the marketed formulation of rimegepant 75 mg orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) administered sublingually with rimegepant 75 mg oral tablet, an earlier development formulation; the second compared the rate and extent of absorption of 75 mg rimegepant ODT administered supralingually with rimegepant oral tablet.

RESULTS

The ln-transformed geometric mean ratios for the area under the curve (AUC) from time 0 to the last available concentration time point (time t) (AUC0-t), AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf), and maximum observed concentration (Cmax) of sublingual rimegepant ODT vs. rimegepant tablet were 97, 97, and 105%, respectively, and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were all within the predefined range (80-125%) for bioequivalence. The ln-transformed geometric mean ratios for the AUC0-t and AUC0-inf of supralingual rimegepant ODT vs. rimegepant tablet were 98%, the 90% CIs were within the predefined range (80-125%), and the geometric mean ratio for Cmax was 103% with the 95% upper confidence bound for the scaled average bioequivalence criterion of -0.0575 (within-participant coefficient of variation for the reference for Cmax > 30%) for bioequivalence.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant 75 mg ODT, administered sublingually or supralingually, and rimegepant 75 mg oral tablet were bioequivalent.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Galcanezumab Versus Rimegepant for Prevention of Episodic Migraine: Results from a Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

There have been no prior trials directly comparing the efficacy of different calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists for migraine prevention. Reported are the results from the first head-to-head study of two CGRP antagonists, galcanezumab (monoclonal antibody) versus rimegepant (gepant), for the prevention of episodic migraine.

METHODS

In this 3-month, double-blind, double-dummy study, participants were randomized (1:1) to subcutaneous (SC) galcanezumab 120 mg per month (after a 240 mg loading dose) and a placebo oral disintegrating tablet (ODT) every other day (q.o.d.) or to rimegepant 75 mg ODT q.o.d. and a monthly SC placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with a ≥ 50% reduction in migraine headache days per month from baseline across the 3-month double-blind treatment period. Key secondary endpoints were overall mean change from baseline in: migraine headache days per month across 3 months and at month 3, 2, and 1; migraine headache days per month with acute migraine medication use; Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire Role Function-Restrictive domain score at month 3; and a ≥ 75% and 100% reduction from baseline in migraine headache days per month across 3 months.

RESULTS

Of 580 randomized participants (galcanezumab: 287, rimegepant: 293; mean age: 42 years), 83% were female and 81% Caucasian. Galcanezumab was not superior to rimegepant in achieving a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in migraine headache days per month (62% versus 61% respectively; P = 0.70). Given the pre-specified multiple testing procedure, key secondary endpoints cannot be considered statistically significant. Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 21% of participants, with no significant differences between study intervention groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Galcanezumab was not superior to rimegepant for the primary endpoint; however, both interventions demonstrated efficacy as preventive treatments in participants with episodic migraine. The efficacy and safety profiles observed in galcanezumab-treated participants were consistent with previous studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinTrials.gov-NCT05127486 (I5Q-MC-CGBD).

The Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Rimegepant 75 mg Are Similar in Elderly and Nonelderly Adults: A Phase 1, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Single-Dose Study

Rimegepant is a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine ± aura and preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The pharmacokinetics of rimegepant in elderly and nonelderly subjects were evaluated. In an open-label Phase 1 study, 14 elderly (aged 65 years or older) and 14 nonelderly (aged 18 to less than 45 years) subjects each received a single oral dose of rimegepant 75 mg. Blood samples were collected before dosing and through 96 hours after dosing. The pharmacokinetic parameters of rimegepant after a single dose were similar in both age groups. Geometric least-squares mean ratios (elderly/nonelderly) of the natural log-transformed maximum observed plasma concentration and natural log-transformed area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity were 96.6 and 104.6, respectively. Eight (28.6%) subjects (4 elderly, 4 nonelderly) experienced 1 or more adverse events (AEs); all AEs were mild in intensity, and no serious AEs or AEs leading to discontinuation were reported. Following a single 75-mg dose of oral rimegepant, pharmacokinetic parameters were similar in elderly and nonelderly adults; no dose adjustment is warranted in elderly subjects.

Efficacy and Safety of Rimegepant for Migraine Patients: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

OBJECTIVES

Rimegepant may have some potential in treating migraine, and this meta-analysis aims to study the efficacy and safety of rimegepant for migraine patients.

METHODS

We have searched several databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library databases and selected the randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of rimegepant versus placebo for migraine patients. This meta-analysis was conducted using the random- or fixed-effect model based on the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with placebo in migraine patients, rimegepant treatment was associated with substantially improved freedom from pain at 2 hours (odds ratio [OR], 2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.69-2.59; P < 0.00001), pain relief at 2 hours (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.65 to 2.25; P < 0.00001), freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 hours (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35-1.91; P < 0.00001), ability to function normally at 2 hours (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.42-2.01; P < 0.00001), sustained freedom from pain at 24 hours (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.74-4.78; P < 0.0001), sustained pain relief at 24 hours (OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.96-2.72; P < 0.00001), and no rescue medication (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 2.02-2.90; P < 0.00001) but showed no obvious impact on adverse events (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant may be effective and safe for the treatment of migraine patients.

