Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: A systematic review and likelihood to help or harm analysis

Erenumab escalation in migraine - double dose without additional benefit - a retrospective experience

BACKGROUND

Erenumab is a monoclonal antibody specifically targeting the CGRP-receptor. Several studies showed efficacy and safety in patients with migraine. Less is known regarding dosage increase, especially in a difficult to treat patients. The aim of the study is to evaluate the increased dosage under real world conditions with particular focus on 70 mg non-responders.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis, patients treated in tertiary headache centers (Halle or Jena, Germany) receiving 70 mg erenumab for at least 3 months with a dosage increase to 140 mg were analyzed. Data were evaluated regarding headache days, intake of acute medication, previous prophylaxis, and medication overuse. Baseline and all treatment intervals were determined as three-month periods.

RESULTS

Datasets of 52 migraine patients (90.4% women) aged between 22 and 78 years (mean 50.4 years, SD 12.1 years) were analyzed. At baseline (mean headache-days 15.67 ± 6.37) 51.9% met criteria for chronic migraine and 56% were currently overusing acute medication. While therapy with 70 mg showed significant improvement in headache days and 50% response, further improvement was not achieved for therapy escalation to 140 mg. The same applies to the secondary endpoints and covers the entire study population as well as the subgroups of chronic and episodic migraine. The 50% response of the 70 mg non-responders for escalation was only 5.14%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this difficult-to-treat patient cohort we reconfirmed the effectiveness of erenumab, but could not detect any additional benefit for a dosage escalation from 70 mg to 140 mg erenumab.

A Risk-Difference Meta-Analysis for the Prophylactic Treatments of Chronic Migraine

Chronic migraine (CM) imposes significant personal, societal, and financial burdens, historically lacking specific prophylactic treatments. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) represent a novel, mechanism-based, and migraine-specific prophylactic approach. Four mAbs, namely, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab, have been marketed, although head-to-head trials with standard anti-migraine treatments are absent. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of anti-CGRP mAbs with standard anti-migraine treatments using a cross-trial indirect model of the absolute risk difference (ARD) of a 50% responder rate, in order to express the final results in terms of the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH). Phase 3 and 2b randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for CM prophylaxis were searched in the MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases with specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The ARD between groups for the percentage of trial participants who reported a 50% reduction in monthly migraine days and the differences in the number of adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and participants who withdrew from each RCT were calculated, and subsequently, the NNT and NNH were calculated for each one of the outcome measures. In total, eight RCTs were considered eligible. A similar efficacy and safety have been demonstrated among CGRP mAbs and all standard CM treatments. The results of the ARD for the total number of studies concerning efficacy, total adverse events, serious adverse events, and dropout from the RCTs ranged from -0.688 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.821-(-0.513)) to -0.018 (95% CI: -0.044-(0.007)), from 0.032 (95% CI: -0.041, 0.104) to -0.380 (95% CI: -0.589, -0.126), from -0.025 (95% CI: -0.046, -0.006) to 0.014 (95% CI: -0.015, 0.42), from 0.048 (95% CI: -0.112, 0.014) to 0.232 (95% CI: -0.016, 0.458) correspondingly. All anti-CGRP mAbs showed a roughly equal statistically significant ARD and similar NNTs, ranging from 5 to 8, while the ARD of onbotulinum toxin A (oBTA) was not significant with an NNT 56. The two studies of topiramate showed contradictory results, the one significant while the other not, with NNTs 2 and 22, respectively. All four anti-CGRP mAbs showed an invariably high efficacy among their studies, in terms of the ARD and its derivative measure of NNT, in contrast to oBTA, while in topiramate, the results are contradictory between the two studies.

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.

Are anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies effective in treating migraine aura? A pilot prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

About 15% to one third of migraineurs experience aura symptoms. Aura is a reversible focal neurological phenomenon involving visual, sensory, speech, and motor symptoms that usually precede migraine pain. Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin-related peptide (anti- CGRP mAbs) are effective in preventing chronic and episodic migraine, but little is known about their effectiveness on specifically preventing migraine with aura.

METHODS

This is a pilot prospective observational cohort study, aiming at evaluating the effectiveness and safety of Erenumab, Fremanezumab or Galcanezumab for the treatment of migraine aura. We enrolled 14 patients at the Headache Centre of University Federico II of Naples. Duration of follow-up was 12 months. We assessed mean monthly days with aura symptoms, with or without subsequent headache, as well as mean monthly days with headache and mean monthly MIDAS score, by reviewing standardized paper patient headache diaries every three months.

RESULTS

A significant decrease in mean monthly aura days was observed throughout the observation period (median baseline: 13, interquartile range: 4-16; after 12 months: 1, interquartile range: 0-3, p < 0.001). We observed a statistically significant decrease in mean monthly headache days as well (median baseline 21, interquartile range: 16-30; after 12 months: 5, interquartile range: 4-7, p < 0.001). During the 12-month treatment period, none of the 14 patients reported mild or serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that anti-CGRP mAbs are highly effective in migraine with aura, both in reducing mean monthly aura days and mean monthly days with headache.

Eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: a narrative review

Eptinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), was recently approved in Europe for the prophylactic treatment of migraine in adults who have at least four migraine days a month. Eptinezumab is administered by intravenous infusion every 12 weeks. During recent months, a considerable amount of evidence from eptinezumab trials has been published. The aim of this review is to describe the existing evidence on the tolerability, safety and efficacy of eptinezumab in patients with migraine. Data from randomized (PROMISE-1, PROMISE-2, RELIEF and DELIVER) and open-label (PREVAIL) phase 3 clinical trials have demonstrated the favorable effect of eptinezumab in migraine symptoms from first day of treatment. These studies showed that eptinezumab results in an overall reduction in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs), increases in the ≥50% and ≥ 75% migraine responder rates (MRRs) and improvements in patient-reported outcome measures in both patients with episodic migraine (EM) and with chronic migraine (CM), including patients who failed previous preventive treatments. The RELIEF trial also showed that eptinezumab, within 2 h of administration, reduced headache pain, migraine-associated symptoms and acute medication use when administered during a migraine attack. Eptinezumab benefits manifested as early as day 1 after dosing and with the subsequent doses lasted up to at least 2 years. Treatment-emergent adverse events reported by ≥2% of patients included upper respiratory tract infection and fatigue. Current evidence demonstrates that eptinezumab has a potent, fast-acting, sustained migraine preventive effect in patients with EM and CM. Eptinezumab has also shown to be well tolerated, supporting its use in the treatment of patients with migraine and inclusion in the current migraine therapeutic options.

