Efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibody against calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor for migraine patients with prior preventive treatment failure: a network meta-analysis

Scoping Review: The Effects of Interrupted Onabotulinumtoxin A Treatment for Chronic Migraine Prevention During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective

To systematically examine the literature on the clinical consequences of inadvertent delays in scheduled onabotulinumtoxin A (OTA) therapy for chronic migraine during the COVID-19 pandemic and assess recommendations when access to OTA is limited.

Background

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic was unprecedented in its impact on the global medical community. Most healthcare institutions in the United States (US) and the world had begun significantly limiting elective procedures, undermining management of many debilitating chronic conditions. OTA injections, were similarly involuntarily postponed, leading to significant setbacks in symptom control.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted on databases of Medline and Embase with search timeframe defined as the point of database inception to March 1st, 2024, and the search was performed on March 2nd, 2024. The search strategy was independently formulated by two authors (QR and CR) and was reviewed and approved by all authors of the article after appropriate amendments.

Results

A total of nine articles met the defined inclusion criteria. They collectively demonstrated marked delays in OTA treatment with decline in migraine symptom control measured in the form of migraine intensity, frequency, as well as patient satisfaction in disease management. Quality of care in the form of follow-ups also appeared compromised. Alternative strategies of telemedicine and the administration of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAb) were adopted in place of conventional treatment.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic had caused marked clinical deterioration in the migraine patient populations across US, Europe, and the Middle East. Strategies employed to circumvent this limitation included the adoption of remote consultation via telemedicine as well as the use of pharmacological agents such as CGRP antagonists. In the event of a reoccurrence of a worldwide pandemic, strategies should be implemented to prevent the cessation of needed treatment for those suffering from chronic migraine.

Preventive drug treatments for adults with chronic migraine: a systematic review with economic modelling

Background

Chronic migraine is a disabling condition, affecting 2-4% of adults globally. With the introduction of expensive calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, it is timely to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of preventive drugs for chronic migraine.

Objective

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of medications used for chronic migraine through systematic reviews and economic modelling.

Eligibility criteria

Randomised controlled trials of drug treatments for efficacy with > 100 participants with chronic migraine per arm; for adverse events > 100 participants with episodic or chronic migraine per arm. Previous economic analyses of preventive drugs for chronic migraine.

Data sources

Eight databases.

Reviews methods

Systematic reviews, network meta-analysis and economic modelling.

Outcomes

Monthly headache days, monthly migraine days, headache-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness.

Results

We found 51 individual articles, reporting 11 randomised controlled trials, testing 6 drugs (topiramate, Botox, eptinezumab, erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab), versus placebo, on 7352 adults with chronic migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, Botox and topiramate reduced headache/migraine days by 2.0-2.5, just under two, or by less than 1.5 days per month, respectively. In the network meta-analysis, eptinezumab 300 mg and fremanezumab monthly ranked in first place in both monthly headache day and monthly migraine day analyses. The calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies were consistently the best choices for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life. Topiramate was very unlikely to be the best choice for headache/migraine days and headache-related quality of life when compared to calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies or Botox. We found no trials of the commonly used drugs, such as propranolol or amitriptyline, to include in the analysis. The adverse events review included 40 randomised controlled trials with 25,891 participants; 3 additional drugs, amitriptyline, atogepant and rimegepant, were included. There were very few serious adverse events - none of which were linked to the use of these medications. Adverse events were common. Most people using some calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies reported injection site issues; and people using topiramate or amitriptyline had nervous system or gastrointestinal issues. The cost-effectiveness review identified 16 studies evaluating chronic migraine medications in adults. The newer, injected drugs are more costly than the oral preventatives, but they were cost-effective. Our economic model showed that topiramate was the least costly option and had the fewest quality-adjusted life-year gains, whereas eptinezumab 300 mg was more costly but generated the most quality-adjusted life-year gains. The cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showed that topiramate was the most cost-effective medication if the decision maker is willing to pay up to £50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Our consensus workshop brought together people with chronic migraine and headache experts. Consensus was reached on the top three recommendations for future research on medications to prevent chronic migraine: (1) calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and Botox versus calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies, (2) candesartan versus placebo and (3) flunarizine versus placebo.

Limitations

Topiramate was the only oral drug for which we were able to include data. We did not find sufficient quality evidence to support the use of other oral drugs.