Pharmaceutical aspects of novel CGRP inhibitors used in the prophylaxis and treatment of migraine

Migraine is one of the most prevalent neurological disorders known to have an immense adverse socio-economic impact. Neurogenic inflammation is thought to mediate migraine, and CGRP is known to be released during acute attacks of migraine that causes vasodilation in extracerebral arteries. Hence, CGRP is believed to play a key role in triggering migraine. Although there are several classes of medications used in the prevention and treatment of migraine pain, targeted therapies are fewer. Therefore, CGRP receptor inhibitors which bind to CGRP receptors in the cranial vasculature have been developed as drugs for migraine therapy. In this review article, we describe the basic pathophysiologic mechanism that causes migraine headaches and the pharmacotherapeutic aspects of CGRP inhibitors available for clinical use. For the purpose of this review, a search was performed on the pharmacological, pharmacokinetic, pharmaceutical, and therapeutic aspects of the FDA-approved CGRP inhibitors viz. erenumab, ubrogepant, rimegepant, atogepant, eptinezumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in UpToDate database and PubMed beginning year 2000. Based on the data collected, a risk-benefit comparison of different classes of novel CGRP inhibitors available for clinical use is provided. This comparative review may help the healthcare providers in choosing the best pharmacotherapeutic agent for their patients based on patient-specific information.

Update of Gepants in the Treatment of Chronic Migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the unmet therapeutic needs of patients with chronic migraine (CM) and/or medication overuse, available treatment options are limited. Recently, four calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonists, known as gepants, have been approved for the treatment of migraine. This review focuses on the preventive treatment of CM with gepants and highlights recent findings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown promising results for rimegepant and atogepant as preventive treatments for CM. In an RCT targeting patients with CM, atogepant demonstrated a significant reduction in the mean monthly migraine days, irrespective of acute medication overuse. Moreover, the patients reported no significant safety concerns and exhibited good tolerance to treatment. These findings highlight the potential of gepants as a new and effective therapeutic option for patients with CM and/or medication overuse. Gepant use will help improve the management and quality of life of individuals with this debilitating condition.

A Bibliometric and Scientific Knowledge Map Study of Migraine Treatment from 2013 to 2022

Background

Migraine treatment research has made much great progress over the past decade. However, there have been few bibliometric studies conducted so far. In this study, bibliometric analysis was used to explore the current status and future trends of migraine treatment research.

Methods

Migraine treatment-related articles were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection on December 7, 2022. Quantitative variables were analyzed by the R-tool bibliometrix and Excel 2020. VOS viewer and CiteSpace software were used to visualize citation, co-authorship, co-occurrence, and co-citation analysis of countries/regions, organizations, authors, references, and keywords.

Results

A total of 3294 articles were included with the global publication output showing a slow upward trend. The United States was the most productive country with 1116 papers and gained the most citations. Albert Einstein College of Medicine was the most active institution with 176 papers. Headache published the most articles in this domain, while Cephalalgia was the most commonly co-cited journal. Lipton, RB published the most articles and had the most citations. Tepper S, 2017, Lancet neurology and Silberstein S, 2004, Cephalalgia were defined as classic articles. The current research mainly focuses on CGRP-related therapeutics, such as fremanezumab, erenumab and ubrogepant.

Conclusion

Based on the analysis of bibliometric data on migraine treatment over the past decade, the trends and the knowledge graph of the country, organization, author, reference, and the keyword were identified, providing accurate and quick positioning of the critical information in the domain.

Migraine: Advances in the Pathogenesis and Treatment

This article presents a comprehensive review on migraine, a prevalent neurological disorder characterized by chronic headaches, by focusing on their pathogenesis and treatment advances. By examining molecular markers and leveraging imaging techniques, the research identifies key mechanisms and triggers in migraine pathology, thereby improving our understanding of its pathophysiology. Special emphasis is given to the role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in migraine development. CGRP not only contributes to symptoms but also represents a promising therapeutic target, with inhibitors showing effectiveness in migraine management. The article further explores traditional medical treatments, scrutinizing the mechanisms, benefits, and limitations of commonly prescribed medications. This provides a segue into an analysis of emerging therapeutic strategies and their potential to enhance migraine management. Finally, the paper delves into neuromodulation as an innovative treatment modality. Clinical studies indicating its effectiveness in migraine management are reviewed, and the advantages and limitations of this technique are discussed. In summary, the article aims to enhance the understanding of migraine pathogenesis and present novel therapeutic possibilities that could revolutionize patient care.

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

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

The vascular role of CGRP: a systematic review of human studies

Intravenous infusion of human alpha calcitonin gene-related peptide (h-α-CGRP) has been applied to explore migraine pathogenesis and cerebral hemodynamics during the past three decades. Cumulative data implicate h-α-CGRP in regulating the vascular tone. In this systematic review, we searched PubMed and EMBASE for clinical studies investigating the vascular changes upon intravenous infusion of h-α-CGRP in humans. A total of 386 studies were screened by title and abstract. Of these, 11 studies with 61 healthy participants and 177 participants diagnosed with migraine were included. Several studies reported hemodynamic effects including flushing, palpitation, warm sensation, heart rate (HR), mean arterial blood pressure (MABP), mean blood flow velocity of middle cerebral artery (mean V_MCA), and diameter of superficial temporal artery (STA). Upon the start of h-α-CGRP infusion, 163 of 165 (99%) participants had flushing, 98 of 155 (63%) participants reported palpitation, and 160 of 165 (97%) participants reported warm sensation. HR increased with 14%-58% and MABP decreased with 7%-12%. The mean V_MCA was decreased with 9.5%-21%, and the diameter of the STA was dilated with 41%-43%. The vascular changes lasted from 20 to >120 min. Intravenous infusion of h-α-CGRP caused a universal vasodilation without any serious adverse events. The involvement of CGRP in the systemic hemodynamic raises concerns regarding long-term blockade of CGRP in migraine patients with and without cardiovascular complications.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Clinical efficacy and safety of rimegepant in the treatment of migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of rimegepant for the treatment of migraine in adult patients using a meta-analysis.