Early and annual projected savings from anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prevention: a cost-benefit analysis in the working-age population

BACKGROUND

Migraine is one of the main causes of disability worldwide. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have proven to be safe and efficacious as preventive migraine treatments. However, their use is restricted in many countries due to their apparently high cost. Cost-benefit studies are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To study the cost-benefit of anti-CGRP MAbs in working-age patients with migraine.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of consecutive migraine patients treated with anti-CGRP MAbs (erenumab, fremanezumab and galcanezumab) following National reimbursement policy in a specialized headache clinic. Migraine characteristics and the work impact scale (WPAI) were compared between baseline (M0) and after 3 (M3) and 6 months (M6) of treatment. Using WPAI and the municipal average hourly wage, we calculated indirect costs (absenteeism and presenteeism) at each time point. Direct costs (emergency visits, acute medication use) were also analysed. A cost-benefit study was performed considering the different costs and savings of treating with MAbs. Based on these data an annual projection was conducted.

RESULTS

From 256 treated working-age patients, 148 were employed (89.2% women; mean age 48.0 ± 8.5 years), of which 41.2% (61/148) were responders (> 50% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD)). Statistically significant reductions between M0 and M3/M6 were found in absenteeism (p < 0.001) and presenteeism (p < 0.001). Average savings in indirect costs per patient at M3 were absenteeism 105.4 euros/month and presenteeism 394.3 euros/month, similar for M6. Considering the monthly cost of anti-CGRP MAbs, the cost-benefit analysis showed savings of 159.8 euros per patient at M3, with an annual projected savings of 639.2 euros/patient. Both responders and partial responders (30-50% reduction in MHD) presented a positive cost-benefit balance. The overall savings of the cohort at M3/M6 compensated the negative cost-benefit balance for non-responders (< 30% reduction in MHD).

CONCLUSION

Anti-CGRP MAbs have a positive impact in the workforce significantly reducing absenteeism and presenteeism. In Spain, this benefit overcomes the expenses derived from their use already at 3 months and is potentially sustainable at longer term; also in patients who are only partial responders, prompting reconsideration of current reimbursement criteria and motivating the extension of similar cost-benefit studies in other countries.

Characteristics associated with response to subcutaneously administered anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody medications in a real-world community cohort of persons living with migraine: A retrospective clinical and genetic study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate response to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) migraine preventives in a real-world community cohort of persons living with migraine and to identify clinical and genetic characteristics associated with efficacious response.

BACKGROUND

Erenumab-aooeb, fremanezumab-vrfm, and galcanezumab-gnlm target CGRP or its receptor; however, many patients are non-responsive.

METHODS

In this retrospective clinical and genetic study, we identified 1077 adult patients who satisfied the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition, criteria for migraine without aura, migraine with aura, or chronic migraine and who were prescribed an anti-CGRP migraine preventive between May 2018 and May 2021. Screening of 558 patients identified 289 with data at baseline and first follow-up visits; data were available for 161 patients at a second follow-up visit. The primary outcome was migraine days per month (MDM). In 198 genotyped patients, we evaluated associations between responders (i.e., patients with ≥50% reduction in MDM at follow-up) and genes involved in CGRP signaling or pharmacological response, and genetic and polygenic risk scores.

RESULTS

The median time to first follow-up was 4.4 (0.9-22) months after preventive start. At the second follow-up, 5.7 (0.9-13) months later, 145 patients had continued on the same preventive. Preventives had strong, persistent effects in reducing MDM in responders (follow-up 1: η2  = 0.26, follow-up 2: η2  = 0.22). At the first but not second follow-up: galcanezumab had a larger effect than erenumab, while no difference was seen at either follow-up between galcanezumab and fremanezumab or fremanezumab and erenumab. The decrease in MDM at follow-up was generally proportional to baseline MDM, larger in females, and increased with months on medication. At the first follow-up only, patients with prior hospitalization for migraine or who had not responded to more preventive regimens had a smaller decrease in MDM. Reasons for stopping or switching a preventive varied between medications and were often related to cost and insurance coverage. At both follow-ups, patient tolerance (1: 92.2% [262/284]; 2: 95.2% [141/145]) and continued use (1: 77.5% [224/289]; 2: 80.6% [116/145]) were high and similar across preventives. Response consistency (always non-responders: 31.7% [46/145]; always responders: 56.5% [82/145], and one-time only responders: 11.7% [17/145]) was also similar across preventives. Non-responder status had nominally significant associations with rs12615320-G in RAMP1 (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 4.7 [1.5, 14.7]), and rs4680-A in COMT (0.6[0.4, 0.9]). Non-responders had a lower mean genetic risk score than responders (1.0 vs. 1.1; t(df) = -1.75(174.84), p = 0.041), and the fraction of responders increased with genetic and polygenic risk score percentile.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world setting, anti-CGRP preventives reduced MDM persistently and had similar and large effect sizes on MDM reduction; however, clinical and genetic factors influenced response.

Comparative retention and effectiveness of migraine preventive treatments: A nationwide registry-based cohort study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Little is known about the comparative effects of migraine preventive drugs. We aimed to estimate treatment retention and effectiveness of migraine preventive drugs in a nationwide registry-based cohort study in Norway between 2010 and 2020.

METHODS

We assessed retention, defined as the number of uninterrupted treatment days, and effectiveness, defined as the reduction in filled triptan prescriptions during four 90-day periods after the first preventive prescription, compared to a 90-day baseline period. We compared retention and efficacy for different drugs against beta blockers. Comparative retention was estimated with hazard ratios (HRs), adjusted for covariates, using Cox regression, and effectiveness as odds ratios (ORs) using logistic regression, with propensity-weighted adjustment for covariates.

RESULTS

We identified 104,072 migraine patients, 81,890 of whom were female (78.69%) and whose mean (standard deviation) age was 44.60 (15.61) years. Compared to beta blockers, botulinum toxin (HR 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.44) and calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway antibodies (CGRPabs; HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.59-0.66) were the least likely to be discontinued, while clonidine (HR 2.95, 95% CI 2.88-3.02) and topiramate (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.31-1.37) were the most likely to be discontinued. Patients on simvastatin, CGRPabs, and amitriptyline were more likely to achieve a clinically significant reduction in triptan use during the first 90 days of treatment, with propensity score-adjusted ORs of 1.28 (95% CI 1.19-1.38), 1.23 (95% CI 0.79-1.90), and 1.13 (95% CI 1.08-1.17), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a favorable effect of CGRPabs, amitriptyline, and simvastatin compared with beta blockers, while topiramate and clonidine were associated with poorer outcomes.

