Monthly Headache Research Articles

Reduction in migraine-associated burden after eptinezumab treatment in patients with chronic migraine.

ObjectiveTo examine changes in the occurrence, severity, and symptoms of headache episodes in patients with chronic migraine following eptinezumab treatment.MethodsPROMISE-2 was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial that randomized adults with chronic migraine to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo IV every 12 weeks for up to 24 weeks (2 infusions). Headache episodes (migraine and non-migraine) and their characteristics were reported in daily electronic diaries during the 28-day baseline and throughout the 24-week treatment period.ResultsA total of 1072 patients were included in this post hoc analysis. Mean monthly headache days decreased by 8.9 (100 mg) and 9.7 (300 mg) compared to a 7.3 decrease in placebo over the first 4-week interval post initial dose and reductions were maintained throughout the 24-week treatment period. Mean monthly headache episodes also decreased by 8.4 (100 mg) and 9.0 (300 mg) compared to a decrease of 7.1 with placebo. The proportion of headache episodes that were migraine attacks decreased by 11.2% (100 mg), 12.4% (300 mg), and 3.9% (placebo), and among remaining headaches decreases in severe pain, nausea, phonophobia, photophobia, and physical activity limitations were numerically greater than placebo.ConclusionsPatients with chronic migraine treated with eptinezumab decreased the monthly severity and frequency of headache days and episodes more than placebo. Beyond decreased headache frequency, patients treated with eptinezumab reported a reduction in the percent of remaining headache episodes that were migraine attacks, as well as a decrease in burdensome symptoms of headache episodes, indicating additional decreased headache severity after eptinezumab treatment.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02974153; registered November 23, 2016.

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.

A retrospective evaluation of the combination of erenumab and onabotulinum toxin A for the prevention of chronic migraine

ObjectivePrior to the approval of erenumab, onabotulinum toxin A (onabot A) was the only Food and Drug Administration-approved chronic migraine preventive treatment. In this study, we assess the safety and efficacy of the combination of erenumab and onabot A for chronic migraine prevention. MethodsThis is a retrospective cohort study of patients with a diagnosis of chronic migraine receiving onabot A, who were additionally started on erenumab. Primary endpoint was a decrease in number of migraine days while on the combination treatment as compared to onabot A alone. Secondary endpoints included a decrease in headache days and reported side effects. ResultsWhen erenumab was added to onabot A, participants (n = 50) experienced significantly lower number of monthly migraine days (11.3 ± 9.3 vs. 14.9 ± 9.4, p < 0.001). The treatment of onabot A and erenumab also significantly lowered the number of monthly headache days (18.2 ± 10.3 vs. 20.7 ± 9.1, p = 0.042). There were no “severe” adverse effects reported in the combined treatment group. ConclusionThis retrospective case series showed a reduction in monthly migraine and headache days with the treatment combination of erenumab and onabot A compared to onabot A alone in patients with chronic migraine.

Treatment satisfaction with calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies as a new patient-reported outcome measure: A real-life experience in migraine.

To evaluate treatment satisfaction with galcanezumab as a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in migraine. Patients with ≥8 headache days/month that had failed at ≥3medications were included. Demographic and medical history were collected. Patient´s satisfaction (effectiveness, safety, convenience, and global satisfaction [GS]) was assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version 1.4 (TSQM-1.4©). We included 30 patients with migraine (76.7% chronic migraine). After 12weeks of galcanezumab treatment, median monthly headache days (MHDs) decreased 11.5 (IQR 14.0) and median monthly migraine days (MMDs) 9.0 (IQR 7.5); at 24weeks, the change was 15.0 (IQR 12.0) and 8.0days (IQR 6.0). HIT-6 score decreased from 68.0 (IQR 7.5) to 54.0 (IQR 9.5) at 12weeks (p<.001) and to 52.0 (IQR12.0) at 24weeks (p<.001) and MIDAS from 60.0 (IQR 62.7) to 25.5 (IQR 41.2, p=.004) and 7.0 (IQR 18.5, p<.001), respectively. TSQM-1.4© at 12weeks was higher compared to other preventive therapy in effectiveness (80.6/50.4, p<.001), convenience (83.3/66.7, p=.001), and GS (78.6/50.0, p<.001). These rates of satisfaction were similar at 24weeks of galcanezumab treatment. Reductions in HIT-6 (r=-.444, p=.014), MIDAS (r=-.423, p=.020), MMDs (r=-.515, p=.004), and MHDs (r=-.477, p=.008) were associated significantly with GS at 12weeks. This correlation was significantly associated with changes in HIT-6 and MHDs at 24weeks. The results of this study suggest that migraine patients receiving galcanezumab are significantly more satisfied compared to other preventive therapies, associating treatment GS with meaningful reductions in frequency, impact, and disability caused by migraine.