Conclusions

We did not find evidence that the calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies are more clinically and cost-effective when compared to topiramate or Botox. We identified directions for future research these drugs might take.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42021265990, CRD42021265993 and CRD42021265995.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132803) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 63. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Preferences and perceptions of 617 migraine patients on acute and preventive migraine treatment attributes and clinical trial endpoints

BACKGROUND

To identify the preferences and perceptions of migraine patients for acute and preventive treatment options and to investigate which treatment outcomes are the most important.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The authors performed a choice-format survey in a cohort of migraine patients from Greece and Cyprus. A self-administered questionnaire developed in collaboration with the Greek Society of Migraine Patients was used.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were collected from 617 migraine patients. Efficacy was preferred over safety as the single most important parameter, both in acute and preventive treatment. When analyzing single outcomes, patients prioritized a complete pain remission at 1-hour post-dose for acute therapies. Regarding migraine prevention, a 75% reduction in frequency, intensity of pain, accompanying symptoms and acute medication intake were considered as most important. Conversely, outcomes routinely used in clinical trials, namely complete or partial pain remission at 2-hours post-dose for acute treatment and 50% or 30% reduction in migraine frequency for prevention, were not deemed particularly relevant. Tablet formulation was mostly preferred, both in acute and preventive treatment. Conclusion: Listening to patients' needs may add a piece of the puzzle that is generally missing in clinical practice and often explains the lack of adherence in both acute and preventative anti-migraine therapies.

Anti-CGRP mAbs for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: An Overview Review and a Cost Saving Analysis in the Global Scenario

Objectives: Migraine is a neurological disease with a high frequency of incidence. The new monoclonal antibodies selective for the calcitonin gene-related peptide and its ligand (anti-CGRP mAbs) have been marketed both in the USA and EU based on the positive efficacy results in the prevention of migraine. This search has been carried out with the aim of collecting real-world evidence on the effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs, performing a cost-savings analysis, and comparing performances among anti-CGRP mAbs medicines marketed in the American and European market. Methods: The literature review has been performed in PubMed database on 31 December 2022; the cost of the unitary dose of anti-CGRP mAbs has been extracted consulting an American national database. Results: The results confirm efficacy and good tolerability of anti-CGRP mAbs, determining a difference in the purchase price. In fact, all extracted studies showed a protective risk factor exposure in monthly migraine days reduction for all the anti-CGRP mAbs, whereas the cost analysis showed that using eptinezumab, in a quarter there is a cost saving of at least $425 per patient, compared with the other anti-CGRP mAbs. Conclusions: With equal efficacy and equal safety, anti-CGRP mAbs should be prescribed also regard to the cost established at the negotiation, making sure to guarantee the best treatment to the patients, but at the same time impacting as little as possible to the healthcare services resources.

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.

Real-world experience with calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeted antibodies for migraine prevention: a retrospective observational cohort study at two Japanese headache centers

BACKGROUND

Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeted monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) are an efficacious and safe therapeutic modality for migraine prevention, their clinical benefits have not been well validated in Japanese patients in the real-world setting. The present study aimed to evaluate the real-world efficacy and safety of galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and erenumab in Japanese patients with migraine.

METHODS

This observational retrospective cohort study was conducted at two headache centers in Japan. Patients with migraine who had experienced treatment failure with at least one traditional oral migraine preventive agent were treated with a CGRP mAb de novo. The primary efficacy endpoints were the changes from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMDs) and Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) score after 3 dosing intervals (V3). We explored whether demographic and clinical characteristics predicted therapeutic outcomes at V3.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients who completed three doses of a CGRP mAb (85.3% female [58/68], mean age: 46.2 ± 13.1 years) were included in the analysis. There were 19 patients with chronic migraine. The baseline MMDs were 13.4 ± 6.0. After 3 doses, the MMDs significantly decreased to 7.4 ± 5.5 (p < 0.0001), and the 50% response rate was 50.0%. HIT-6 score was significantly reduced from 66.7 ± 5.4 to 56.2 ± 8.7 after 3 doses (P = 0.0001). There was a positive correlation between the changes in MMDs and HIT-6 score from baseline after 2 doses (p = 0.0189). Those who achieved a ≥ 50% therapeutic response after the first and second doses were significantly more likely to do so at V3 (crude odds ratio: 3.474 [95% CI: 1.037 to 10.4], p = 0.0467). The most frequent adverse event was constipation (7.4%). None of the adverse events were serious, and there was no need for treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study demonstrated that CGRP mAbs conferred Japanese patients with efficacious and safe migraine prevention, and an initial positive therapeutic response was predictive of subsequent favorable outcomes. Concomitant measurement of MMDs and HIT-6 score was useful in evaluating the efficacy of CGRP mAbs in migraine prevention.

Adverse event profile of CGRP monoclonal antibodies: findings from the FDA adverse event reporting database

BACKGROUND

Four CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs) have been approved for migraine prophylaxis by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) since 2018. However, there are concerns about the safety of these four drugs for real-world use.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the adverse event profiles of four CGRP-mAbs with FAERS data.