The history and rationale of the development of new drugs for migraine treatment

Migraine is one of the most prevalent and disabling diseases in the world. Migraine attack treatments and prophylactic treatments of this disease are essential to lessen its individual, social, and economic impact. This is a narrative review of the main drugs used for treating migraine, as well as the experimental models and the theoretical frameworks that led to their development. Ergot derivatives, triptans, non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, tricyclic antidepressants, beta-blockers,: flunarizine,: valproic acid,: topiramate, onabotulinumtoxin A, ditans, monoclonal antibodies against CGRP and its receptor, and gepants are discussed. Possible therapeutic targets for the development of new drugs that are under development are also addressed. Many of the drugs currently in use for treating migraine were developed for the treatment of other diseases, but have proven effective for the treatment of migraine, expanding knowledge about the disease. With a better understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine, new drugs have been and continue to be developed specifically for the treatment of this disease.

Eptinezumab for the Prevention of Migraine: Clinical Utility, Patient Preferences and Selection - A Narrative Review

The new Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-targeted therapies have proven high efficacy and tolerability in episodic and chronic migraine. Eptinezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds CGRP with high affinity. Eptinezumab was approved by the Food and Drug Administration on February 21st, 2020, for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. It is administered intravenously over 30 minutes with a standard dose of 100 mg and has a T-max of 30 minutes-1 hour and a half-life of 27 days. These pharmacological properties allow for a very rapid onset of effect and a quarterly administration. It is the first time that a preventive treatment for migraine can be offered as an intravenous administration. As the range of therapeutic possibilities in migraine is expanding, the treatment process must include common decision-making, where physicians should explain in detail to patients the different characteristics of treatment options beyond efficacy and side effects. Patients can now express a preference on a range of opportunities: pharmacological versus non-pharmacological approaches, route of administration, frequency of administration, efficacy, rapidity, side effects, costs, the possibility of titration or dosing, and durability of effectiveness at suspension. Also, patient preferences can be influenced by age, country, migraine severity, and earlier experience with CGRP-targeted therapies. Besides, adherence may be influenced by several factors, including route and the schedule of administration. This narrative review describes a new perspective from the patient's point of view. Clinicians should ally with patients to select treatments that meet each patient's needs and thus apply a tailored approach, addressing not only headaches. In this way, physicians would care for the patients globally and stand out their preferences on different aspects of treatment. Besides, healthcare professionals shall be aware that patients' beliefs about therapies are subject to change with increasing experience with new therapeutic approaches.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Numbers needed to treat or harm and likelihood of being helped versus harmed for fremanezumab in patients who had prior inadequate response to two to four classes of migraine preventive medications: A post hoc analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the number needed to treat (NNT), number needed to harm (NNH), and likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH) in a post hoc analysis of the phase 3b FOCUS trial.

BACKGROUND

Fremanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), has demonstrated efficacy, tolerability, and safety in adults with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM), with documented previous inadequate response to two to four classes of migraine preventive medications.

METHODS

In the 12-week double-blind period of the FOCUS study, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, or matched monthly placebo. NNT was based on responder analysis, defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly average number of migraine days at 12 weeks. NNH was based on discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Among patients with CM (n = 509), response rates and discontinuation rates were 27% (45/169) and 0 for quarterly fremanezumab, 29% (50/173) and 2% (3/173) for monthly fremanezumab, and 8% (13/167) and <1% (1/167) for placebo, respectively. These results translated to NNTs of 5.3 and 4.7, NNHs of 1000 and 88, and LHHs of 188 and 19 for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab, respectively. Among patients with EM (n = 328), response rates were 47% (50/107) for quarterly fremanezumab, 43% (47/110) for monthly fremanezumab, and 10% (11/111) for placebo. Discontinuation rates were <1% (n = 1) in all three groups. These results translated to NNTs of 2.7 and 3.0, NNHs of 1000 and 1000, and LHHs of 368 and 328 for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The NNT, NNH, and LHH for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab compare favorably with those for traditional oral preventive medications, including topiramate, valproate, and propranolol.

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

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

The Anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (Anti-CGRP) Antibody Fremanezumab Reduces Trigeminal Neurons Immunoreactive to CGRP and CGRP Receptor Components in Rats

Treatment with the anti-CGRP antibody fremanezumab is successful in the prevention of chronic and frequent episodic migraine. In preclinical rat experiments, fremanezumab has been shown to reduce calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) release from trigeminal tissues and aversive behaviour to noxious facial stimuli, which are characteristic pathophysiological changes accompanying severe primary headaches. To further decipher the effects of fremanezumab that underlie these antinociceptive effects in rats, immunohistochemistry and ELISA techniques were used to analyse the content and concentration of CGRP in the trigeminal ganglion, as well as the ratio of trigeminal ganglion neurons which are immunoreactive to CGRP and CGRP receptor components, 1-10 days after subcutaneous injection of fremanezumab (30 mg/kg) compared to an isotype control antibody. After fremanezumab treatment, the fraction of trigeminal ganglion neurons which were immunoreactive to CGRP and the CGRP receptor components calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CLR) and receptor activity modifying protein 1 (RAMP1) was significantly lowered compared to the control. The content and concentration of CGRP in trigeminal ganglia were not significantly changed. A long-lasting reduction in CGRP receptors expressed in trigeminal afferents may contribute to the attenuation of CGRP signalling and antinociceptive effects of monoclonal anti-CGRP antibodies in rats.

Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting CGRP: A Novel Treatment in Vestibular Migraine

Background. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor represented the first targeted and specialized approach to migraine prophylaxis. Nevertheless, they have been rarely considered in the treatment of vestibular migraine (VM). Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs in VM patients who did not respond to conventional migraine treatments. Methods. Consecutive VM patients treated with erenumab were considered. As a comparison, we considered the same VM patients during conventional migraine treatments (i.e., propranolol, flunarizine, or valproic acid), which were tried before mAbs therapy. Videonystagmography, the Italian version of the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) questionnaire, and migraine days over the last 3 months were evaluated in all patients before and after treatments. Results. In the present retrospective study, we included 21 female and 2 male VM patients, mean age 45.2 years. All patients underwent contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging that ruled out other causes of vertigo. The DHI questionnaire significantly improved after mAb therapy (p < 0.0001). Mean migraine days over the last 3 months were significantly reduced after treatment (p = 0.001). Videonystagmography was altered in 11 (48%) patients prior to monoclonal antibodies. We found vertical positional nystagmus in 9 patients and horizontal positional nystagmus in 2 patients. After the treatment, we found vertical positional nystagmus only in 1 patient (p = 0.002). When patients were treated with conventional therapies, there was no significant reduction in DHI, and instrumental vestibular examinations remained altered. Conclusions. VM patients using anti-CGRP mAbs experienced a reduction in the dizziness-derived handicap, as reported in the DHI questionnaire. Furthermore, these treatments were significantly associated with a normalization of vestibular instrumental analysis. These findings were not seen with conventional treatments. Treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs may be effective in VM patients who did not respond to conventional migraine treatments. These findings should be tested in large, randomized clinical trials.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrisABSTRACT_pals.gov NCT03963232, registered May 24, 2019.

