1
|
Puledda F, Sacco S, Diener HC, Ashina M, Al-Khazali HM, Ashina S, Burstein R, Liebler E, Cipriani A, Chu MK, Cocores A, Dodd-Glover F, Ekizoğlu E, Garcia-Azorin D, Göbel CH, Goicochea MT, Hassan A, Hirata K, Hoffmann J, Jenkins B, Kamm K, Lee MJ, Ling YH, Lisicki M, Martinelli D, Monteith TS, Ornello R, Özge A, Peres MFP, Pozo-Rosich P, Romanenko V, Schwedt TJ, Souza MNP, Takizawa T, Terwindt GM, Thuraiaiyah J, Togha M, Vandenbussche N, Wang SJ, Yu S, Tassorelli C. International Headache Society Global Practice Recommendations for Preventive Pharmacological Treatment of Migraine. Cephalalgia 2024; 44:3331024241269735. [PMID: 39262214 DOI: 10.1177/03331024241269735] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/13/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Francesca Puledda
- Headache Group, Wolfson SPaRC, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Simona Sacco
- Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy
| | - Hans-Christoph Diener
- Department of Neuroepidemiology, Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Messoud Ashina
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Haidar M Al-Khazali
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Sait Ashina
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Neurology and Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, USA
| | - Rami Burstein
- Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, USA
| | | | - Andrea Cipriani
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Oxford Precision Psychiatry Lab, NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK
- Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - Min Kyung Chu
- Department of Neurology, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Alexandra Cocores
- Department of Neurology-Headache Division, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, USA
| | - Freda Dodd-Glover
- Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, Accra, Ghana
| | - Esme Ekizoğlu
- Department of Neurology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - David Garcia-Azorin
- Department of Neurology, Hospital Universitario Rio Hortega, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain
| | - Carl H Göbel
- Kiel Migraine and Headache Centre, Kiel, Germany
- Department of Neurology, Christian-Albrechts University, Kiel, Germany
| | | | - Amr Hassan
- Department of Neurology, Kasr Alainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
| | - Koichi Hirata
- Neurology, Dokkyo Medical University, Mibu, Tochigi, Japan
| | - Jan Hoffmann
- Wolfson Sensory, Pain and Regeneration Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK
| | | | - Katharina Kamm
- Department of Neurology, Klinikum der Universitat Munchen, Munich, Germany
| | - Mi Ji Lee
- Department of Neurology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Yu-Hsiang Ling
- Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei
- College of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei
| | - Marco Lisicki
- Instituto de Investigación Médica Mercedes y Martin Ferreyra (INIMEC), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Técnicas (CONICET), Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina
| | - Daniele Martinelli
- IRCCS Mondino Foundation, Headache Science and Rehabilitation Unit, Pavia, Italy
| | - Teshamae S Monteith
- Department of Neurology-Headache Division, University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, Miami, USA
| | - Raffaele Ornello
- Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy
| | - Aynur Özge
- Department of Neurology, Mersin University School of Medicine, Mersin, Turkey
| | | | - Patricia Pozo-Rosich
- Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron & Headache & Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Research, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | | | - Tsubasa Takizawa
- Department of Neurology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Gisela M Terwindt
- Department of Neurology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Janu Thuraiaiyah
- Department of Neurology, Danish Headache Center, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mansoureh Togha
- Neurology ward, Sina Hospital, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
- Headache department, Iranian Center of Neurological Research, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Nicolas Vandenbussche
- Department of Neurology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Neurology, AZ Sint-Jan Brugge, Bruges, Belgium
| | - Shuu-Jiun Wang
- Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei
- College of Medicine, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei
- Brain Research Center, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei
| | - Shenguan Yu
- Department of Neurology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Cristina Tassorelli
- IRCCS Mondino Foundation, Headache Science and Rehabilitation Unit, Pavia, Italy