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched up to March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated migraine and other comparator treatments in adult patients were included. The clinical response at the post-treatment evaluation, including acute pain free and relief effect, whereas the secondary outcomes were the risk of adverse events (AEs).

Results

A total of 4 RCTs involving 4,230 patients with episodic migraine were included. Outcome indicators for the number of pain free and relief patients at 2 h, 2-24 h, 2-48 h post-dose showed that rimegepant had better effects relative to the placebo [free at 2 h: OR = 1.84, 95% CI (1.55, 2.18), P < 0.00001; relief at 2 h: OR = 1.80, 95% CI (1.59, 2.04), P < 0.00001]. And there was no significant difference between the occurrence of adverse events in the experimental and control groups [OR = 1.29, 95% CI (0.99, 1.67), P = 0.06].

Conclusion

Rimegepant has better therapeutic effects compared to placebo and no significant difference in adverse events.

Safety and efficacy of rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet for the acute treatment of migraine in China and South Korea: a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

No acute treatments targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) have been approved for use in China or South Korea. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of rimegepant-an orally administered small molecule CGRP antagonist-with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine among adults in these countries.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial was done at 86 outpatient clinics at hospitals and academic medical centres (73 in China and 13 in South Korea). Participants were adults (≥18 years) with at least a 1-year history of migraine who had two to eight moderate or severe attacks per month and fewer than 15 headache days per month within the 3 months before the screening visit. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to 75 mg rimegepant or placebo to treat a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. Randomisation was stratified by the use of preventive medication and by country. The allocation sequence was generated and implemented by study personnel using an interactive web-response system accessed online from each study centre. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The coprimary endpoints of freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (nausea, phonophobia, or photophobia) 2 h after dosing were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (randomly assigned participants who took study medication for a migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity, and provided at least one efficacy datapoint after treatment) using Cochran-Mantel Haenszel tests. Safety was assessed in all participants who received rimegepant or placebo. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04574362, and is completed.

FINDINGS

1431 participants were randomly assigned (716 [50%] to rimegepant and 715 [50%] to placebo). 668 (93%) participants in the rimegepant group and 674 (94%) participants in the placebo group received treatment. 1340 participants were included in the mITT analysis (666 [93%] in the rimegepant group and 674 [94%] in the placebo group). 2 h after dosing, rimegepant was superior to placebo for pain freedom (132 [20%] of 666 vs 72 [11%] of 674, risk difference 9·2, 95% CI 5·4-13·0; p<0·0001) and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (336 [50%] of 666 participants vs 241 [36%] of 674 participants, 14·8, 9·6-20·0; p<0·0001). The most common (≥1%) adverse events were protein in urine (8 [1%] of 668 participants in the rimepegant group vs 7 [1%] of 674 participants in the placebo group), nausea (7 [1%] of 668 vs 18 [3%] of 674), and urinary tract infection (5 [1%] of 668 vs 8 [1%] of 674). There were no rimegepant-related serious adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

Among adults living in China or South Korea, a single dose of 75 mg rimegepant was effective for the acute treatment of migraine. Safety and tolerability were similar to placebo. Our findings suggest that rimegepant might be a useful new addition to the range of medications for the acute treatment of migraine in China and South Korea, but further studies are needed to support long-term efficacy and safety and to compare rimegepant with other medications for the acute treatment of migraine in this population.

FUNDING

BioShin Limited.

TRANSLATIONS

For the Chinese and Korean translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Effects of rimegepant 75 mg daily on the pharmacokinetics of a combined oral contraceptive containing ethinyl estradiol and norgestimate in healthy female participants

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of single and multiple doses of rimegepant 75 mg dose on the pharmacokinetics of an oral contraceptive containing ethinyl estradiol (EE)/norgestimate (NGM) in healthy females of childbearing potential or non-menopausal females with tubal ligation.

BACKGROUND

Females of childbearing age experience the highest prevalence of migraine and frequently inquire about the concomitant use of anti-migraine medications and contraceptives. Rimegepant, a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, demonstrated efficacy and safety for treating an acute migraine attack and preventing migraine.

METHODS

This open-label, single-center, phase 1, drug-drug interaction study explored the effects of rimegepant 75 mg daily dose on the pharmacokinetics of an oral contraceptive containing EE/NGM 0.035 mg/0.25 mg in healthy females of childbearing potential or non-menopausal females with tubal ligation. During cycles 1 and 2, participants received EE/NGM once daily for 21 days followed by placebo tablets with inactive ingredients for 7 days. Rimegepant was administered during only cycle 2 for 8 days, from days 12 through 19. The primary endpoint was the effect of single and multiple doses of rimegepant on the pharmacokinetics of EE and norelgestromin (NGMN), an active metabolite of NGM, at steady state, including area under the concentration-time curve for 1 dosing interval (AUC_0-τ,ss ) and maximum observed concentration (C_ss[max] ).

