Gene-related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies Research Articles

Effectiveness and Safety of Chronic Migraine Preventive Treatments: A Systematic Literature Review.

Numerous medications are used for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM), including oral treatments, onabotulinumtoxinA (onabotA; BOTOX), and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Despite substantial clinical trial evidence, less is published about the real-world experience of these treatments based on data routinely collected from a variety of sources. This systematic review assessed real-world evidence on the effectiveness and safety of preventive treatments for CM in adults. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library with back-referencing and supplementary searches retrieved data published between January 2010 and February 2020. Publications were screened, extracted, and quality assessed. Data were narratively synthesized. Search criteria included preventive medications for CM. Evidence was available for topiramate, onabotulinumtoxinA, CGRP mAbs (erenumab, galcanezumab, and fremanezumab). OnabotulinumtoxinA was most commonly assessed (55 studies), followed by erenumab (six studies), multiple CGRP mAbs (one study), and topiramate (one study). Long-term data (> 1year) were available for onabotulinumtoxinA only, with erenumab reported up 6months, topiramate up to 3months, and multiple CGRP mAbs up to 12months. Substantial data demonstrated that onabotulinumtoxinA reduces the number/frequency of headaches, concomitant acute medication use, and impact of headaches on well-being and daily activity. More limited evidence showed benefits for the same parameters with erenumab. Single studies suggested topiramate and multiple CGRP mAbs decrease the number/frequency of headaches and impact of headaches. To date, onabotulinumtoxinA is the only preventive treatment for CM that has long-term safety data in real-world settings reporting treatment-related adverse events of up to 3years. While substantial real-world evidence supports the long-term effectiveness and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA, real-world data on other preventive treatments of CM are currently limited to short term effectiveness due to their more recent approvals.

Can calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody improve migraine and restless legs syndrome?

BackgroundA significant association between migraine and restless legs syndrome (RLS) has been reported, and their coexistence is not uncommon. We report a patient with concomitant migraine and RLS who showed improvement of both migraine and RLS symptoms after treatment with galcanezumab, a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody. Case presentationA 47-year-old woman had been treated in our outpatient headache clinic for migraine without aura. She had RLS since childhood and had been treated with dopamine agonists and α2δ ligands. Over the past 2 months, the patient suffered from frequent migraine headaches and worsening RLS symptoms, despite ongoing treatment. Therefore, galcanezumab was started. After 1 month, the number of headache days decreased from 20 to 4, and her score on the International RLS Study Group Rating Scale improved from 38 to 10. Her photo/phono/osmo-phobia were also markedly improved. The efficacy of galcanezumab for both headache and RLS was sustained over 5 months. ConclusionWe report a case of improvement of both migraine and RLS after treatment with CGRP monoclonal antibody. Additional studies are needed to clarify how CGRP antagonism affects RLS symptoms in patients with migraine and RLS comorbidity.

Inpatient Constipation Among Migraine Patients Prescribed Anti-calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibodies and Standard of Care Antiepileptic Drugs: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a United States Electronic Health Record Database.