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

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

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies and Risk of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Severe COVID-19 Outcomes Among Veterans With Migraine Disorder

Importance

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a neuropeptide involved in migraine pathophysiology, is also a key neuroimmune modulator. CGRP antagonists may help mitigate the hyperinflammatory response observed in patients with COVID-19; however, findings from the literature are contradictory, and to date, no study has investigated the safety and effectiveness of CGRP antagonists against COVID-19.

Objective

To evaluate the association between CGRP monoclonal antibody (mAb) treatment and risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and sequela hospitalization, requiring supplemental oxygen, use of mechanical ventilation, or death.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study analyzed the electronic health records of US veterans aged 18 to 65 years who were diagnosed with migraine disorder and were at risk of COVID-19 between January 20, 2020, and May 19, 2022.

Exposure

Initiation of CGRP mAbs.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Odds of 30-day hospitalization, requiring supplemental oxygen, use of mechanical ventilation, or death were secondary outcomes.

Results

Among 8 178 652 eligible person-trials (354 294 veterans), 9992 (mean [SD] age, 46.0 [9.5] years; 53.9% male) initiated CGRP mAbs and 8 168 660 (mean [SD] age, 46.6 [10.2] years; 65.7% male) did not initiate CGRP mAbs. Over a 28-month follow-up period, 1247 initiators (12.5%) and 780 575 noninitiators (9.6%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. After censoring persons who deviated from treatment, the incidence was 7.4 cases per 1000 person-months among initiators and 6.9 per 1000 person-months among noninitiators. The inverse probability-weighted observational analogs of intention-to-treat and per-protocol hazard ratios were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.89-1.01) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.86-1.02), respectively. No significant differences in the likelihood of hospitalization (odds ratio [OR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.62-1.41), requiring supplemental oxygen (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.45-1.30), use of mechanical ventilation (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.26-2.84), or death (OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.09-5.23) were observed between CGRP mAb initiators and noninitiators who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, CGRP mAb treatment was not associated with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results or risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, suggesting that CGRP mAbs may be used for migraine prevention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the few events of requiring supplemental oxygen, use of mechanical ventilation, and death, replication analysis in a larger sample of patients later in the course of disease is warranted.

Burden of migraine with acute medication overuse or psychiatric comorbidities and treatment with CGRP pathway-targeted monoclonal antibodies: A review

Migraine is a complex and often debilitating neurological disease that affects more than 1 billion people worldwide. It is characterized by moderate-to-intense, throbbing headache attacks that are worsened by activity and is associated with nausea, vomiting, and sensitivity to light and sound. Migraine, ranked the second leading cause of years lived with disability by the World Health Organization, can diminish patients' quality of life and bring significant personal and economic burden. Furthermore, migraine patients with a history of acute medication overuse (AMO) or psychiatric comorbidities, such as depression or anxiety, may experience even greater impairment and burden, and their migraine may be more difficult-to-treat. Appropriate treatment of migraine is essential to reduce this burden and improve patient outcomes, especially for those with AMO or psychiatric comorbidities. There are several available preventive treatment options for migraine, though many of these are not migraine-specific and may have limited efficacy and/or poor tolerability. The calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway plays a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine, and monoclonal antibodies that target the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway have been developed as specific preventive treatments for migraine. Four of these monoclonal antibodies have been approved for the preventive treatment of migraine after demonstrating favorable safety and efficacy profiles. These treatments offer substantial benefits for migraine patients, including those with AMO or common psychiatric comorbidities, by reducing monthly headache days and migraine days, days of acute medication use, and disability measures, as well as improving quality of life.

A head-to-head observational cohort study on the efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide for chronic and episodic migraine

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and erenumab for the treatment of chronic and episodic migraine, through real-world data.

BACKGROUND

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway have been tested extensively in several clinical trials for both episodic and chronic migraine, showing high effectiveness, safety, and tolerability; however, there are no prospective real-world studies intending to compare their efficacy and safety.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational cohort study comparing the effectiveness and safety profiles of galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and erenumab for the treatment of chronic and episodic migraine. We enrolled 140 patients at the Headache Centre of University Federico II of Naples, with a history of multiple failed treatments with validated migraine preventatives. Framenezumab, erenumab, or galcanezumab were administered for 12 months. The mean monthly days with headache, Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score, and adverse events were evaluated during the run-in period and every 3 months by reviewing standardized paper patient headache diaries.

RESULTS

We found a mean reduction of migraine monthly days from baseline of -12.0 (-9.8, -14.1) in the galcanezumab group, -12.3 (-10.2, -14.3) in the fremanezumab group, and -10.8 (-8.5, -13.1) in the erenumab group (for all, p < 0.001). We found a mean reduction of MIDAS score of -32.6 (-26.6, -38.5) in the galcanezumab group, -33.4 (-28.0, -38.9) in the fremanezumab group, and -29.2 (-23.0, -35.4) in the erenumab group (for all, p < 0.001). We found no significant differences between mAbs in the reduction of mean monthly days with headache and MIDAS score. We found a more rapid effect of galcanezumab and erenumab compared to fremanezumab in medication overuse headache patients after 3 months of treatment (-10.8 and -11.1 vs. -4.0 days; p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm the therapeutic benefits of anti-CGRP mAbs. There is no evidence that suggests that one antibody may be superior to the others in terms of effectiveness, both in chronic and episodic patients.