RESULTS

The study enrolled 25 participants, with pharmacokinetic data assessed for 20 participants. A single 75 mg dose of rimegepant co-administered with EE/NGM increased exposures of EE and NGMN by ≤16% (geometric mean ratio [GMR], 1.03; 90% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.06; and GMR, 1.16; 90% CI, 1.13-1.20, respectively). After 8 days of co-administering EE/NGM with rimegepant, EE pharmacokinetic parameters, AUC_0-τ,ss and C_ss(max) , increased by 20% (GMR, 1.20; 90% CI, 1.16-1.25) and 34% (GMR, 1.34; 90% CI, 1.23-1.46), respectively, and NGMN pharmacokinetic parameters increased by 46% (GMR, 1.46; 90% CI, 1.39-1.52) and 40% (GMR, 1.40; 90% CI, 1.30-1.51), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified modest elevations in overall EE and NGMN exposures after multiple doses of rimegepant, but these elevations are unlikely to be clinically relevant in healthy females with migraine.

Efficacy, safety and indirect comparisons of lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

We performed a random-effects network meta-analysis to study the efficacy and safety of newly developed drugs for the acute treatment of migraine attacks.

METHODS

MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to 11 February 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials examining all formulations of lasmiditan, rimegepant and ubrogepant for the acute treatment of adults with migraine, were included. Data were extracted following the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Seven studies (SAMURAI, SPARTAN, CENTURION, Study 302, Study 303, ACHIEVE I and II) involving n = 12,859 patients were included. All treatments were superior in efficacy to placebo. Lasmiditan 200 mg showed the highest two-hour pain freedom, while two-hour freedom from most bothersome symptom was equally achieved by the higher doses of lasmiditan (100 and 200 mg), rimegepant and the higher doses of ubrogepant (50 and 100 mg). The odds of treatment-emergent adverse events were greatest with all doses of lasmiditan.

CONCLUSION

Lasmiditan 200 mg was the most effective intervention in the treatment of migraine attacks, although it was associated with high degrees of dizziness, nausea and somnolence. Rimegepant showed slightly lower, but similar efficacy rates to lasmiditan. Ubrogepant had overall the best tolerability profile. These conclusions are limited by the absence of head-to-head comparisons, limitations of individual trials and of the meta-analysis methodology itself.PROSPERO trial registration: CRD42022308224.

Rimegepant: A Review in the Acute Treatment and Preventive Treatment of Migraine

Rimegepant [Nurtec^® ODT (USA); Vydura^® (EU)] is a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults, and for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. Rimegepant is available as an orally disintegrating tablet (ODT), which offers convenience and a potentially faster response time than the conventional tablet formulation. In pivotal phase III trials, rimegepant was more effective than placebo at relieving pain and the most bothersome symptom when taken as needed for the acute treatment of migraine. Rimegepant was also more effective than placebo at reducing the number of monthly migraine days when taken every other day for the preventive treatment of migraine. The beneficial effects of rimegepant in reducing migraine frequency and improving quality of life were maintained over the longer term (up to 52 weeks). Rimegepant was generally well tolerated, with no evidence of hepatotoxicity or cardiovascular toxicity in clinical trials. As the first dual agent approved for both treatment and prevention of migraine, rimegepant represents a useful option for the management of migraine in adults.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Single and Multiple Daily Dosing of 75-mg Rimegepant Orally Disintegrating Tablets in Healthy Chinese Adults: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Rimegepant is an oral small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist for acute migraine treatment with or without aura and prevention of episodic migraine in adults. This was a rimegepant single- and multiple-dose phase 1, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and confirm safety in healthy Chinese participants. Participants received a 75-mg rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) (N = 12) or matching placebo (N = 4) ODT on days 1 and 3-7 after fasting for pharmacokinetic assessments. Safety assessments included 12-lead electrocardiograms, vital signs, clinical laboratory data, and adverse events (AEs). After a single dose (9 females, 7 males) median time to maximum plasma concentration was 1.5 hours; mean values were 937 ng/mL (maximum concentration), 4582 h*ng/mL (area under the concentration-time curve, 0 to infinity), 7.7 hours (terminal elimination half-life), and 19.9 L/h (apparent clearance). Similar results were seen after 5 daily doses, with minimal accumulation. Six (37.5%) participants experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent AE: 4 (33.3%) had received rimegepant and 2 (50.0%) had received placebo. All AEs were grade 1 and resolved by the end of the study with no deaths, serious/significant AEs, or AEs leading to discontinuation. Overall, single- and multiple-dose rimegepant ODT 75 mg was safe and well-tolerated in healthy Chinese adults with similar pharmacokinetics to non-Asian healthy participants. Trial registration: This trial is registered with the China Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE): CTR20210569.