Erenumab, an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor monoclonal antibody (mAb), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in May 2018. Constipation with serious complications was added to the Warning and Precautions section in the erenumab Prescribing Information in October 2019 after events were observed during post-marketing surveillance. We aimed to assess and compare the risk of inpatient constipation, and, separately, inpatient constipation with serious complications, among patients with migraine treated with CGRP mAbs and standard of care antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Within Optum's Electronic Health Record Research Database, patients with migraine who initiated erenumab, other CGRP mAbs, and AEDs were identified from May 2018 through March 2020. Erenumab initiators were propensity score-matched separately to initiators of other CGRP mAbs and AEDs. Incident inpatient constipation events, and serious complications, were identified using multiple risk windows for outcome assessment (30-, 60-, 90-day risk windows, and all available follow-up). Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated comparing inpatient constipation risk among matched erenumab initiators relative to comparators. We identified 17,902 erenumab, 13,404 other CGRP mAb, and 49,497 AED initiators who met study criteria. Among matched initiators, the risk of inpatient constipation was 0.46% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.60) for erenumab and 0.44% (95%CI 0.33-0.58) for other CGRP mAbs within the 90-day risk window, with a corresponding OR of 1.06 (95%CI 0.72-1.55). Among matched erenumab and AED initiators, inpatient constipation risk was 0.53% (95%CI 0.42-0.66) and 0.76% (95%CI 0.62-0.92), respectively, and the OR was 0.69 (95%CI 0.51-0.94). Few serious complications were observed. Patients initiating erenumab had similar risk of inpatient constipation within 90days of treatment initiation versus patients initiating other CGRP mAbs, and lower risk versus patients initiating AEDs. These findings provide context to events observed during post-marketing surveillance.

Vestibular Migraine.

To explore recent developments in vestibular migraine (VM). This review discusses the current diagnostic criteria for VM in the adult and pediatric populations, as proposed by the International Headache Society and Bárány Society. Recent VM studies confirm the prior findings and reveal new insights, including the wide range of vestibular symptoms, symptoms in the attack-free period, and triggers. Many patients experience persistent vestibular symptoms, even in the absence of acute attacks, which often significantly impact patients' quality of life. The syndrome of benign recurrent vertigo and its relationship to migraine, VM, and Meniere's disease is also discussed. There is a dearth of randomized controlled trials in VM treatment. Prospective and retrospective studies support the benefit of many migraine treatments are effective in VM, including neuromodulation, and calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies. VM affects almost 3% of the population, but remains under-diagnosed. Recent diagnostic criteria can help clinicians diagnose VM in adults and children.

Measuring interictal burden among people affected by migraine: a descriptive survey study

BackgroundPrevious research has extensively documented the impact of migraine episodes (‘ictal’) on patients’ health-related quality of life. Few studies have looked at the impact of migraine on migraine-free days (‘interictal’). This study was designed to describe interictal burden of migraine in a mixed group of people affected by migraine and to explore patient characteristics associated with interictal burden.MethodsPeople with migraine in the United States (US) and Germany were recruited for a cross-sectional online survey, including a subgroup treated with calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb). The survey included the Migraine Interictal Burden Scale (MIBS-4), Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), and items measuring patient demographics, clinical and treatment background. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and linear regression.ResultsFive hundred six people with migraine completed the survey (US: n = 257; Germany: n = 249), of whom 195 had taken a CGRP mAb for three or more months. Participants had a mean of 8.5 (SD = 6.4) Monthly Migraine Days (MMD) and 10.4 (SD = 7.1) Monthly Headache Days (MHD). The mean MIBS-4 score was 6.3 (SD = 3.4), with 67% reporting severe interictal burden (MIBS-4: ≥5). The mean HIT-6 score was 65.3 (SD = 6.0), with 86% reporting severe migraine impact (HIT-6: ≥60). MIBS-4 was correlated with the HIT-6 (r = 0.37), MMD and MHD (both r = 0.27). The HIT-6, MMD, MHD, CGRP mAb treatment, and depression all had an independent positive association with the MIBS-4.ConclusionTwo-thirds of the study sample reported substantial interictal burden. Whilst interictal burden was associated with migraine frequency and impact of migraine attacks, study results also show it represented a distinct aspect of the overall disease burden. Study findings further indicate unique associations between interictal burden and depression. A unique positive association between interictal burden and CGRP mAb treatment suggests a remaining unmet need among people affected by migraine treated with CGRP mAb.

Refractory Headaches.