Erenumab and Possible CGRP Effect on Chronotype in Chronic Migraine: A Real-Life Study of 12 Months Treatment

The introduction of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), or its receptor (CGRPr), revolutionized migraine management due to their high efficacy and few side effects. Data suggest that the CGRP may even be implicated in circadian rhythm, but studies about the effect of anti-CGRP treatments on sleep are still lacking. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of erenumab (70 and 140 mg per month), a human mAb directed against CGRPr, on chronotype in chronic migraineurs; secondly, we assessed its efficacy, safety, and the effects on anxiety and depression. Sleep was evaluated using self-administrable questionnaires investigating chronotype, sleep quality, and daytime sleepiness. Migraine diaries and several self-administrable questionnaires regarding headache impact and psychological correlates were evaluated every 3 months during 12 months of treatment. Eighty-eight patients were included; most of them showed a significant reduction in headache frequency and an improvement in psychological symptoms. Moreover, an initial change in chronotype was observed at the three-month assessment from a morning chronotype to an intermediate one; a similar trend remained in the other evaluations, even if it did not reach a statistical significance. Lastly, patients who responded to the treatment showed a progressive sleep efficiency reduction. The present real-life study hypothesized the influence of erenumab on chronotype, representing a link between circadian rhythm, CGRP, and migraine.

Monoclonal anti-CGRP antibodies in post-menopausal women: a real-life study

INTRODUCTION

Migraine usually ameliorates after menopause. However, 10-29% of women still experience migraine attacks after menopause, especially if menopause is surgical. The use of monoclonal antibodies against the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is changing the landscape of migraine treatment. This study aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in women in menopause.

METHODS

Women affected by either migraine or chronic migraine and treated with an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody for up to 1 year. Visits were scheduled every 3 months.

RESULTS

Women in menopause displayed a similar response compared to women of childbearing age. Among women in menopause, the women experiencing surgical menopause seemed to exhibit a similar response compared to the ones experiencing physiological menopause. Erenumab and galcanezumab displayed similar effectiveness in women in menopause. No serious adverse events were registered.

DISCUSSION

The effectiveness of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies is almost the same between women in menopause and women of childbearing age, without appreciable differences between the different antibodies.

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 Safety and Effectiveness of Erenumab in Patients with Migraine: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Several studies on use of erenumab for migraine treatment have been published over recent years. However, its long-term safety and effectiveness have not been consistently established in the literature yet. We aimed to perform a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the long-term safety and effectiveness of erenumab for the treatment of migraine headaches.

METHODS

Long-term follow-up was defined as ≥ 1 year. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from inception to 14 June 2022 for studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies, comprising 3574 patients, were included. The total follow-up period ranged from 48 to 268 weeks (i.e., 1 year to 5.6 years). Pooled estimate rates for all adverse events (AEs) were 63% (95% CI 46-78); for serious AEs, 3% (95% CI 1-7); and for AEs leading to discontinuation of erenumab, 3% (95% CI 2-5). Reduction in monthly migraine days (MMDs) was -6.98 (95% CI -8.90 to -5.05) and in migraine-specific medication days (MSMDs) was - 6.09 (95% CI - 9.43 to - 2.75). More than half (57%; 95% CI 51-63) and around one-third (35%; 95% CI 28-42) of patients presented with reductions of ≥ 50% and ≥ 75% in MMDs, respectively. Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) score was decreased by -9.68 points (95% CI - 12.03 to - 7.34). Nine studies were considered of poor methodological quality and five of fair quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Erenumab has a favorable safety profile, with a low incidence of serious AEs, and sustained efficacy over ≥1 year of follow-up in the treatment of migraine.

Advances in Antibody-Based Therapeutics for Cerebral Ischemia

Cerebral ischemia is an acute disorder characterized by an abrupt reduction in blood flow that results in immediate deprivation of both glucose and oxygen. The main types of cerebral ischemia are ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. When a stroke occurs, several signaling pathways are activated, comprising necrosis, apoptosis, and autophagy as well as glial activation and white matter injury, which leads to neuronal cell death. Current treatments for strokes include challenging mechanical thrombectomy or tissue plasminogen activator, which increase the danger of cerebral bleeding, brain edema, and cerebral damage, limiting their usage in clinical settings. Monoclonal antibody therapy has proven to be effective and safe in the treatment of a variety of neurological disorders. In contrast, the evidence for stroke therapy is minimal. Recently, Clone MTS510 antibody targeting toll-like receptor-4 (TLR4) protein, ASC06-IgG1 antibody targeting acid sensing ion channel-1a (ASIC1a) protein, Anti-GluN1 antibodies targeting N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor associated calcium influx, GSK249320 antibody targeting myelin-associated glycoprotein (MAG), anti-High Mobility Group Box-1 antibody targeting high mobility group box-1 (HMGB1) are currently under clinical trials for cerebral ischemia treatment. In this article, we review the current antibody-based pharmaceuticals for neurological diseases, the use of antibody drugs in stroke, strategies to improve the efficacy of antibody therapeutics in cerebral ischemia, and the recent advancement of antibody drugs in clinical practice. Overall, we highlight the need of enhancing blood-brain barrier (BBB) penetration for the improvement of antibody-based therapeutics in the brain, which could greatly enhance the antibody medications for cerebral ischemia in clinical practice.

Predictors of response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a 24-week, multicenter, prospective study on 864 migraine patients

Background and objectives

The identification of predictors of response to antiCGRP mAbs could favor tailored therapies and personalized treatment plans. This study is aimed at investigating predictors of ≥ 50%, ≥ 75% and 100% response at 24 weeks in patients with high-frequency episodic (HFEM: 8–14 days/month) or chronic migraine (CM).

Methods

This is a large, multicenter, cohort, real-life study. We considered all consecutive adult patients affected by HFEM or CM who were prescribed antiCGRP mAbs for ≥ 24 weeks in 20 headache centers. Patients were interviewed face-to-face using a shared semi-structured questionnaire carefully exploring socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients received subcutaneous erenumab (70 mg or140 mg, monthly), galcanezumab (120 mg monthly, following a 240 mg loading dose), or fremanezumab (225 mg, monthly or 675 mg, quarterly) according to drug market availability, physician’s choice, or patient’s preference. The primary endpoint of the study was the assessment of ≥ 50% response predictors at 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints included ≥ 75% and 100% response predictors at 24 weeks.