Rimegepant for the treatment of migraine

Migraine is a common form of primary headache, affecting up to 1 in every 6 Americans. The pathophysiology is an intricate interplay of genetic factors and environmental influence and is still being elucidated in ongoing studies. The trigeminovascular system is now known to have a significant role in the initiation of migraines, including the release of pain mediators such as CGRP and substance P. Traditional treatment of migraine is usually divided into acute and preventive treatment. Acute therapy includes non-specific therapy, such as NSAIDs and other analgesics, which may provide relief in mild to moderate migraines. 5-HT1 agonists may provide relief in severe migraine, but are not universally effective and carry a significant side-effect profile with frequent redosing requirement. Prophylactic therapy may reduce the occurrence of acute migraine attacks in selected patients, but does not completely eliminate it. More recently, CGRP antagonism has been studied and shown to be effective in both abortion and prevention of migraine. Novel medications, targeting CGRP, divide into CGRP antibodies and receptor antagonists (gepants). Rimegepant, a second-generation gepant, has shown efficacy in several clinical trials in treating acute migraine. Ongoing trials are also evaluating its role in migraine prophylaxis, and results are promising. It is also generally safer for use than existing options, does not appear to increase the chance of developing chronic migraines, and carries a very tolerable side effects profile. It is a part of a growing arsenal in migraine treatment, and may present the silver bullet for treatment of this disease.

Recently approved and emerging drug options for migraine prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

: Migraine occupies the first position regarding to the disability caused in female working population (15-49 years). Research in the field of prophylaxis of this pathology has made enormous strides in recent years.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative review we retrace the most important scientific evidence regarding recently approved and emerging drug for prophylactic treatment of migraine. The purpose of this article is in fact to evaluate currently approved or emerging pharmacological agents for migraine prophylaxis. This review is based on literature published in peer review journal obtained through PubMed, Cochrane library, Clinicaltrials.gov and US FDA.

EXPERT OPINION

: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target the calcitonin gene-related peptide signalling pathway (CGRP) have marked an innovation in prophylactic migraine therapy. The combination of Onabotulinumtoxin-A (OBTA) and mAbs appears to be an effective, but costly, therapeutic option for resistant cases. New classes of molecules like gepants and ditans seem to give exceptional results. In addition, new prophylactic drugs are emerging with several targets: the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP), ion channels, several receptors coupled to G proteins, orexin, and glutamate. All these therapies will implement and improve migraine management, as well as personalized medicine for each patient.

Relative efficacy of lasmiditan versus rimegepant and ubrogepant as acute treatments for migraine: network meta-analysis findings

Background

In the absence of head-to-head trials, comprehensive evidence comparing onset of efficacy of novel agents for acute treatment of migraine is lacking. This study aimed to explore the relative efficacy of lasmiditan (serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine] 1F receptor agonist) versus rimegepant and ubrogepant (calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists) for the acute oral treatment of migraine through network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

Data included in the NMA were identified through a systematic literature search (conducted April 2018, updated May/December 2020) of phase II–IV, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic/episodic migraine with/without aura. Treatments included: lasmiditan 50, 100, 200 mg; rimegepant 75 mg; ubrogepant 25, 50, 100 mg. Pairwise treatment comparisons from Bayesian fixed-effect/random-effects NMA, adjusted by baseline risk where appropriate, were conducted. Comparisons were reported as odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. Early-onset efficacy endpoints included: pain freedom at 2 hours and pain relief at 1 and 2 hours. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) profiles were summarised. Heterogeneity and inconsistency in the network were explored; sensitivity analyses investigated robustness of findings.

Results

Across 12 RCTs included in the base case, females represented >80% of included patients (mean age 37.9–45.7 years). Odds of achieving both pain freedom and pain relief at 2 hours were higher with lasmiditan 100 and 200 mg versus rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 25 and 50 mg. Results for pain relief at 1 hour were consistent with those at 2 hours, but fewer comparisons were available. There were no statistically significant differences between lasmiditan 50 mg and ubrogepant or rimegepant for any outcome. Sensitivity analyses were in the same direction as base case analyses. Most commonly reported ADRs (incidence ≥2%) were: dizziness, fatigue, paraesthesia, sedation, nausea/vomiting and muscle weakness with lasmiditan; nausea with rimegepant; and nausea, somnolence and dry mouth with ubrogepant.

Conclusions

The efficacy findings of this indirect comparison indicate that lasmiditan 100 mg or 200 mg might be an appropriate acute treatment option for patients with migraine seeking a fast onset of action. Differently from rimegepant and ubrogepant, lasmiditan use is associated with mainly neurological events, which are mostly mild or moderate in severity and self-limiting.

350/350 words

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01440-w.

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.

Cardiovascular Disease and Migraine: Are the New Treatments Safe?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The authors present data on cardiovascular safety for the new acute and preventive migraine treatments including ditans, gepants, and calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) alongside older medications like triptans and ergotamines.

RECENT FINDINGS

The authors conclude that there are no cardiovascular safety concerns for lasmiditan, and that it could be used in those with cardiovascular disease. In fact, the literature even suggests that triptans are safer in cardiovascular disease than their contraindications may suggest. At this time, there is insufficient evidence that gepants and CGRP mAbs should be contraindicated in those with cardiovascular disease including stroke or myocardial infarction, though erenumab has now been associated with hypertension. Vasodilation may be an important CGRP-mediated mechanism mid-ischemia especially in patients with small vessel disease; hence, CGRP antagonists should be use with caution in this context. Long-term data is still needed, and prescribers should ensure patients are aware of the limitations of our knowledge at this time, while still offering these effective and well-tolerated treatment options.