Effectiveness and safety of erenumab and galcanezumab in the prevention of chronic and episodic migraine: A retrospective cohort study.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE?: Erenumab and galcanezumab have shown great results for migraine prevention. However, strict inclusion criteria, absence of concomitant medication and selective outcome report of clinical trials may sometimes be barely representative of the real-world daily practice. Therefore, this study was designed to evaluate effectiveness and safety of these two monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide in real-world patients. METHODS: This observational, retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of erenumab 140mg and galcanezumab 120mg in 142 real-world patients who had previously not responded to three well-established pharmacological alternatives for migraine prevention. To do so, a combination of objective parameters (monthly headache days and acute migraine-specific medication days) and subjective measurements (Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire, Headache Impact Test and Visual Analogue Scale), validated for clinical research in migraine, were assessed during clinical interview. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Findings here reported show that erenumab and galcanezumab reduced monthly headache days, acute migraine specific medication days per month, Headache Impact Test score, Migraine Disability Assessment Test score and Visual Analogue Scale score after 3 and 6 doses (p<0.01). Additionally, more than 25% of the patients enrolled in the study experienced a reduction by a half in monthly headache days, and more than 50% of the patients also reported a reduction by a half in the number of migraine specific medication days. Both treatments exhibited a great safety profile, rarely leading to discontinuation because of poor tolerance. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS?: Altogether, these results support previous real-life studies regarding effectiveness and safety and provide an interesting insight in how these preventive therapies are also effective in patients diagnosed with difficult to treat migraine who have previously failed, at least, three different drug classes stablished by current neurology guidelines for migraine prevention. Moreover, these data may suggest that erenumab and galcanezumab are able to not only diminish frequency, but also migraine intensity, and that it should be also considered as an effectiveness measure in line with other authors suggestion.

Detoxification vs non-detoxification before starting an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody in medication overuse headache

BackgroundMedication overuse headache significantly contributes to the chronification process and treatment refractoriness of migraine. Currently, abrupt discontinuation of the overused medication still represents the best management strategy for these patients, challenging public health system resources.MethodsIn this prospective study, chronic migraine and medication overuse headache sufferers with at least 28 days of analgesic consumption per month were included. Assessment of efficacy outcomes at three months were compared among patients who underwent in-hospital abrupt discontinuation of overused acute medication (YES-DETOX group) and patients who did not (NO-DETOX group) before starting an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody.ResultsOf 401 patients who received either erenumab or galcanezumab, 28% (n = 111) satisfied inclusion criteria (YES-DETOX n = 28; NO-DETOX n = 83). After three months of treatment, 59% (n = 65; 47/83 YES-DETOX; 18/28 NO-DETOX) patients reverted from medication overuse headache and 51% (n = 57; 42/83 YES-DETOX; 15/28 NO-DEOTX) achieved ≥50% reduction in monthly headache days; yet no statistical differences were observed between the two groups (p = 0.4788 and p = 0.8393, respectively). Monthly consumption of pain medication was the only baseline prognostic factor in multivariate analysis in the overall cohort (p = 0.016).ConclusionOur results support the emerging evidence that anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies may be effective in medication overuse headache patients irrespective of detoxification, yet further studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions.

Diagnosis, consultation, treatment, and impact of migraine in the US: Results of the OVERCOME (US) study.

ObjectiveThe ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care of MigrainE (OVERCOME; United States) study is a multicohort, longitudinal web survey that assesses symptomatology, consulting, diagnosis, treatment, and impact of migraine in the United States.BackgroundRegularly updating population‐based views of migraine in the United States provides a method for assessing the quality of ongoing migraine care and identifying unmet needs.MethodsThe OVERCOME (US) 2018 migraine cohort involved: (I) creating a demographically representative sample of US adults using quota sampling (n = 97,478), (II) identifying people with active migraine in the past year via a validated migraine diagnostic questionnaire and/or self‐reported medical diagnosis of migraine (n = 24,272), and (III) assessing consultation, diagnosis, and treatment of migraine (n = 21,143). The current manuscript evaluated whether those with low frequency episodic migraine (LFEM; 0–3 monthly headache days) differed from other categories on outcomes of interest.ResultsAmong the migraine cohort (n = 21,143), 19,888 (94.1%) met our International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition‐based case definition of migraine and 12,905 (61.0%) self‐reported a medical diagnosis of migraine. Respondents’ mean (SD) age was 42.2 (15.0) years; 15,697 (74.2%) were women. Having at least moderate disability was common (n = 8965; 42.4%) and around half (n = 10,783; 51.0%) had consulted a medical professional for migraine care in the past year. Only 4792 (22.7%) of respondents were currently using a triptan. Overall, 8539 (40.4%) were eligible for migraine preventive medication and 3555 (16.8%) were currently using migraine preventive medication. Those with LFEM differed from moderate and high frequency episodic migraine and chronic migraine on nearly all measures of consulting, diagnosis, and treatment.ConclusionThe OVERCOME (US) 2018 cohort revealed slow but steady progress in diagnosis and preventive treatment of migraine. However, despite significant impact among the population, many with migraine have unmet needs related to consulting for migraine, migraine diagnosis, and getting potentially beneficial migraine treatment. Moreover, it demonstrated the heterogeneity and varying unmet needs within episodic migraine.