Results

Eight hundred sixty-four migraine patients had been treated with antiCGRP mAbs for ≥ 24 weeks (erenumab: 639 pts; galcanezumab: 173 pts; fremanezumab: 55 pts). The ≥50% response (primary endpoint) in HFEM was positively associated with unilateral pain (UP) + unilateral cranial autonomic symptoms (UAs) (OR:4.23, 95%CI:1.57–11.4; p = 0.004), while in CM was positively associated with UAs (OR:1.49, 95%CI:1.05–2.11; p = 0.026), UP + UAs (OR:1.90, 95%CI:1.15–3.16; p = 0.012), UP + allodynia (OR:1.71, 95%CI:1.04–2.83; p = 0.034), and negatively associated with obesity (OR:0.21, 95%CI:0.07–0.64; p = 0.006). The 75% response (secondary endpoint) was positively associated with UP + UAs in HFEM (OR:3.44, 95%CI:1.42–8.31; p = 0.006) and with UP + UAs (OR:1.78, 95%CI:1.14–2.80; p = 0.012) and UP + allodynia (OR:1.92, 95%CI:1.22–3.06; p = 0.005) in CM. No predictor of 100% response emerged in patients with HFEM or CM.

Conclusions

A critical evaluation of headache characteristics indicating peripheral or central sensitization may help in predicting responsiveness to antiCGRP mAbs in HFEM and CM. A more precise pain profiling may represent a steppingstone for a mechanism-based approach and personalized treatment of migraine with compounds targeting specific molecular mechanisms.

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

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

Observations from a prospective small cohort study suggest that CGRP genes contribute to acute posttraumatic headache burden after concussion

Introduction

Post-traumatic headache (PTH) is commonly reported after concussion. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is implicated in the pathogenesis of migraine. We explored how single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from CGRP-alpha (CALCA) and the receptor activity modifying protein-1 (RAMP1) related to headache burden during the first week after concussion.

Methods

A prospective study was performed in 34 collegiate athletes who sustained a concussion. Participants completed the symptom evaluation checklist from the SCAT3 within 48 h of injury (V1), and again 4 (V2) and 7 (V3) days after injury. For each visit, the self-reported score (0–6) for headache, pressure in head, blurred vision, and sensitivity to light/noise were reported and summed to calculate the headache burden. A saliva sample was obtained and genotyped for CALCA (rs3781719) and RAMP1 (rs10185142). RAMP1 (TT, TC, CC) and CALCA (AA, AG, GG) were dichotomized (A+, A- and T+, T-, respectively), and concatenated (T+A+, T+A-, T-A+, T-A-) for analyses.

Results

Headache Burden at Visit 1 was greatest in T+A+ compared to T-A+, and trended toward a significant difference with T+A-. Repeated-measures ANOVA revealed the presence of significant visit main effects (p &lt; 0.001, η2 = 0.404), but the group (p = 0.055) and interaction effects only trended (p = 0.094). Pearson's χ2-tests revealed that 88% of those with return-to play (RTP) exclusions ≥15 days had PTH with multi-sensory symptoms (PTH+SENS) as compared to 35% in those with RTP &lt; 14 day.

Conclusion

Knowledge of RAMP1 and CALCA genotypes appear to improve an understanding the presenting features and magnitude of headache burden after concussion injury.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Trial registration

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Cerebral Blood Flow and Other Predictors of Responsiveness to Erenumab and Fremanezumab in Migraine-A Real-Life Study

Introduction

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) showed efficacy in migraine prevention. The aim of this study was to check if baseline clinical parameters and cerebral blood flow (CBF) measured by transcranial Doppler (TCD) may help predict mAbs efficacy.

Methods

Electronic charts of migraineurs treated with erenumab or fremanezumab, with baseline TCD evaluations were collected, including data on migraine type, pain localization, monthly migraine days (MMD), medication overuse headache (MOH), mean blood flow velocity (Vm), and pulsatility index (PI) in cerebral arteries.

Results

A total of 123 patients were enrolled, mean age 38, 75 years, 87 with chronic migraine, 61 with MOH, 72 were good responders (GR), and reported ≥50% reduction in MMD, 43 ≥75% reduction in MMD. Baseline Vm values in MCAs were significantly lower in GR as compared with non-responders. MAbs responsiveness ≥50% was positively associated with unilateral pain localization (OR: 6.53, 95% CI: 2.01–23.93; p = 0.003) and HIT-6 score (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.01–1.30; p = 0.036) whereas negatively associated with Vm in right MCA (OR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.92–0.99; p = 0.012), and having no relatives with migraine (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.16–0.95; p = 0.040).

Conclusions

Baseline Vm in MCA is lower in mAbs GR as compared with non-responders which may reflect increased secretion of CGRP with further vasodilation in GR. Simple clinical features and baseline CBF in anterior circulation might help to predict the patient's responsiveness.

Therapies targeting CGRP signaling for medication overuse headache

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Medication overuse headache (MOH) affects more than 60 million individuals worldwide causing enormous personal and social burden. Only repurposed drugs are available for MOH that share limited evidence for efficacy. The preclinical data suggesting that activation of the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway is involved in headache chronification along with clinical evidence that monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP (anti-CGRP mAbs) have good efficacy in preventing chronic migraine, triggered this review that aims to summarize the current data on the effectiveness and safety of mAbs against CGRP in MOH.

RECENT FINDINGS

Post hoc analyses of phase-3 trials of erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, and eptinezumab for the prevention of chronic migraine revealed that patients with MOH benefit from the treatment over placebo. Several real-world studies confirm the efficacy of erenumab and galcanezumab in patients with MO. However, all published trials evaluated treatments in patients with chronic migraine with MO collectively, not in patients with MOH exclusively.

SUMMARY

The available data indicate that anti-CGRP mAbs represent a good mechanism-based and disease-specific therapeutical option with for MOH as long as detoxification and additional nonpharmaceutical interventions are operated. Future research should focus on long-term-controlled trials in MOH populations exclusively.

The Arrival of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Migraine

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

Migraine

Migraine is a common, chronic, disorder that is typically characterized by recurrent disabling attacks of headache and accompanying symptoms, including aura. The aetiology is multifactorial with rare monogenic variants. Depression, epilepsy, stroke and myocardial infarction are comorbid diseases. Spreading depolarization probably causes aura and possibly also triggers trigeminal sensory activation, the underlying mechanism for the headache. Despite earlier beliefs, vasodilation is only a secondary phenomenon and vasoconstriction is not essential for antimigraine efficacy. Management includes analgesics or NSAIDs for mild attacks, and, for moderate or severe attacks, triptans or 5HT_1B/1D receptor agonists. Because of cardiovascular safety concerns, unreliable efficacy and tolerability issues, use of ergots to abort attacks has nearly vanished in most countries. CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) and lasmiditan, a selective 5HT1_F receptor agonist, have emerged as effective acute treatments. Intramuscular onabotulinumtoxinA may be helpful in chronic migraine (migraine on ≥15 days per month) and monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor, as well as two gepants, have proven effective and well tolerated for the preventive treatment of migraine. Several neuromodulation modalities have been approved for acute and/or preventive migraine treatment. The emergence of new treatment targets and therapies illustrates the bright future for migraine management.