Safety evaluation of oral calcitonin-gene-related peptide receptor antagonists in patients with acute migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonists have been suggested as novel treatments for acute migraine. This study aimed to use meta-analysis to compare the safety and tolerability of five existing oral CGRP receptor antagonists (BI44370TA, MK-3207, rimegepant, telcagepant, and ubrogepant) with that of a placebo or triptans against acute migraine.

METHODS

Five prominent databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials on this topic. The primary safety outcomes of interest were any adverse events (AEs) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and secondary outcomes were individual events, namely diarrhea, dizziness, dry mouth, fatigue, nausea, paresthesia, somnolence, upper abdominal pain, and vomiting.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies met the eligibility criteria and were examined in detail. Although, compared to placebo, oral CGRP receptor antagonists significantly increased the incidence of any AEs (risk ratio [RR] = 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.07-1.23), there was no difference in the incidence of TRAEs (RR = 1.18; 95% CI = 1.00-1.38). Moreover, CGRP receptor antagonists were safer than triptans with respect to primary safety outcomes, such as any AEs (RR = 0.78; 95% CI = 0.63-0.98) and TRAEs (RR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.58-0.79).

CONCLUSION

Despite oral CGRP receptor antagonists posing a significantly higher risk of AEs when compared to placebo, CGRP receptor antagonists have a favorable safety profile compared to triptans. Our findings inform strategies to enhance safety and tolerability in the treatment of acute migraine.

Recent advances in targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide for the treatment of menstrual migraine: A narrative review

Menstrual migraine (MM) has a longer duration and higher drug resistance than non-perimenstrual migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and CGRP receptors are expressed in the peripheral and central nervous systems throughout the trigeminovascular system. The CGRP/CGRP receptor axis plays an important role in sensory physiology and pharmacology. CGRP receptor antagonists and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have shown consistent efficacy and tolerability in the prevention of chronic or episodic migraine and are now approved for clinical use. However, few studies have reported the use of these drugs in MM, and no specific treatment for MM has been approved. This review aimed to shed light on the recent advances in targeting calcitonin gene-related peptides for the treatment of menstrual migraines in PubMed. In this review, we first discuss the axis of the CGRP/CGRP receptor. We then discuss the role of CGRP receptor antagonists and anti-CGRP mAbs in MM treatment. Finally, we discuss the role of the combination of anti-CGRP mAbs and CGRP receptor antagonists in migraine treatment and the drugs that inhibit CGRP release. Altogether, the anti-CGRP mAbs or CGRP receptor antagonists showed good efficacy and safety in the treatment of MM.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

DEVELOPMENT

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

DEVELOPMENT

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Efficacy and safety of calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists in migraine treatment: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

We systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) antagonists for migraine treatment.

METHODS

Various databases including PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Data were electronically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CGRP antagonists for migraine treatment since inception to March 2021. The trials were screened for inclusion, after which the methodological quality of the included trials was assessed. Then meta-analysis was performed using the Revman 5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 26 RCTs involving 21,736 patients were included. The CGRP antagonists group included 13,635 patients while the control group included 8101 patients. Meta-analysis showed that compared to the control group, CGRP antagonists were associated with various significant effects, including the following outcome indicators: (1) number of patients with ≥50% reduction from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (RR = 1.50, 95% CI [1.39,1.62], p < .00001); (2) number of patients with pain free at 2 h postdose (RR = 1.98, 95% CI [1.77, 2.20], p < .00001), and (3) number of patients with 2-24 h sustained pain free postdose (RR = 2.18, 95% CI [1.93, 2.46], p < .00001). However, the number of patients with any adverse events was significantly high in the antagonists group, relative to the control group (RR = 1.08, 95% CI [1.04, 1.12], p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

CGRP antagonists are significantly effective for migraine treatment; however, they are associated with various adverse events. Due to limitations with regards to quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions should be verified by more high quality studies.

P-Glycoprotein and Breast Cancer Resistance Protein Transporter Inhibition by Cyclosporine and Quinidine on the Pharmacokinetics of Oral Rimegepant in Healthy Subjects

Rimegepant (Nurtec ODT)—an orally administered, small‐molecule calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine—is a substrate for both the P‐glycoprotein and breast cancer resistance protein transporters in vitro. We evaluated the effects of concomitant administration of strong inhibitors of these transporters on the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant in healthy subjects. This single‐center, open‐label, randomized study was conducted in 2 parts, both of which were 2‐period, 2‐sequence, crossover studies. Part 1 (n = 15) evaluated the effect of a single oral dose of 200‐mg cyclosporine, a strong inhibitor of the P‐glycoprotein and breast cancer resistance protein transporters, on the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant 75 mg. Part 2 (n = 12) evaluated the effect of a single oral dose of 600‐mg quinidine, a strong selective P‐glycoprotein transporter, on the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant 75 mg. Coadministration with cyclosporine showed an increase in rimegepant area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to infinity and maximum observed concentration based on geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals [CIs]) of 1.6 (1.49‐1.72) and 1.41 (1.27‐1.57), respectively, versus rimegepant alone. Coadministration with quinidine showed an increase in rimegepant area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to infinity and maximum observed concentration geometric mean ratios (90% CIs) of 1.55 (1.40‐1.72) and 1.67 (1.46‐1.91), respectively, versus rimegepant alone. Strong P‐glycoprotein inhibitors (cyclosporine, quinidine) increased rimegepant exposures (>50%, <2‐fold). In parts 1 and 2, rimegepant coadministration was well tolerated and safe. The similar effect of cyclosporine and quinidine coadministration on rimegepant exposure suggests that inhibition of breast cancer resistance protein inhibition may have less influence on rimegepant exposure.