- Department of Brain and Behavioral Science, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Al-Hassany L, Lyons HS, Boucherie DM, Farham F, Lange KS, Marschollek K, Onan D, Pensato U, Storch E, Torrente A, Waliszewska-Prosół M, Reuter U. The sense of stopping migraine prophylaxis. J Headache Pain 2023; 24:9. [PMID: 36792981 PMCID: PMC9933401 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01539-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2022] [Accepted: 01/18/2023] [Indexed: 02/17/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Migraine prophylactic therapy has changed over recent years with the development and approval of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway. As new therapies emerged, leading headache societies have been providing guidelines on the initiation and escalation of such therapies. However, there is a lack of robust evidence looking at the duration of successful prophylaxis and the effects of therapy discontinuation. In this narrative review we explore both the biological and clinical rationale for prophylactic therapy discontinuation to provide a basis for clinical decision-making. METHODS Three different literature search strategies were conducted for this narrative review. These include i) stopping rules in comorbidities of migraine in which overlapping preventives are prescribed, notably depression and epilepsy; ii) stopping rules of oral treatment and botox; iii) stopping rules of antibodies targeting the CGRP (receptor). Keywords were utilized in the following databases: Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core collection, Cochran Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar. DISCUSSION Reasons to guide decision-making in stopping prophylactic migraine therapies include adverse events, efficacy failure, drug holiday following long-term administration, and patient-specific reasons. Certain guidelines contain both positive and negative stopping rules. Following withdrawal of migraine prophylaxis, migraine burden may return to pre-treatment level, remain unchanged, or lie somewhere in-between. The current suggestion to discontinue CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after 6 to 12 months is based on expert opinion, as opposed to robust scientific evidence. Current guidelines advise the clinician to assess the success of CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after three months. Based on excellent tolerability data and the absence of scientific data, we propose if no other reasons apply, to stop the use of mAbs when the number of migraine days decreases to four or fewer migraine days per month. There is a higher likelihood of developing side effects with oral migraine preventatives, and so we suggest stopping these drugs according to the national guidelines if they are well tolerated. CONCLUSION Translational and basic studies are warranted to investigate the long-term effects of a preventive drug after its discontinuation, starting from what is known about the biology of migraine. In addition, observational studies and, eventually, clinical trials focusing on the effect of discontinuation of migraine prophylactic therapies, are essential to substantiate evidence-based recommendations on stopping rules for both oral preventives and CGRP(-receptor) targeted therapies in migraine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Linda Al-Hassany
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Vascular Medicine and Pharmacology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hannah S. Lyons
- grid.6572.60000 0004 1936 7486Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Deirdre M. Boucherie
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Vascular Medicine and Pharmacology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Fatemeh Farham
- grid.411705.60000 0001 0166 0922Department of Headache, Iranian Centre of Neurological Researchers, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
| | - Kristin S. Lange
- grid.6363.00000 0001 2218 4662Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Karol Marschollek
- grid.4495.c0000 0001 1090 049XDepartment of Neurology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland
| | - Dilara Onan
- grid.14442.370000 0001 2342 7339Spine Health Unit, Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey ,grid.7841.aDepartment of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
| | - Umberto Pensato
- grid.417728.f0000 0004 1756 8807Neurology and Stroke Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy ,grid.452490.eHumanitas University, Pieve Emanuale, Milan, Italy
| | - Elisabeth Storch
- grid.6363.00000 0001 2218 4662Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany
| | - Angelo Torrente
- grid.10776.370000 0004 1762 5517Department of Biomedicine, Neurosciences and Advanced Diagnostics, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy
| | - Marta Waliszewska-Prosół
- grid.4495.c0000 0001 1090 049XDepartment of Neurology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland
| | - Uwe Reuter
- Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany. .,Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ashina M, Tepper SJ, Reuter U, Blumenfeld AM, Hutchinson S, Xia J, Miceli R, Severt L, Finnegan M, Trugman JM. Once-daily oral atogepant for the long-term preventive treatment of migraine: Findings from a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial. Headache 2023; 63:79-88. [PMID: 36651532 PMCID: PMC10107835 DOI: 10.1111/head.14439] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2021] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of once-daily oral atogepant 60 mg in adults with migraine. BACKGROUND Atogepant is an oral, small-molecule, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. METHODS A 52-week, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial of adults (18-80 years) with migraine. Lead-in trial completers or newly enrolled participants with 4-14 migraine days/month were enrolled and randomized (5:2) to atogepant 60 mg once daily or oral standard care (SC) migraine preventive medication. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of atogepant; safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory evaluations, vital signs, and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale scores. Efficacy assessments (atogepant only) included change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (MMDs) and the proportion of participants with reductions from baseline of ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% in MMDs. RESULTS The trial included 744 participants randomized to atogepant 60 mg (n = 546) or SC (n = 198). The atogepant safety population was 88.2% female (n = 479/543) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 42.5 (12.0) years. TEAEs occurred in 67.0% (n = 364/543) of participants treated with atogepant 60 mg. The most commonly reported TEAEs (≥5%) were upper respiratory tract infection (10.3%; 56/543), constipation (7.2%; 39/543), nausea (6.3%; 34/543), and urinary tract infection (5.2%; 28/543). Serious TEAEs were reported in 4.4% (24/543) for atogepant. Mean (standard error) change in MMDs for atogepant was -3.8 (0.1) for weeks 1-4 and -5.2 (0.2) at weeks 49-52. Similarly, the proportion of participants with ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% reductions in MMDs increased from 60.4% (310/513), 37.2% (191/513), and 20.7% (106/513) at weeks 1-4 to 84.2% (282/335), 69.9% (234/335), and 48.4% (162/335), at weeks 49-52. CONCLUSION Daily use of oral atogepant 60 mg for preventive treatment of migraine during this 1-year, open-label trial was safe, well tolerated, and efficacious.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Messoud Ashina
- Danish Headache Center, Department of NeurologyRigshospitalet Glostrup Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark
| | - Stewart J. Tepper
- Department of NeurologyGeisel School of Medicine at DartmouthHanoverNew HampshireUSA
| | - Uwe Reuter
- Department of NeurologyCharité Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pozo-Rosich P, Detke HC, Wang S, Doležil D, Li LQ, Aurora SK, Reuter U. Long-term treatment with galcanezumab in patients with chronic migraine: results from the open-label extension of the REGAIN study. Curr Med Res Opin 2022; 38:731-742. [PMID: 35392739 DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2022.2059975] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide, was found to be safe and efficacious for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine based on the randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind period of the REGAIN study. Long-term safety and efficacy were assessed in an open-label extension. METHODS Patients 18-65 years old with chronic migraine completing the 3-month double-blind period of REGAIN could enter a 9-month open-label extension (OLE; months 4-12). Upon entering the OLE, patients received a 240-mg galcanezumab loading dose, then 120 mg at the next month, with flexible dosing thereafter (120 or 240 mg/month). The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in the number of monthly migraine headache days from double-blind baseline to month 12. Other endpoints included response rates (based on percent reduction in monthly migraine headache days from double-blind baseline to month 12), safety and tolerability. RESULTS Of patients who completed double-blind treatment, 1022 (99%) entered the OLE, with 81% completing month 12. From a baseline of 19.4 monthly migraine headache days at the beginning of the double-blind period, patients at month 12 in the previous placebo, 120-mg, and 240-mg galcanezumab groups had a mean change of -8.5, -9.0, and -8.0, respectively (SE = 0.43 to 0.55, within-group p's < .001). At month 12, the percentage of patients with ≥50% response was 57%, 57%, and 53%, respectively. Percentage with ≥75% response was 32%, 31%, and 30%, respectively. Percentage with 100% response was 8%, 6%, and 6%, respectively. There were no significant new safety findings during the open-label period. The incidence of discontinuation from the OLE due to adverse events was 5%. CONCLUSION Galcanezumab was effective, safe, and well-tolerated, with high adherence, for up to 12 months of treatment in patients with chronic migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02614261; www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02614261.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia Pozo-Rosich
- Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
- Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Research (VHIR), Departament de Medicina, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Shufang Wang
- Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA
- Now at Sarepta Therapeutics, Cambridge, MA, USA
| | - David Doležil
- Prague Headache Center, DADO MEDICAL s.r.o, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Lily Q Li
- Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Sheena K Aurora
- Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA
- Now at Impel NeuroPharma, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Uwe Reuter
