Ultra-late response (> 24 weeks) to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine: a multicenter, prospective, observational study

OBJECTIVE

Nearly 60% of migraine patients treated with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway experience a ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) at 12 weeks compared to baseline (responders). However, approximately half of the patients not responding to anti-CGRP mAbs ≤ 12 weeks do respond ≤ 24 weeks (late responders). We assessed frequency and characteristics of patients responding to anti-CGRP mAbs only > 24 weeks (ultra-late responders).

METHODS

In this multicenter (n = 16), prospective, observational, real-life study, we enrolled all consecutive adults affected by high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM: ≥ 8 days/month) or chronic migraine (CM), with ≥ 3 prior therapeutic failures, treated with any anti-CGRP mAbs for ≥ 48 weeks. We defined responders patients with a ≥ 50% response rate ≤ 12 weeks, late responders those with a ≥ 50% response rate ≤ 24 weeks, and ultra-late responders those achieving a ≥ 50% response only > 24 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 572 migraine patients completed ≥ 48 weeks of anti-CGRP mAbs treatment. Responders accounted for 60.5% (346/572), late responders for 15% (86/572), and ultra-late responders for 15.7% (90/572). Among ultra-late responders, 7.3% (42/572) maintained the ≥ 50% response rate across all subsequent time intervals (weeks 28, 32, 36, 40, 44, and 48) and were considered persistent ultra-late responders, while 8.4% (48/572) missed the ≥ 50% response rate at ≥ 1 subsequent time interval and were classified as fluctuating ultra-late responders. Fifty patients (8.7%) did not respond at any time interval ≤ 48 weeks. Ultra-late responders differed from responders for higher BMI (p = 0.033), longer duration of medication overuse (p < 0.001), lower NRS (p = 0.017) and HIT-6 scores (p = 0.002), higher frequency of dopaminergic symptoms (p = 0.002), less common unilateral pain-either alone (p = 0.010) or in combination with UAS (p = 0.023), allodynia (p = 0.043), or UAS and allodynia (p = 0.012)-a higher number of comorbidities (p = 0.012), psychiatric comorbidities (p = 0.010) and a higher proportion of patients with ≥ 1 comorbidity (p = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

Two-thirds of patients not responding to anti-CGRP mAbs ≤ 24 weeks do respond later, while non-responders ≤ 48 weeks are quite rare (8.7%). These findings suggest to rethink the duration of migraine prophylaxis and the definition of resistant and refractory migraine, currently based on the response after 2-3 months of treatment.

Impact of multiple treatment cycles with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies on migraine course: focus on discontinuation periods. Insights from the multicenter, prospective, I-GRAINE study

OBJECTIVES

While a single 12-month treatment cycle (TrC) with anti-CGRP mAbs is not disease-modifying for most patients, there is limited understanding of the effects of multiple TrCs on migraine course. We evaluated whether a second TrC might modify the migraine course by comparing the occurrence of migraine relapse after discontinuation of the second TrC to that following the cessation of the first TrC.

METHODS

In a real-life, multicenter, prospective study we considered all consecutive patients diagnosed with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM) with > 3 treatment failures and treated with any anti-CGRP mAbs for ≥ 2 consecutive 12-month TrCs who were responders at week 12. The primary endpoint was the change in monthly migraine days (MMD) for HFEM or monthly headache days (MHD) for CM at the first month of treatment discontinuation after the second TrC (D2) compared to the first TrC (D1). Secondary endpoints included variations in monthly analgesic medications (MAM), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores, ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% response rates, and relapse from episodic migraine to CM and from no-medication overuse (MO) to MO at D2 vs. D1.