Erenumab for Migraine Prevention in a 1-Year Compassionate Use Program: Efficacy, Tolerability, and Differences Between Clinical Phenotypes

During a 1-year compassionate use program, 156 patients with migraine self-administered a monthly dose of erenumab 140 mg with a subcutaneous autoinjector. Main inclusion criteria were: ≥ 4 migraine days/month and ≥two prior prophylactic treatment failures. The patients covered the migraine severity spectrum from episodic migraine (EM) (n = 80) to chronic migraine (CM) (n = 76). During the 3rd month of treatment, monthly headache days decreased by 45.7% in EM and 35.5% in CM. The 50% responder rate for reduction in monthly headache days was significantly higher in EM (55%) than in CM (43%) (p = 0.05). In both the migraine subgroups, the clinical improvement vs. baseline was already significant during the 1st month of treatment (p < 0.001). There were also significant reductions in mean headache severity, duration, and monthly days with acute drug intake. The 30% responder rate at 3 months was 60% in CM and 54.1% of patients reversed from CM to EM. The therapeutic effect was maintained at 12 months when 50% responder rates, considering discontinuation for lack of efficacy or adverse effects as 0% response, still were 51% in EM and 41% in CM. A total of 10 patients with EM (12.5%) and 23 patients with CM (30.3%) had discontinued treatment, considering the treatment as ineffective. At 3 months, 48% of patients reported non-serious adverse events among which the most frequent was constipation (20.5%); corresponding figures at 12 months were 30 and 15%. Discontinuation due to an adverse effect for the entire 12 month period was rare (3.8%). The lower efficacy in CM than in EM was mainly due to a very low 50% responder rate in patients with CM with continuous pain (13%) as compared to CM with pain-free periods (58%) (p < 0.001). Similarly, the 50% responder rate was lower in patients with ≥two prior prophylactic treatment failures (40.5%) compared to those with two failures (70%) (p < 0.05). There was no significant efficacy difference between low (4-7 migraine days/month, n = 22) and high frequency (8-14 days, n = 59) EM nor between patients with CM with (n = 50) or without (n = 26) acute medication overuse. Erenumab had no effect on the frequency of auras. Taken together, erenumab 140 mg monthly was highly effective for migraine prophylaxis over the whole severity spectrum of the disease, except in patients with continuous headaches. Its effect is significant after the first injection, quasi-maximal after the second injection, and does not wear off after 12 months. The most frequent adverse effect was constipation. These results are compared to those published for erenumab in the pivotal randomized placebo-controlled trials and to those reported in several recent real-world studies.

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.

Progress in the Treatment of Migraine Attacks: From Traditional Approaches to Eptinezumab

Migraine is the second cause of disability and of lost years of healthy life worldwide. Migraine is characterized by recurrent headache attacks and accompanying disabling symptoms lasting 4–48 h. In episodic migraine, attacks occur in less than 15 days per month and in chronic migraine, in more than 15 monthly days. Whilst successful translation of pharmacological discoveries into efficacious therapeutics has been achieved in the preventative therapy of chronic migraine, treatment of acute migraine suffers the lack of effective advancements. An effective treatment affords complete freedom from pain two hours after therapy and provides the absence of the most bothersome symptom (MBS) associated with migraine after 2 h. However, available anti-migraine abortive treatments for acute attacks do not represent an effective and safe treatment for all the populations treated. In particular, the most used specific treatment is represented by triptans that offer 2-h sustained freedom from pain achieved in 18–50% of patients but they are contraindicated in coronary artery disease, stroke and peripheral vascular disease due to the vasoconstriction at the basis of their pharmacologic action. The most novel therapies, i.e., gepants and ditans, are without sufficient post-marketing data for secure use. Here, an attempt is proposed to analyse the rational basis and evidence in favour of investigating the efficacy and safety in acute migraine attacks of eptinezumab, i.e., monoclonal antibody (mAb) directed towards calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) unique for intravenous infusion administration.

Drug tolerability: How much ambiguity can be tolerated? A systematic review of the assessment of tolerability in clinical studies

AIMS

Drug tolerability refers to the degree to which drugs' overt adverse effects can be tolerated by patients. The tolerability profile is of comparative importance to its efficacy and safety, as it largely determines adherence to treatment and ultimately treatment success or failure. However, the term is frequently used imprecisely, and it is unclear if tolerability is limited to subjective patient-reported symptoms or also covers certain objective signs and findings. The aim of this systematic review was to assess how clinical studies define, evaluate and present drug tolerability.

METHODS

The study consisted of a systematic review of clinical studies in PubMed® reporting the term "tolerability".

RESULTS

Eighty clinical studies were screened and 56 studies reporting drug tolerability were retained. None of the retained studies defined events encompassed by the term tolerability by making a distinction between safety and tolerability. Twenty-five studies claimed to evaluate tolerability, but none of them described how to evaluate tolerability from the patient perspective. Most studies (54 out of 56) concluded that the treatment was well tolerated, apparently implying favourable safety. However, none of them actually presented tolerability in terms of a contrast between safety and tolerability.

CONCLUSIONS

Tolerability is used frequently, albeit incorrectly, to refer to a drug's favourable safety profile. Focused evaluation of drug tolerability (i.e., the patient perspective of adverse drug reactions) should become routine. Presentation in regulatory documents, such as risk management plan summaries, product information and patient leaflets should be a continuation of the process of patient-centred healthcare.

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm

INTRODUCTION

Subcutaneous galcanezumab was an effective, well-tolerated preventive treatment for adults with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) in 4 phase 3 randomized controlled trials: EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, REGAIN, and CONQUER. Number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) are metrics of effect size used to evaluate benefit-risk profiles. This study evaluated NNT, NNH, and benefit-risk profiles (measured as likelihood to be helped or harmed, LHH) of galcanezumab 120 mg versus placebo in patients with EM or CM.

METHODS

Primary efficacy outcomes were responses defined as ≥ 30%, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 75% reductions from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days in patients with EM (EVOLVE-1; EVOLVE-2; CONQUER) and CM (REGAIN; CONQUER); corresponding NNTs to achieve respective responses; and corresponding NNHs for discontinuations due to adverse events (DCAEs) among the safety population. Secondary efficacy outcomes were responses for patients with ≥ 2 failed prior preventive treatments due to lack of efficacy and/or for tolerability reasons. All LHHs were based on ≥ 50% response and DCAEs.