- Department of Neurology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Jedynak J, Eross E, Gendolla A, Rettiganti M, Stauffer VL. Shift from high-frequency to low-frequency episodic migraine in patients treated with Galcanezumab: results from two global randomized clinical trials. J Headache Pain 2021; 22:48. [PMID: 34049484 PMCID: PMC8161994 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-021-01222-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/12/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Patients with episodic migraine (EM) with a higher-frequency of migraine headache days (HFEM: 8–14 migraine headache days/month) have a greater disease burden and a higher risk of progressing to chronic migraine (CM) with associated acute treatment overuse versus those with low-frequency EM (LFEM: 4–7 migraine headache days/month). In this post hoc analysis, we assessed the proportions of patients who shifted from HFEM to LFEM and to very low-frequency EM (VLFEM: 0–3 migraine headache days/month) status following treatment with galcanezumab versus placebo. Methods EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2 were double-blind, Phase 3 studies in patients with EM. Patients (18–65 years) were randomized (2:1:1) to subcutaneous monthly injections of placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg (240 mg loading dose) or 240 mg, for up to 6 months. Data were pooled and endpoints were change from baseline in number of migraine headache days/month and patients who shifted from HFEM to LFEM or VLFEM status. Impact of change in HFEM status on migraine headache days/month, quality of life and disability was also assessed. Results A total of 66% (1176/1773) patients from EVOLVE studies had HFEM status at baseline and were included in this analysis; placebo: 592, galcanezumab 120 mg: 294 and galcanezumab 240 mg: 290. At each month, both doses of galcanezumab resulted in a higher proportion of patients who shifted to 0–7 monthly headache days/month (VLFEM or LFEM status). Patients who shifted from HFEM at baseline to VLFEM status at Month 3, a relatively larger proportion of patients on galcanezumab 120 mg versus placebo remained at VLFEM status at Months 4–6; Months 4–5 for galcanezumab 240 mg versus placebo. Among the galcanezumab-treated patients who did-not-shift or shifted to LFEM or VLFEM status for ≥3 consecutive months until the end of the study, patients who shifted from HFEM to VLFEM status experienced the largest reduction in migraine headache days/month and the largest clinically meaningful improvements in daily functioning (MSQ-RFR) and disability (MIDAS). Conclusions In patients with HFEM, treatment with galcanezumab (120 mg and 240 mg) significantly reduced migraine headache days/month, maintained remission status at subsequent months until the end of the study, and improved patients’ quality of life versus placebo. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: EVOLVE-1, NCT02614183; EVOLVE-2, NCT02614196. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-021-01222-w.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jakub Jedynak
- Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, 46285, USA.
| | - Eric Eross
- Phoenix Headache Institute, Scottsdale, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Onset, Maintenance, and Cessation of Effect of Galcanezumab for Prevention of Migraine: A Narrative Review of Three Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials. Adv Ther 2021; 38:1614-1626. [PMID: 33544305 PMCID: PMC7932975 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-021-01632-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Accepted: 01/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide, is approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. It is self-administered once monthly as a subcutaneous injection. This paper describes the time course of effect of galcanezumab in patients with episodic and chronic migraine. Methods Data were based on three double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies. Patients (1773 episodic and 1113 chronic) were randomized (2:1:1) to monthly doses of placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg with a 240 mg loading dose, or galcanezumab 240 mg (January 2016–March 2017). Onset of effect was determined using a sequential analysis approach based on earliest time point at which galcanezumab achieved and subsequently maintained statistical superiority to placebo. Maintenance of effect was a comparison of the percentages of galcanezumab- and placebo-treated patients with maintenance of at least 50% response at the individual patient level. Cessation of effect was determined during a 4-month post-treatment period on the basis of change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days. Results Galcanezumab led to a lower percentage of patients who had a migraine headache on the first day after injection, provided maintenance of effect throughout the duration of the double-blind treatment period, and gradually lost effect without signs of rebound headache throughout the post-treatment period in most patients with episodic and chronic migraine. Conclusion Galcanezumab is a novel preventive therapeutic option for adult patients with migraine that has early onset of action, maintenance of effect, and gradual reduction of effect upon treatment cessation. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02614183 (EVOLVE-1); NCT02614196 (EVOLVE-2); NCT02614261 (REGAIN). Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01632-x.