RESULTS

One-hundred-seventy-eight patients completed two 12-month TrCs with anti-CGRP mAbs. At D2, patients experienced a significant reduction in MMD (- 0.6, p = 0.028), MHD (- 2.6, p < 0.001), monthly analgesic medications (- 2.0, p < 0.001), and HIT-6 score (- 2.2, p < 0.001) compared to D1, indicating improved effectiveness. The ≥ 50% response rate at weeks 45-48 during the first TrC was 95.5%, while at weeks 45-48 of the second TrC was 99.4%. Corresponding rates at D1 was 20.2% whereas at D2 was 51.6% (p < 0.0001). No statistical difference emerged in ≥ 75% and 100% responders. The relapse rate from episodic migraine to CM at D2 was lower than at D1 (12.3% vs 30.4%; p = 0.0002) Fewer patients experienced relapse from no-MO to MO at D2 compared to D1 (29.5% vs 68.7%; p = 0.00001).

DISCUSSION

A second TrC with anti-CGRP mAbs demonstrated clinical improvements compared to the first one, as indicated by a milder migraine relapse at D2 compared to D1. Multiple TrCs with anti-CGRP mAbs could progressively modify migraine evolution by reducing CGRP-dependent neuroinflammatory nociceptive inputs to the brain.

An economic evaluation of eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of migraine in the UK, with consideration for natural history and work productivity

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a highly prevalent neurological disease with a substantial societal burden due to lost productivity. From a societal perspective, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of migraine.

METHODS

An individual patient simulation of discrete competing events was developed to evaluate eptinezumab cost-effectiveness compared to best supportive care for adults in the United Kingdom with ≥ 4 migraine days per month and prior failure of ≥ 3 preventive migraine treatments. Individuals with sampled baseline characteristics were created to represent this population, which comprised dedicated episodic and chronic migraine subpopulations. Clinical efficacy, utility, and work productivity inputs were based on results from the DELIVER randomised controlled trial (NCT04418765). Timing of natural history events and treatment holidays-informed by the literature-were simulated to unmask any natural improvement of the disease unrelated to treatment. The primary outcomes were monthly migraine days, migraine-associated costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and net monetary benefit, each evaluated over a 5-year time horizon from 2020. Secondary analyses explored a lifetime horizon and an alternative treatment stopping rule.

RESULTS

Treatment with eptinezumab resulted in an average of 0.231 QALYs gained at a saving of £4,894 over 5 years, making eptinezumab dominant over best supportive care (i.e., better health outcomes and less costly). This result was confirmed by the probabilistic analysis and all alternative assumption scenarios under the same societal perspective. Univariate testing of inputs showed net monetary benefit was most sensitive to the number of days of productivity loss, and monthly salary.

CONCLUSIONS

This economic evaluation shows that from a societal perspective, eptinezumab is a cost-effective treatment in patients with ≥ 4 migraine days per month and for whom ≥ 3 other preventive migraine treatments have failed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

N/A.

Treatment patterns and characteristics of patients with migraine: results from a retrospective database study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Clinical characteristics and treatment practice of patients with migraine in Japan in real-world setting have not been fully investigated. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using claims database to understand the clinical practice of migraine in recent years and to characterize patients potentially not managed well by current treatment options.

METHODS

Our study used data from the large claims database maintained by JMDC Inc. Patients with diagnosis of headache or migraine between January 1, 2018, and July 31, 2022, were defined as the headache cohort, and those with migraine diagnosis and prescription of migraine treatments among the headache cohort were included in the migraine cohort. In the headache cohort, characteristics of medical facilities and status of imaging tests to distinguish secondary headache were examined. Treatment patterns and characteristics of patients potentially not managed well by acute/preventive treatment were described in migraine cohort.

RESULTS

In the headache cohort, 989,514 patients were included with 57.0% females and mean age of 40.3 years; 77.0% patients visited clinics (with ≤ 19 bed capacities) for their primary diagnosis, and 30.3% patients underwent imaging tests (computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging). In the migraine cohort, 165,339 patients were included with 65.0% females and mean age of 38.8 years. In the migraine cohort, 95.6% received acute treatment while 20.8% received preventive treatment. Acetaminophen/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were most common (54.8%) as the initial prescription for migraine treatment followed by triptan (51.4%). First treatment prescription included preventive treatment in 15.6%, while the proportion increased to 82.2% in the fourth treatment prescription. Among patients with more than 12 months of follow-up, 3.7% had prescription patterns suggestive of risk of medication-overuse headache, and these patients were characterized by a higher percentage of females and a higher prevalence of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that approximately one-fifth of the patients with migraine visiting medical facilities use preventive drugs. The presence of potential patients at risk of medication-overuse headache and the role of clinics in migraine treatment were also described.