Medication overuse headache (MOH), new daily persistent headache (NDPH), and persistent refractory headache attributed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) infection represent a significant burden in terms of disability and quality of life, and a challenge in terms of definition, pathophysiology, and treatment. Regarding MOH, prevention without withdrawal is not inferior to prevention with withdrawal. Preventive medications like topiramate, onabotulinumtoxinA, and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies improve chronic migraine with MOH regardless of withdrawal. The differential diagnosis of NDPH is broad and should be carefully examined. There are no guidelines for the treatment of NDPH, but options include a short course of steroids, nerve blocks, topiramate, nortriptyline, gabapentin, CGRP monoclonal antibodies, and onabotulinumtoxinA. The persistence of headache 3 months after SARS-CoV2 infection is a predictor of poor prognosis.

Health care resource utilization and costs associated with treatment among patients initiating calcitonin gene-related peptide inhibitors vs other preventive migraine treatments in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on health care resource utilization (HCRU) and health care costs of calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) for preventive treatment of migraine. OBJECTIVE: To compare all-cause and migraine-related HCRU and direct health care costs in patients with migraine initiating CGRP mAbs, galcanezumab (GMB), vs standard-of-care (SOC) preventive treatments in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective observational study used insurance claims data collected from IBM MarketScan Research Databases. Adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with 1 or more claims for CGRP mAb (GMB, erenumab, or fremanezumab) or SOC preventive treatment between May 1, 2018, and June 30, 2019, were included. The date of earliest migraine treatment claim during this period was the index date. Annual all-cause and migraine-related HCRU included inpatient visits, emergency department visits, and acute and preventive migraine medication fills. After matching, HCRU and costs at 6- and 12-month follow-up in CGRP mAb, specifically GMB, vs SOC cohorts were analyzed using paired t-test and chi-square test. RESULTS: In the 12-month follow-up study, 4,528 patients using CGRP mAb (GMB, n = 426) and 10,897 patients using SOC were included. After matching, 3,082 pairs were identified in the CGRP mAb and SOC cohorts and 421 pairs in the GMB and SOC cohorts. After matching, all variables were well balanced across cohorts. At 12-month follow-up, the percentage decrease in acute and preventive migraine medication fills was significantly greater in the CGRP mAb (acute: -1.5% vs -0.2%, P < 0.001; preventive: -1.1% vs 3.8, P < 0.001) and GMB cohorts (acute: -1.5% vs -0.2%, P = 0.002; preventive: -1.8 vs 3.0, P < 0.001) compared with the SOC cohort. At follow-up, compared with the SOC cohort, the mean change of annual all-cause total costs was significantly higher in both the CGRP mAb ($6,043 vs $1,323, P < 0.001) and GMB cohorts ($8,398 vs $68, P < 0.001), and the mean change of annual migraine-related total costs was significantly higher in both the CGRP mAb ($3,416 vs $976, P < 0.001) and GMB cohorts ($4,334 vs $1,245, P < 0.001). Significant cost savings in mean acute and preventive migraine prescription costs occurred in both the CGRP mAb (acute: -$358 vs -$80, P < 0.001; preventive: -$298 vs $1,376, P < 0.001) and GMB cohorts (acute: -$280 vs -$36, P = 0.034; preventive: -$374 vs $1,537, P < 0.001) compared with the SOC cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although treatment with CGRP mAbs and GMB increase total costs, they may lead to significantly greater cost savings in outpatient acute and preventive migraine medication costs vs SOC. Further studies assessing indirect health care costs are important to understand additional cost savings with CGRP mAbs. DISCLOSURES: Drs Varnado, Ye, and Schuh are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Wenzel is a former employee of Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Manjelievskaia is an employee of IBM Watson Health. Ms Perry is a former employee of IBM Watson Health. This study was sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company. IBM Watson Health received funding for this study from Eli Lilly and Company. Independent analyses were conducted by IBM Watson Health. Eli Lilly and Company and IBM Watson Health collaborated on designing the study and interpreting results.