Collapse
|
7
|
Förderreuther S, Zhang Q, Stauffer VL, Aurora SK, Láinez MJA. Preventive effects of galcanezumab in adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine are persistent: data from the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, and REGAIN studies. J Headache Pain 2018; 19:121. [PMID: 30594122 PMCID: PMC6755564 DOI: 10.1186/s10194-018-0951-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/16/2018] [Accepted: 12/10/2018] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Maintenance of effect following treatment with galcanezumab compared to placebo in adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine was evaluated. METHODS In 2 similarly designed studies of patients with episodic migraine (6 months) and 1 study of patients with chronic migraine (3 months), patients randomized in a 1:1:2 ratio received a subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab 120 mg/month (after an initial loading dose of 240 mg) or 240 mg/month or placebo. Maintenance of effect during the double-blind phase was evaluated based on a comparison of the percentages of galcanezumab- and placebo-treated patients with maintenance of 30, 50, 75, and 100% response (defined as ≥30, ≥50, ≥75, and 100% reduction from baseline in monthly migraine headache days [MHD]) at an individual patient level. Logistic regression analyses were used for between treatment comparisons. RESULTS A total of 1773 adult patients with episodic migraine (n = 444 for galcanezumab 120 mg; n = 435 for galcanezumab 240 mg; n = 894 for placebo for 2 studies pooled) and 1113 patients with chronic migraine (n = 278 for galcanezumab 120 mg; n = 277 for galcanezumab 240 mg; n = 558 for placebo) were evaluated. In patients with episodic migraine, ≥50% response was maintained in 41.5 and 41.1% of galcanezumab-treated patients (120 mg and 240 mg, respectively) for ≥3 consecutive months (until patient's endpoint) and 19.0 and 20.5%, respectively, for 6 consecutive months and was significantly greater than the 21.4 and 8.0% of placebo-treated patients at ≥3 and 6 months consecutively (P < 0.001). Approximately 6% of galcanezumab-treated patients maintained ≥75% response all 6 months versus 2% of placebo-treated patients. Few galcanezumab-treated patients maintained 100% response. In patients with chronic migraine, 29% of galcanezumab-treated patients maintained ≥30% response all 3 months compared to 16% of placebo patients while ≥50% response was maintained in 16.8 and 14.6% of galcanezumab-treated patients (120 mg and 240 mg) and was greater than placebo (6.3%; p < 0.001). Few patients maintained ≥75% response. CONCLUSIONS Treatment with galcanezumab 120 mg or 240 mg demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful persistence of effect in patients with episodic migraine (≥3 and 6 consecutive months) and in patients with chronic migraine (for 3 months). STUDY IDENTIFICATION AND TRIAL REGISTRATION Study Identification: EVOLVE-1 (I5Q-MC-CGAG); EVOLVE-2 (I5Q-MC-CGAH); REGAIN (I5Q-MC-CGAI) TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ; NCT02614183 (EVOLVE-1); NCT02614196 (EVOLVE-2); NCT02614261 (REGAIN).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Sheena K. Aurora
- Eli Lilly and Company, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN 46285 USA
| | - Miguel J. A. Láinez
- Hospital Clínico Universitario, Universidad Católica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
VanderPluym J, Evans RW, Starling AJ. Long-Term Use and Safety of Migraine Preventive Medications. Headache 2016; 56:1335-43. [DOI: 10.1111/head.12891] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2016] [Accepted: 05/27/2016] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
|
9
|
Silva-Néto RP, Almeida KJ, Bernardino SN. Analysis of the duration of migraine prophylaxis. J Neurol Sci 2014; 337:38-41. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2013.11.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2013] [Revised: 10/30/2013] [Accepted: 11/11/2013] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|