METHODS

The study was based on records from the FAERS database. Only reports containing one of the active ingredients with CGRP-mAbs were included in this study. Disproportionality analyses including but not limited to reporting odds ratio (ROR) and information components (IC) were conducted to identify drug-AE associations.

RESULTS

In total, 58110 reports were identified for CGRP-mAbs. 80 overlapping signals were disproportionately reported. They affected a range of organs and systems, including the gastrointestinal and cardiovascular systems, skin, and hair. Additionally, the rare cardiovascular adverse events were significantly different among the four CGRP-mAbs.

CONCLUSION

We identified numerous shared underlying signals (overlapping signals) for CGRP-mAbs as suspected drugs in multiple systems and organs. The unlabeled common signals may indicate potential safety issues. In addition, the underlying safety signals varied among the four CGRP-mAbs, particularly in the cardiovascular system, and further studies are needed to confirm these associations and the potential clinical implications.

An exploratory comparative case series of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies in patients with migraine with rosacea

Rosacea is associated with &gt; 50% of cases of migraine. Recent data have shown that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is elevated in rosacea skin. CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) prevent migraine with known safety profiles, but their effect on rosacea is not known. This exploratory retrospective study examined rosacea in patients with migraines, before and after CGRP mAbs. Of 13 eligible patients on stable or unchanged concurrent rosacea medications, the majority experienced improvement after receiving CGRP mAbs. Mean (SD) rosacea severity scores for the periods before and while on CGRP mAbs were, respectively, 1.19 (0.65) and 0.58 (0.70) (P = 0.01). Prospective, placebo-controlled clinical trials are needed to further assess the use of CGRP mAbs in rosacea.

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.

Estimating treatment effects on health utility scores for patients living with migraine: a post hoc analysis of the DELIVER trial

BACKGROUND

This post hoc analysis aimed to estimate eptinezumab's therapeutic effect on health utilities and determined to which extent monthly migraine days (MMDs) explain changes in health utilities.

RESEARCH DESIGN/METHODS

DELIVER, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3b trial (NCT04418765), investigated eptinezumab efficacy and safety in patients with 2-4 prior migraine treatment failures. Regression analysis explored the relationship between utility scores and MMDs, with eptinezumab treatment as a covariate along with MMDs to identify any MMD-independent effect on utilities. Path analysis quantified eptinezumab's impact as mediated through MMD reduction.

RESULTS

The base case model showed that each reduction in MMD was associated with a mean utility score increase (0.0189; 95% CI: 0.0180, 0.0198; P < 0.001). Mean utility score was generally higher for eptinezumab versus placebo, justifying addition of treatment effect to the base case model. Patients administered eptinezumab had on average 0.0562 (95% CI: 0.0382, 0.0742; P < 0.001) higher utility versus placebo when controlling for number of MMDs. From path analysis, MMD reduction resulting from eptinezumab treatment accounted for 53% additional utility gain observed in patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in MMDs alone inadequately captured migraine's impact on patient utility, as there was also a positive eptinezumab-driven, treatment-specific impact on utility score.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (CT.gov identifier: NCT04418765).

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.

Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide and Adrenomedullin Levels During Ictal and Interictal Periods in Patients With Migraine

Background Peptides related to calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) have been suggested to have a role in migraine. Adrenomedullin (AM) might be a candidate molecule because it is related to pain pathways in the peripheral and central nervous systems and uses the same receptors as CGRP. Methodology In this study, we examined the serum CGRP and AM levels during unprovoked ictal and interictal periods of 30 migraine patients as well as 25 healthy controls. Another focus of this study was on the association of CGRP and AM levels with clinical features. Results Mean serum AM levels were 15.80 pg/mL (11.91-21.43 pg/mL) in the ictal and 15.85 pg/mL (12.25-19.29 pg/mL) in the interictal periods in the migraine group and 13.36 pg/mL (10.84-17.18 pg/mL) in the control group. Mean serum CGRP levels were 2.93 pg/mL (2.45-3.90 pg/mL) in the ictal and 3.25 pg/mL (2.85-4.67 pg/mL) in the interictal periods in the migraine group and 3.03 pg/mL (2.48-3.80 pg/mL) in the control group. There were no statistical differences between ictal and/or interictal AM and CGRP levels (p = 0.558 and p = 0.054, respectively) which were also comparable with the results of the control group (p = 0.230, p = 0.295, p = 0.987, p = 0.139, respectively). Ictal serum CGRP and/or AM levels did not correlate with any of the reported clinical features. Conclusions Serum AM and CGRP levels are similar in interictal and unprovoked ictal periods in migraine patients and as well in controls. These results do not indicate that these molecules do not have a role in migraine pathophysiology. Considering the broad mechanisms of action of peptides in the CGRP family, further studies are needed in larger cohorts.