Efficacy of Fremanezumab In Resistant and Refractory Chronic Migraine Patients: Real-World Data from The Hull Migraine Clinic, Uk

Background Fremanezumab is an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody efficacious for chronic migraine prophylaxis. We evaluated real-world prophylactic efficacy of fremanezumab for refractory and resistant chronic migraine in a United Kingdom specialist headache centre (Hull Migraine Clinic). Materials and Methods 289 adult patients with resistant and refractory chronic migraine commenced fremanezumab with prospective follow-up, maintaining headache diaries for ≥1-month pre-fremanezumab initiation and continuously thereafter. Patients failed 6 median previous prophylactics. We measured monthly headache days, migraine days, headache-free days, analgesia medication days, triptan days and Headache Impact Test-6 scores at baseline and during treatment. Results All outcomes significantly improved in results of 182 patients at 4-month follow-up (p&lt;0.0001), with reduced median monthly headache days (by 9 days), migraine days (by 10 days) and Headache Impact Test-6 (by 14.5 points). 80% patients achieved ≥30% migraine reduction, whilst 68% and 42% patients achieved &gt;50% and &gt;75% reduction. 58%, 39% and 17% patients achieved ≥30%, &gt;50% and &gt;75% headache day reduction. OnabotulinumtoxinA-unresponsive patients exhibited substantial responses, with 78%, 66% and 39% patients achieving ≥30%, &gt;50% and &gt;75% migraine reduction. Medication-overuse did not affect responses. 45% patients achieved &lt;15 headache days in any month, and 65% achieved &lt;8 migraine days in any month. 37% achieved both outcomes. In multivariate analyses, baseline headache-freedom and lower Headache Impact Test-6 score associated with ≥30% migraine reduction (p&lt;0.05), whilst baseline headache-freedom and lower migraine-days associated with achieving &lt;15 headache days in any month (p&lt;0.01). Conclusion Fremanezumab demonstrates real-world efficacy at 4 months in resistant and refractorychronic migraine, including in OnabotulinumtoxinA-unresponsive patients, irrespective of medication-overuse. Baseline headache-freedom, lower migrainedays and lower Headache Impact Test-6 score heralded superior responses.

Cardiovascular Disease and Migraine: Are the New Treatments Safe?

The authors present data on cardiovascular safety for the new acute and preventive migraine treatments including ditans, gepants, and calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) alongside older medications like triptans and ergotamines. The authors conclude that there are no cardiovascular safety concerns for lasmiditan, and that it could be used in those with cardiovascular disease. In fact, the literature even suggests that triptans are safer in cardiovascular disease than their contraindications may suggest. At this time, there is insufficient evidence that gepants and CGRP mAbs should be contraindicated in those with cardiovascular disease including stroke or myocardial infarction, though erenumab has now been associated with hypertension. Vasodilation may be an important CGRP-mediated mechanism mid-ischemia especially in patients with small vessel disease; hence, CGRP antagonists should be use with caution in this context. Long-term data is still needed, and prescribers should ensure patients are aware of the limitations of our knowledge at this time, while still offering these effective and well-tolerated treatment options.

Patient characteristics and treatment utilization among patients with migraine initiating self-injectable calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody and novel acute medication

Objective This study describes patient characteristics and utilization of recently approved novel acute medication and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies. Methods This retrospective observational study utilized the IBM MarketScan Research Database and Optum’s Clinformatics Data Mart from May 2017 through December 2020 (index period). Adult patients initiating self-injectable CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab) and novel acute migraine medications (lasmiditan, rimegepant, ubrogepant) with: (a) ≥3 months overlap between the index medication and second medication initiated along with it; (b) ≥1 claim for migraine diagnosis; and (c) continuous medical and pharmacy benefits 12 months pre- and 3 months post-index were included. Data are presented descriptively. Results A total of 2840 patients from the MarketScan database and 657 patients from the Optum database were included. Identified patients’ (MarketScan/Optum) mean age was 44.7/51.2 years; they were mostly women (88.8%/87.7%); a majority had a chronic migraine diagnosis (64.4%/71.4%) and were prescribed both preventive and acute treatments for migraine in the pre-index period. Most patients received a combination of both preventive and acute medications binding CGRP receptors (43.6%/59.0%) or preventive medication binding CGRP ligands and acute medication binding CGRP receptors (51.9%/34.9%). Mean (SD) number of days of concomitant use of CGRP and novel acute medications were: MarketScan, 29.1 (18.7); Optum, 31.8 (20.4). Prescribing patterns were similar across healthcare provider types within each database. Conclusions Understanding patient characteristics and treatment utilization patterns among patients prescribed both a CGRP mAb and novel acute medication may provide valuable insight regarding migraine treatment selection for healthcare decision makers.

