The effectiveness and value of novel acute treatments for migraine

Calcitonin gene-related peptide: a possible biomarker in migraine patients with patent foramen ovale

BACKGROUND

Serum CGRP has been found to increase during migraine attack. However, whether CGRP can identify MA with PFO subtypes in MA remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the differential expression of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) between migraine (MA) patients with and without patent foramen ovale (PFO), and to evaluate the predictive value of CGRP for MA with PFO.

METHODS

A total of 153 patients with MA, 51 patients with PFO and 102 patients without. Venous blood was drawn and HIT-6 score was calculated during the onset of MA, and blood routine, inflammatory indexes and serum CGRP were detected. The differences in serum markers and HIT-6 scores were compared between the two groups, and the risk factors of MA with PFO were determined by univariate and multivariate logistics regression. Furthermore, the correlation between CGRP level with right-to-left shunt (RLS) grades and headache impact test-6 (HIT-6) score in MA patients with PFO were assessed. Independent risk factors were screened out by multivariate Logistic regression analysis. We used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to analyze the diagnostic value of these risk factors in MA complicated with PFO.

RESULTS

The serum CGRP level and HIT-6 scores in the MA with PFO group were significantly higher than those in the MA group (P < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that CGRP was an independent risk factor for MA with PFO (OR = 1.698, 95% CI = 1.325-2.179, P < 0.001). CGRP values ​​increased with the increase of RLS grade(Spearmen rho = 0.703, P < 0.001). Furthermore, a positive correlation between CGRP and HIT-6 scores was found (Spearmen rho = 0.227; P = 0.016). ROC curve showed that the optimal cut-off value for diagnosing MA with PFO was 79 pg/mL, the area under the curve (AUC) for predicting MA with PFO was 0.845, with 72.55% sensitivity and 78.43% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

MA patients with PFO have higher serum CGRP level. elevated CGRP concentration was associated with higher RLS grade and increased HIT-6 score. Higher serum CGRP level has certain clinical value in predicting PFO in MA patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Zhuhai Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine (Ethics batch number: 20,201,215,005).

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.

Ditans: a new prospective for the therapy of migraine attack?

INTRODUCTION

Migraine attack is characterized by disabling pain and associated symptoms. Triptans represent the "gold standard" therapy, but cardiac subjects have significant limitations for this approach. New drug families are under consideration to expand therapeutic offerings, especially in the presence of contraindications or for non-responsive patients. This review aimed to analyze studies related to the category of "ditans," with a focus on lasmiditan, which is available for human use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We consulted PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov to find both original and review articles on the mechanism of action of 5-HT1F agonists in migraine, and for randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) on the family of drugs called "ditans," with a focus on "lasmiditan," published in the time frame of 01-Jan-2010 to 31-Mar-2022. Only studies conducted in human subjects and published in English were included in this review.

RESULTS

We retrieved four RCTs (named SAMURAI, SPARTAN, GLADIATOR, and CENTURION) and several studies that analyzed the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan. Lasmiditan at increasing doses showed significant improvement in pain and most other troublesome symptoms at 2 h. Adverse events were mild and mainly represented by dizziness, vertigo, drowsiness, and fatigue. No vasoconstrictive effects were described, suggesting the use of ditans as a safe option in chronic cardio- and cerebro-vascular disease.

DISCUSSION

Lasmiditan could be a viable alternative to triptans, although further RCT studies and real-world evidence are needed to better understand its potential and possible adverse events in a larger population.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

350/350 words

Supplementary Information

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

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03266588.

Supplementary Information

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

Budget impact of lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine in the United States

BACKGROUND: Three novel acute treatments for migraine-lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant-were approved by the FDA in 2019 and 2020 for adults with migraine with and without aura. American Headache Society guidance recommends that these novel acute treatments be considered for patients who are contraindicated to or fail to respond or tolerate oral triptans, the current standard of acute care. OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from a US commercial plan perspective, the budget impact of adding lasmiditan as an option to a formulary that already includes ubrogepant and rimegepant. METHODS: Epidemiologic data were drawn from US Census data, the American Migraine Prevalence and Preventive study, and the first wave of the OVERCOME US survey, a web-based survey that included 21,000 patients with migraine. A model with a 3-year time horizon was built assuming that demand for the novel acute treatments would not vary based on whether lasmiditan is included in the formulary. The model examined a variety of populations, in particular beneficiaries with previous use of 1 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to triptans and beneficiaries with previous use of 2 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to triptans. Primary outcomes were the incremental differences in total cost and average cost per member per month (PMPM) between scenarios with and without lasmiditan. One-way sensitivity analyses with model parameters that were varied by plus or minus 15% were conducted to assess the effect of key parameters on the incremental total cost over 3 years. RESULTS: The addition of lasmiditan to a formulary that already includes ubrogepant and rimegepant resulted in a total savings of -$927,657 (-1.5% compared with the scenario without lasmiditan) over a 3-year time horizon in the population with previous history of using 1 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to a triptan. In the population with previous history of using 2 or more oral triptans or contraindicated, the addition of lasmiditan resulted in a total budget impact of -$466,518 (-1.3%) over a 3-year time horizon. Most of the cost savings was attributable to reductions in drug acquisition cost. Savings in total costs resulted in average incremental cost per PMPM of -0.03 and -$0.01, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of lasmiditan to the formulary as a novel acute treatment option for migraine alongside ubrogepant and rimegepant resulted in lower budget impact on a 3-year time horizon from a US commercial payer's perspective. This result is important to US commercial payers as they seek to incorporate the emerging novel acute treatments for migraine into their benefit designs. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by Eli Lilly and Company. Milev and Sun are employed by Evidera, which received funding from Eli Lilly and Company for work on this project. Pohl, Mason, Njuguna, and Loo are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company.