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.

Human Milk and Plasma Pharmacokinetics of Single-Dose Rimegepant 75 mg in Healthy Lactating Women

Objective: Investigate whether rimegepant-an oral small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for the treatment of migraine-is excreted in human milk after a single 75 mg dose and characterize its concentration-time profile in the plasma and milk of healthy lactating women to determine the relative infant dose (RID). Methods: This open-label, single-center study enrolled healthy lactating women aged 18-40 years with a gestation of 37-42 weeks and uncomplicated delivery of a single healthy child ≥2 weeks (14 days) and ≤6 months before study drug administration. Plasma samples were collected 0, 1, 2, 4, and 8 hours postdose; human milk samples were collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, and 36 hours. The milk:plasma drug concentration ratio was estimated as the ratio of the human milk:plasma areas under the curve. The RID (%) was calculated as 100 times the quotient of the body weight-normalized infant and maternal doses. Results: Subjects (N = 12) were enrolled between 25 January and 15 September 2020. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 29.8 (3.6) years; mean (SD) body mass index was 26.8 (4.9) kg/m². The mean (SD) RID of rimegepant was 0.51% (0.14). The mean (SD) body-weight normalized infant dose was 0.005 (0.001) mg/kg/day, the mean (SD) body-weight normalized maternal dose was 1.04 (0.18) mg/kg/day, and mean (SD) maternal body weight was 74.0 (13.3) kg. Conclusion: On a weight-adjusted basis, the mean RID of rimegepant was <1% of the maternal dose.

Effectiveness of Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonists for Migraine Treatment: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The pathophysiology of migraine has been researched incessantly, and it has been suggested that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is associated with migraine attacks. CGRP receptor blockers are attracting attention as potential agents for migraine prevention and treatment of acute episodes. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of available CGRP receptor antagonists, focusing on their therapeutic doses for acute migraine treatment.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE and Embase from inception to March 27, 2021, for English-language publications using the keywords "migraine" and "calcitonin gene-related peptide"; the searches were limited to human studies.

RESULTS

Five studies that focused on examining the effects of CGRP receptor antagonists on acute migraine treatment met the eligibility criteria for this meta-analysis. A pooled analysis demonstrated that CGRP receptor antagonists significantly increased freedom from pain (odds ratio [OR] = 2.066, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.766-2.418, I2 = 0%) and from bothersome symptoms in general (OR = 1.606, 95% CI = 1.408-1.830, I2 = 0%); reduced the intensity of pain (OR = 1.791, 95% CI = 1.598-2.008, I2 = 0%); and increased freedom from nausea (OR = 1.361, 95% CI = 1.196-1.548, I2 = 0%) compared to a placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

CGRP receptor antagonists are effective for acute migraine treatment and are expected to be used clinically as emerging therapeutic agents.

Monthly migraine days, tablet utilization, and quality of life associated with Rimegepant - post hoc results from an open label safety study (BHV3000-201)

Background

The objective of this study was to describe patterns in monthly migraine days (MMD) and tablet utilization, and to estimate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures in patients treated as needed (PRN) with rimegepant 75 mg over 52-weeks.

Methods

Eligible subjects were adults with ≥1 year history of migraine and ≥ 6 MMD at baseline, who used rimegepant 75 mg up to once daily PRN (at their discretion) for up to 52-weeks in an open-label safety study (BHV3000–201; NCT03266588). Mean MMD were calculated at each 4-week period, along with mean monthly tablets taken. Migraine-specific quality of life (MSQv2) data were mapped to EQ-5D utilities and used to characterize HRQoL over time. A published network meta-analysis was used to characterize pain hours as well as time periods spent migraine free.

Results

One thousand forty four subjects were included in this post-hoc analysis. Overall mean MMD were 10.9 at baseline and decreased to 8.9 by week 52. Tablet use remained stable over the follow-up period. A total of 0.08 incremental QALYs were associated with rimegepant use.

Conclusion

For subjects with 6 or more MMD, acute treatment of migraine attacks with rimegepant 75 mg on a PRN basis over one-year of follow-up was found to be associated with reduced MMD frequency without an increase in monthly tablet utilization, and improved HRQoL. There was no evidence of medication-related increases in MMDs when rimegepant 75 mg was used as needed for the acute treatment of migraine over 52-weeks.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03266588.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-021-01378-5.

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.

Safety and Risk of Medication Overuse Headache in Lasmiditan and Second-Generation Gepants: A Rapid Review

The treatment of migraine is often complicated by insufficient headache relief, a miscellany of side effects and the risk of developing Medication Overuse Headache (MOH). Novel acute therapies have been recently developed and are now in the early post-marketing phase. Lasmiditan is a highly selective serotonin receptor agonist that binds to the 5-HT_1F receptor, while ubrogepant and rimegepant antagonize the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor. All three medications are now prescribed in a real-world setting, and an adequate level of knowledge is the starting point for rational use. In this rapid systematic review, we have established what is known about lasmiditan, ubrogepant and rimegepant, highlighting the most relevant safety aspects available from published studies and speculating about their risk of MOH.