Efficacy and safety of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for treatment of chronic migraine: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of all randomized trials investigating effects of anti-calcitonin gene related peptide monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP mAbs) on adult patients with chronic migraine.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials searched from inception to July 2020; and clinical trial registries. The network meta-analysis was conducted in Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS and R, with the random effects model selected to allow for apparent heterogeneity between studies in the treatment comparison effects.

RESULTS

Overall 38 studies (5164 chronic migraineurs in seven randomized trials) were included with treatment course of at least 12 weeks. Fremanezumab 675 + 225 + 225 mg QM (SC) injections were numerically more effective in lowering migraine days with lower MDs compared to eptinezumab 10 mg (IV) (MD: -1.52, 95% CrIs: -4.24, 0.99), eptinezumab 30 mg (IV) (MD: -0.33, 95% CrIs: -3.02, 2.16), eptinezumab 100 mg (IV) (MD: -0.59, 95% CrIs: -2.80, 1.42), eptinezumab 300 mg (IV) (MD: -0.02, 95% CrIs: -2.29, 1.98), erenumab 70 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.17, 95% CrIs: -2.84, 2.25), erenumab 140 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.18, 95% CrIs: -2.87, 2.26), fremanezumab 675 mg (SC) (MD: -0.30, 95% CrIs: -1.81, 1.14), galcanezumab 120 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.71, 95% CrIs: -3.44, 1.55) and galcanezumab 240 mg QM (SC) (MD: -0.58, 95% CrIs: -3.09, 1.89), however the results were non-significant. Similarly, the anti-CGRP mAbs were also observed to have comparable safety and immunogenicity with no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Although all doses of anti-CGRP mAbs have comparable efficacy, safety and tolerability based on uncertainties in indirect comparisons for all outcomes, the calculated effect estimates numerically favored high doses of subcutaneous fremanezumab and intravenous eptinezumab as the effective therapy with acceptable safety and tolerability for short term prevention of chronic migraine.

Network meta-analysis on efficacy and safety of different anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody regimens for prophylaxis and treatment of episodic migraine

BACKGROUND

Currently, studies have shown that anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies are effective drugs for the prophylaxis and treatment of episodic migraine. Therefore, for the first time, we classified and concluded 10 treatment regimens according to the different doses, drugs, routes of administration, and courses of treatment, so as to provide a reference for further clinical studies.

METHODS

We studied relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before August 2020 on PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs involving 6397 patients were included in our analysis. Network meta-analysis results suggested that in the comparison of the average migraine days per month, Erenumab  (140 mg), Galcanezumab (120 mg, 240 mg), Fremanezumab (225 mg, 675 mg) were superior to placebo, Erenumab(7 mg), and the difference was statistically significant; Fremanezumab (225 mg, 675 mg) was superior to Erenumab (21 mg, 70 mg), and the difference was statistically significant; in the comparison of average medication days of acute migraine-specific drug per month, Erenumab (70 mg, 140 mg), Galcanezumab (120 mg, 240 mg), Fremanezumab (225 mg, 675 mg) was superior to placebo, and Erenumab (140 mg) and Galcanezumab (120 mg, 240 mg) were superior to Erenumab (70 mg), and the difference was statistically significant; there was no statistically significant difference in the average migraine days in the last month or in the medication days of acute migraine-specific drug.

CONCLUSION

Fremanezumab (225 mg) and Galcanezumab (120 mg) may be the best clinical protocol after a comprehensive assessment.