Migraine With Comorbid Depression: Pathogenesis, Clinical Implications, and Treatment.

Migraine is a neurological disorder that strongly relates to psychiatric conditions like depression. Lately, the increased prevalence of depression in migraineurs has come to attention. This article compiled various literature to explore the association between migraine and depression. Genetic overlap of various gene segments was studied, and heritability patterns were explored. Shared mechanisms such as serotonergic dysfunction, methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) polymorphisms, and hormonal effects were investigated, and commonalities like comorbidities, stress, and environmental factors were analyzed. Migraine with comorbid depression (MID) affects various aspects of life and its clinical impact on migraine disability, quality of life (QOL), progression, and medication overuse was investigated. We further inspected several types of research in order to provide options on various treatment modalities. Pharmacotherapy such as antidepressants and anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies like fremanezumab were studied. Alternative treatment options such as onabotulinumtoxinA (OBTA) injections, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and vagal nerve stimulations (VNS) were also appraised and the efficacies of each were compared.

Real-World experience of interictal burden and treatment in migraine: a qualitative interview study.

BackgroundThe debilitating nature of migraine attacks is widely established; however, less is known about how the interictal burden (i.e., how patients are affected in-between migraine episodes) of migraine impacts on patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQL). Acute and preventive treatments may lift the burden of the disease, but they often have unwanted side effects and limited effectiveness. The objective of this study was to understand the interictal burden of migraines, from the patient perspective, and to explore patient experience with migraine treatments.MethodsParticipants (n=35) with a self-reported diagnosis of migraine were recruited in the US, UK and Canada, including a subgroup of patients who had taken calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody (CGRP mAb) treatment for at least three months. Participants completed a background questionnaire, followed by a semi-structured interview via telephone or video call. The interviews explored patients’ migraine symptoms, perception of interictal burden and treatment experience. The interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsThe most reported migraine symptom was migraine pain, followed by aura, sensory sensitivity and nausea. Most participants reported interictal impact on HRQL, lifestyle changes they made to avoid triggers or in anticipation of an attack, impacts on work, career, daily activities and relationships. Emotional impacts were reported by all participants, including anger, depression, anxiety and hopelessness. Many participants who took preventive treatments reported improvements in HRQL and functioning but still experienced breakthrough attacks. Among patients who took CGRP mAbs, participants noted varying consistency of treatment effectiveness between treatment administrations.ConclusionThis study detailed the additional HRQL impact of migraine in-between migraine attacks and described the unmet need for effective treatment options to prevent and mitigate migraine attacks.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01429-5.

Rapid resolution of migraine symptoms after initiating the preventive treatment eptinezumab during a migraine attack: results from the randomized RELIEF trial