Quality of Life Related to Functional Disability in Migraine Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of all randomized trials investigating effect of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies on disability related to migraine in adult patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials searched from inception to July 2020 with an additional review of clinical trial registries. Disability evaluated using change in patient reported Migraine Disability Assessment scores from baseline were considered for the final analysis. The network meta-analysis was conducted in Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS and R, with the random effects model selected to allow for apparent heterogeneity between studies in the treatment comparison effects.

RESULTS

Overall 41 studies (7095 migraineurs in 9 randomized trials) were included with treatment course of at least 12 weeks. Subcutaneous injections of fremanezumab 675+225+225 mg QM and 225+225+225 mg QM were more effective in reducing disability in chronic and episodic migraine patients, respectively, with higher median difference in Migraine Disability Assessment score from baseline compared with other treatments including erenumab (70 mg QM; 140 mg QM), galcanezumab (120 mg QM; 240 mg QM), and low doses of fremanezumab (225 mg single dose; 675 mg single dose).

DISCUSSION

For short-term prevention of migraine, fremanezumab demonstrated slightly better improvement in disability compared with other anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies in adult patients with migraine.

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.

Efficacy and safety of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for treatment of chronic migraine: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of all randomized trials investigating effects of anti-calcitonin gene related peptide monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP mAbs) on adult patients with chronic migraine.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials searched from inception to July 2020; and clinical trial registries. The network meta-analysis was conducted in Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS and R, with the random effects model selected to allow for apparent heterogeneity between studies in the treatment comparison effects.

RESULTS

Overall 38 studies (5164 chronic migraineurs in seven randomized trials) were included with treatment course of at least 12 weeks. Fremanezumab 675 + 225 + 225 mg QM (SC) injections were numerically more effective in lowering migraine days with lower MDs compared to eptinezumab 10 mg (IV) (MD: -1.52, 95% CrIs: -4.24, 0.99), eptinezumab 30 mg (IV) (MD: -0.33, 95% CrIs: -3.02, 2.16), eptinezumab 100 mg (IV) (MD: -0.59, 95% CrIs: -2.80, 1.42), eptinezumab 300 mg (IV) (MD: -0.02, 95% CrIs: -2.29, 1.98), erenumab 70 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.17, 95% CrIs: -2.84, 2.25), erenumab 140 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.18, 95% CrIs: -2.87, 2.26), fremanezumab 675 mg (SC) (MD: -0.30, 95% CrIs: -1.81, 1.14), galcanezumab 120 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.71, 95% CrIs: -3.44, 1.55) and galcanezumab 240 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.58, 95% CrIs: -3.09, 1.89), however the results were non-significant. Similarly, the anti-CGRP mAbs were also observed to have comparable safety and immunogenicity with no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Although all doses of anti-CGRP mAbs have comparable efficacy, safety and tolerability based on uncertainties in indirect comparisons for all outcomes, the calculated effect estimates numerically favored high doses of subcutaneous fremanezumab and intravenous eptinezumab as the effective therapy with acceptable safety and tolerability for short term prevention of chronic migraine.

Pharmacological treatment of migraine: Drug classes, mechanisms of action, clinical trials and new treatments

Migraine is the sixth most prevalent disease globally, a major cause of disability, and it imposes an enormous personal and socioeconomic burden. Migraine treatment is often limited by insufficient therapy response, leading to the need for individually adjusted treatment approaches. In this review, we analyse historical and current pharmaceutical development approaches in acute and chronic migraine based on a comprehensive and systematic analysis of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs and those under investigation. The development of migraine therapeutics has significantly intensified during the last 3 years, as shown by our analysis of the trends of drug development between 1970 and 2020. The spectrum of drug targets has expanded considerably, which has been accompanied by an increase in the number of specialised clinical trials. This review highlights the mechanistic implications of FDA-approved and currently investigated drugs and discusses current and future therapeutic options based on identified drug classes of interest.

Comprehensive management of adults with chronic migraine: Clinical practice guidelines in Mexico

Introduction:

Migraine is a polygenic multifactorial disorder with a neuronal initiation of a cascade of neurochemical processes leading to incapacitating headaches. Headaches are generally unilateral, throbbing, 4–72 h in duration, and associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia, and sonophobia. Chronic migraine (CM) is the presence of a headache at least 15 days per month for ≥3 months and has a high global impact on health and economy, and therapeutic guidelines are lacking.

Methods:

Using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations system, we conducted a search in MEDLINE and Cochrane to investigate the current evidence and generate recommendations of clinical practice on the identification of risk factors and treatment of CM in adults.

Results:

We recommend avoiding overmedication of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs); ergotamine; caffeine; opioids; barbiturates; and initiating individualized prophylactic treatment with topiramate eptinezumab, galcanezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, or botulinum toxin. We highlight the necessity of managing comorbidities initially. In the acute management, we recommend NSAIDs, triptans, lasmiditan, and gepants alone or with metoclopramide if nausea or vomiting. Non-pharmacological measures include neurostimulation.

Conclusions:

We have identified the risk factors and treatments available for the management of CM based on a grading system, which facilitates selection for individualized management.