RESULTS

During double-blind treatment periods with galcanezumab 120 mg, NNT to achieve ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% responses ranged from 4 to 10 and NNT to achieve ≥ 75% responses ranged from 5 to 23 in individual trials. NNH ranged from 93 to 1000, while LHH ranged from 18.6 to 104.6. NNTs were generally more robust among patients with EM than with CM; however, in patients with failure of ≥ 2 prior preventive treatments, NNTs to achieve ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% responses were similar between patients with CM and EM. NNHs were imputed as 1000 for both migraine types. Resulting LHHs were 178.8 (EM) and 127 (CM).

CONCLUSION

Across 4 trials, galcanezumab 120 mg demonstrated a favorable benefit-risk profile versus placebo, based on low NNTs to achieve response and high NNHs associated with DCAEs. LHH values consistently far exceeded 1.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

EVOLVE-1: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614183; EVOLVE-2: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614196; REGAIN: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614261; CONQUER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03559257.

Changes in Cerebral Blood Flow after Erenumab Treatment in Good and Non-Responders-A Pilot Study of Migraine Patients

Erenumab showed efficacy in migraine prevention, however we cannot identify which patients to treat by predicting efficacy response. The aim of this study was to compare changes in cerebral blood flow (CBF) reflected by transcranial Doppler (TCD) in erenumab good responders (GR) and non-responders, in order to identify a parameter that could predict the treatment response. In this study, migraineurs treated with erenumab underwent clinical and TCD evaluations before and 6 weeks after the treatment, including data on migraine type, monthly migraine days (MMD), medication overuse headache (MOH) presence, mean blood flow velocity (Vm) and pulsatility index (PI) in cerebral arteries (CA). GR were defined as reporting ≥50% reduction in MMD. Thirty women were enrolled, of mean age 40.53 years, 20 with chronic migraine, 14 with MOH, and 19 were GR. Baseline Vm values in right CA and basilar artery (BA) were significantly lower in GR as compared with non-responders. Vm values in all arteries significantly increased after the treatment as compared with corresponding baseline values, but only in GR. A significant negative correlation was observed between baseline Vm in right CA and treatment effectiveness. Baseline Vm in right CA and basilar artery is reduced in erenumab GR as compared with non-responders. This asymmetry normalizes after the treatment with significant Vm increase in CA which may reflect CBF increase in GR only. Lower baseline Vm in right CA may predict erenumab efficacy; however, these results should be replicated in a larger cohort.

The Role of Galcanezumab in Migraine Prevention: Existing Data and Future Directions

Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway by targeting the CGRP. Data from four phase-3 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials showed that galcanezumab is superior to placebo in reducing migraine headaches, migraine-specific quality of life, and headache-related disability. Most of the adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate and did not affect trial completion rates significantly. Along with erenumab, fremanezumab, and eptinezumab, galcanezumab forms a novel class of anti-migraine preventative treatments that is disease-specific and mechanism-based, unlike the standard ones. In addition, galcanezumab has also been shown to be effective in cluster headache, though more clinical trials are required. Overall, galcanezumab is a promising emerging treatment in migraine prophylaxis. However, it needs to be tested in larger clinical trials focused on treatment-resistant migraine. Furthermore, its safety profile, especially its potential association with an increased cardiovascular risk, needs to be established through long-term, real-world data. This review aims to give an overview of its pharmacological properties as well as to report and discuss data from clinical trials and its potential place in headache therapeutics.

Monoclonal Antibodies as Neurological Therapeutics

Over the last 30 years the role of monoclonal antibodies in therapeutics has increased enormously, revolutionizing treatment in most medical specialties, including neurology. Monoclonal antibodies are key therapeutic agents for several neurological conditions with diverse pathophysiological mechanisms, including multiple sclerosis, migraines and neuromuscular disease. In addition, a great number of monoclonal antibodies against several targets are being investigated for many more neurological diseases, which reflects our advances in understanding the pathogenesis of these diseases. Untangling the molecular mechanisms of disease allows monoclonal antibodies to block disease pathways accurately and efficiently with exceptional target specificity, minimizing non-specific effects. On the other hand, accumulating experience shows that monoclonal antibodies may carry class-specific and target-associated risks. This article provides an overview of different types of monoclonal antibodies and their characteristics and reviews monoclonal antibodies currently in use or under development for neurological disease.

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

BACKGROUND

Head-to-head comparator trials between first-line oral migraine preventatives and the new monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway have not been published to date.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to indirectly compare the clinical efficacy and safety of mAbs against CGRP or its receptor (CGRPR) and topiramate in episodic migraine prophylaxis using meta-analysis.

METHODS

We included controlled trials testing efficacy and safety of erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, eptinezumab, and topiramate in adults diagnosed with episodic migraine. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2000 to November 2020. We used the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB2) tool to assess the risk of bias and report pooled mean effects (mean difference and risk ratio) as estimated in a random effect model. For efficacy analysis, we determined the reduction of monthly migraine days (MMDs), reduction of days with acute medication (AMDs), and 50% responder rates (50% RR). For safety, we determined adverse events (AEs) occurring in ≥ 2% of study participants and the number of patients who discontinue treatment due to AEs (DAEs). The number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) were estimated as well as the likelihood to help or harm (LLH).

RESULTS

We included 13 trials involving 7557 patients: three trials with erenumab, two trials with galcanezumab, two trials with fremanezumab, one trial with eptinezumab, and five trials with topiramate, for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine in adults. The placebo-subtracted reduction (pooled mean difference) of MMDs were - 1.55 (95% CI - 1.86 to - 1.24; active drug n = 3326 vs placebo n = 2219, 8 studies) for the CGRP(R) mAb and - 1.11 (95% CI - 1.62 to - 0.59; active drug n = 1032 vs placebo n = 543, 4 studies) for topiramate (p for subgroup difference = 0.15). 'Cognitive' and 'sensory & pain'-related adverse events occurred more often in patients treated with topiramate compared with those treated with a CGRP(R) mAb (p for subgroup difference 0.03 and < 0.001, respectively). Based on the 50% RR and DAE, the NNT, NNH, and LHH for the CGRP(R) mAbs were 6, 130, and 24.3:1, respectively. For topiramate, these values were 7, 9, and 1.8:1, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of CGRP(R) mAbs to reduce migraine days does not differ from topiramate. However, the safety profile is in favor of the CGRP(R) mAbs, with a higher likelihood to help than to harm compared with topiramate. The diversity of endpoint determination and the heterogeneity between studies for some endpoints cause some limitations for this study.