BackgroundEptinezumab is an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. In the phase 3 RELIEF study, eptinezumab resulted in shorter time to headache pain freedom and time to absence of most bothersome symptom (MBS; including nausea, photophobia, or phonophobia) compared with placebo when administered during a migraine attack. The objective of this exploratory analysis was to examine the earliest time points that eptinezumab separated from placebo (P < .05) on headache- and migraine-associated symptoms when administered during a migraine attack.MethodsRELIEF, a multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind trial, occurred from November 7, 2019, through July 8, 2020. Adults considered candidates for preventive treatment were randomized to eptinezumab 100 mg (N = 238) or placebo (N = 242) administered intravenously over 30 min within 1–6 h of migraine onset. Outcome measures included headache pain freedom/relief and absence of MBS, patient’s choice of photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at regular intervals from 0.5 to 48 h after infusion start. Censoring was applied at time of acute rescue medication use.ResultsAt hour 1, more eptinezumab-treated patients achieved headache pain freedom (9.7%), headache pain relief (38.7%), and absence of MBS (33.2%) versus placebo (4.1%, 26.9%, and 22.1%, respectively; P < .05 all), with separation from placebo (P < .05) through hour 48. Eptinezumab separated from placebo (P < .05) at hour 1 in absence-of-photophobia (29.4% vs 17.0%) and absence-of-phonophobia (41.2% vs 27.2%) and through hour 48. Initial separation from placebo (P < .05) in absence-of-nausea occurred at end-of-infusion (0.5 h; 36.7% vs 25.4%, respectively).ConclusionPreventive treatment with eptinezumab initiated during a migraine attack resulted in more patients achieving headache pain freedom/relief and absence of MBS, with separation from placebo (P < .05) as early as 0.5–1 h following the start of infusion. Rapid resolution of headache- and migraine-associated symptoms by a peripherally acting, intravenously administered antibody suggest a peripheral site of pharmacological action for CGRP blockade.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04152083.

Characterization of erenumab and rimegepant on calcitonin gene-related peptide induced responses in Xenopus Laevis oocytes expressing the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor and the amylin-1 receptor

BackgroundThe clinical use of calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP-R) antagonists and monoclonal antibodies against CGRP and CGRP-R has offered new treatment possibilities for migraine patients. CGRP activates both the CGRP-R and structurally related amylin 1 receptor (AMY1-R). The relative effect of erenumab and the small-molecule CGRP-R antagonist, rimegepant, towards the CGRP-R and AMY-R needs to be further characterized.MethodsThe effect of CGRP and two CGRP-R antagonists were examined in Xenopus laevis oocytes expressing human CGRP-R, human AMY1-R and their subunits.ResultsCGRP administered to receptor expressing oocytes induced a concentration-dependent increase in current with the order of potency CGRP-R> > AMY1-R > calcitonin receptor (CTR). There was no effect on single components of the CGRP-R; calcitonin receptor-like receptor and receptor activity-modifying protein 1. Amylin was only effective on AMY1-R and CTR. Inhibition potencies (pIC50 values) for erenumab on CGRP induced currents were 10.86 and 9.35 for CGRP-R and AMY1-R, respectively. Rimegepant inhibited CGRP induced currents with pIC50 values of 11.30 and 9.91 for CGRP-R and AMY1-R, respectively.ConclusionOur results demonstrate that erenumab and rimegepant are potent antagonists of CGRP-R and AMY1-R with 32- and 25-times preference for the CGRP-R over the AMY1-R, respectively. It is discussed if this difference in affinity between the two receptors is the likely reason why constipation is a common and serious adverse effect during CGRP-R antagonism but less so with CGRP binding antibodies.

Erenumab in chronic migraine: Experience from a UK tertiary centre and comparison with other real-world evidence.

Background and purposeChronic migraine is a highly disabling primary headache disorder that is the most common diagnosis of patients seen at tertiary headache centres. Typical oral preventive therapies are associated with many limitations that impact their therapeutic utility. Erenumab was the first available calcitonin gene‐related peptide monoclonal antibody in the UK. It had proven efficacy in migraine prevention in clinical trials and limited real‐world data in tertiary settings.MethodsWe audited our first 92 patients (n = 73 females) with severely disabling chronic migraine who were given monthly erenumab 70 mg sc for 6 months between December 2018 and December 2019.ResultsAt 3 months, monthly migraine days were significantly reduced by a median of 4 days, and all other variables also showed significant improvement. The improvement was not affected by baseline analgesic use status. More than half of our patients experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in migraine days. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionsOur real‐world data with erenumab demonstrate it is effective and well tolerated in managing patients with chronic migraine in a tertiary care setting.

