Real-world assessment of treatment with extended-release topiramate (Trokendi XR®) and comparison with previous immediate-release topiramate treatment

Extended-release metformin improves cognitive impairment in frail older women with hypertension and diabetes: preliminary results from the LEOPARDESS Study

BACKGROUND

Women have a high risk of frailty independently of age and menopause state. Diabetes and hypertension increase the risk of frailty and cognitive impairment. Metformin has been employed in post-menopausal women and some reports have shown encouraging effects in terms of attenuated frailty. However, the impact on cognitive performance of a recently introduced extended-release formulation of metformin has never been explored.

METHODS

We studied consecutive frail hypertensive and diabetic older women presenting at the ASL (local health authority of the Italian Ministry of Health) Avellino, Italy, from June 2021 to August 2022, who were treated or not with extended-release metformin. We included a control group of frail older males with diabetes and hypertension treated with extended-release metformin and a control group of frail older women with diabetes and hypertension treated with regular metformin.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients successfully completed the study. At the end of the 6-month follow-up, we observed a significantly different cognitive performance compared to baseline in the group of frail women treated with extended-release metformin (p: 0.007). Then, we compared the follow-up groups and we observed significant differences between frail women treated vs. untreated (p: 0.041), between treated frail women and treated frail men (p: 0.016), and between women treated with extended-release metformin vs. women treated with regular metformin (p: 0.048). We confirmed the crucial role of extended-release metformin applying a multivariable logistic analysis to adjust for potential confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

We evidenced, for the first time to the best of our knowledge, the favorable effects on cognitive impairment of extended-release metformin in frail women with diabetes and hypertension.

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.