Treatment Satisfaction and Optimization With Real-World Use of Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Combination With an Anti-Calcitonin Gene–Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Preventive: Results From the COURAGE Study (P10-2.001)

Treatment Satisfaction and Optimization With Real-World Use of Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Combination With an Anti-Calcitonin Gene–Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Preventive: Results From the COURAGE Study (P10-2.001)

Real-World Effectiveness of Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine When Used in Combination With an Anti-Calcitonin Gene–Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Preventive: Results From the COURAGE Study (P10-2.003)

Real-World Effectiveness of Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine When Used in Combination With an Anti-Calcitonin Gene–Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody Preventive: Results From the COURAGE Study (P10-2.003)

Evaluation of Headache Profiles in Pediatric Patients Pre and Post Participation in Anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody (Anti-CGRP mAb) Studies (P1-2.003)

Evaluation of Headache Profiles in Pediatric Patients Pre and Post Participation in Anti-Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Monoclonal Antibody (Anti-CGRP mAb) Studies (P1-2.003)

Atogepant: an emerging treatment for migraine

ABSTRACT Introduction Until recently, only nonspecific and not always well-tolerated medications were available for migraine prophylaxis. Currently, specific drugs such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies and second-generation gepants are marketed for migraine treatment. Atogepant, an orally active small molecule, is a potent, selective antagonist of the CGRP receptor and is the only gepant authorized exclusively for episodic migraine prophylaxis in adults. Areas covered Using literature obtained from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov (up to February 13rd, 2022), the authors summarize and evaluate the available data on atogepant for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine. Expert opinion From pivotal trials, the efficacy and tolerability of atogepant in episodic migraine prophylaxis seem comparable to those of CGRP monoclonal antibodies, even if comparative studies have not been conducted. To date, limited information is available on atogepant, including the optimal dose and duration of therapy; hence, it is difficult to establish whether it could be a first-line drug for migraine prophylaxis. Furthermore, it is important to evaluate if atogepant use is associated with the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, which could result from potent and persistent blockade of vasodilation by CGRP.

Real-world efficacy of galcanezumab for the treatment of migraine in Korean patients

We aimed to provide real-world data on the effectiveness of an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody administered for treating migraine in Korean patients. We prospectively recruited patients with migraine who received galcanezumab treatment at a single university hospital from June 2020 to April 2021. The treatment response was assessed after three consecutive monthly injections. A 50% responder rate was evaluated based on ≥50% reduction in the number of moderate/severe headache days. Overall, 87 patients were included in the analysis. Most patients were women (83.9%). They had a mean age of 41.7 ± 12.3 years (range 17-72). Sixty-five patients (74.7%) had chronic migraine, 35 patients (40.2%) had a history of medication-overuse headache, and 32 patients (36.8%) were previously unresponsive to or found intolerable five classes of preventive medication. After three months of treatment, mean changes in numbers of monthly headache days, moderate/severe headache days, crystal clear days, and days of acute medication use were -7.2 ± 8.43, -4.3 ± 9.76, 7.3 ± 8.50, and -4.1 ± 7.93, respectively. The 50% responder rates were 58.3%, 44.2%, and 40.6% for patients with unsuccessful previous use of 0-1, 2-4, and 5 preventive medication classes, respectively. Headache Impact Test-6 and Migraine Disability Assessment Test scores also decreased (-4.4 ± 8.09 and -32.9 ± 77.04, respectively). In our cohort, the effectiveness and safety of galcanezumab were comparable with those reported in clinical trials, whereas a higher response rate was observed in the difficult-to-treat patient subset than that reported in trials. We provide real-world evidence of galcanezumab treatment benefits in Asian patients with migraine.