Real-World Evidence for the Safety and Efficacy of CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment for Migraine Prevention in Adult Patients With Chronic Migraine.

Background: OnabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) target different migraine pathways, therefore, combination treatment may provide additional effectiveness for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM) than either treatment alone. The objective of this study was to collect real-world data to improve the understanding of the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of adding a CGRP mAb to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment for the preventive treatment of CM.Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal study conducted using data extracted from a single clinical site's electronic medical records (EMR) of adult patients (≥18 years) with CM treated with ≥2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA before ≥1 month of continuous onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAb (erenumab, fremanezumab, or galcanezumab) combination treatment. Safety was evaluated by the rate of adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE). The proportion of patients who discontinued either onabotulinumtoxinA, a CGRP mAb, or combination treatment, and the reason for discontinuation, if available, was collected. The effectiveness of combination preventive treatment was assessed by the reduction in monthly headache days (MHD). Outcome data were extracted from EMR at the first CGRP mAb prescription (index) and up to four assessments at ~3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-index. The final analyses were based on measures consistently reported in the EMR.Results: EMR were collected for 192 patients, of which 148 met eligibility criteria and were included for analysis. Erenumab was prescribed to 56.7% of patients, fremanezumab to 42.6%, and galcanezumab to 0.7%. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) MHD were 20.4 (6.6) prior to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment and 14.0 (6.9) prior to the addition of a CGRP mAb (baseline). After real-world addition of a CGRP mAb, there were significant reductions in MHD at the first assessment (~3 months) (mean −2.6 days/month, 95% CI −3.7, −1.4) and at all subsequent visits. After ~12 months of continuous combination treatment, MHD were reduced by 4.6 days/month (95% CI −6.7, −2.5) and 34.9% of patients achieved ≥50% MHD reduction from index. AEs were reported by 18 patients (12.2%), with the most common being constipation (n = 8, 5.4% [onabotulinumtoxinA plus erenumab only]) and injection site reactions (n = 5, 3.4%). No SAEs were reported. Overall, 90 patients (60.8%) discontinued one or both treatments. The most common reason for discontinuing either treatment was lack of insurance coverage (40%); few (~14%) patients discontinued a CGRP mAb and none discontinued onabotulinumtoxinA due to safety/tolerability.Conclusion: In this real-world study, onabotulinumtoxinA was effective at reducing MHD and the addition of a CGRP mAb was safe, well-tolerated and associated with incremental and clinically meaningful reductions in MHD for those who stayed on the combination treatment. No new safety signals were identified. Of those who discontinued, the majority reported lack of insurance coverage as a reason. Prospective real-world and controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the safety and potential benefits of this combination treatment paradigm for people with CM.

POSB26 Real-World Effectiveness of Fremanezumab Treatment for Reducing Monthly Migraine and Headache Days in US Patients Having Different Numbers of PRIOR Migraine Preventive Treatment Failures

This physician chart review assessed the effectiveness of fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), in reducing monthly migraine days (MMD) and monthly headache days (MHD) in patients with different numbers of prior migraine preventive treatment failures (<2 and ≥2 failures) over 6 months.

Predictors of clinical response to erenumab in patients with migraine

Background: Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies have emerged as efficacious preventive therapies for some, but not all patients with migraine. It is not yet fully understood what predicts treatment response. Objective: To identify factors associated with good or poor response to erenumab, the first available CGRP monoclonal antibody. Methods: A chart review of patients with migraine from a large headache center who received at least three 4-weekly doses of erenumab between 2018 and 2020 was conducted. Clinical variables were compared between erenumab responders (defined as ≥30% reduction in monthly headache or migraine days at 3 months) and non-responders via logistic regression analyses. Results: Among 90 enrolled patients, 62.2% were erenumab responders and 37.8% non-responders. A significantly larger proportion of non-responders were unemployed (58.8% vs. 28.6%), had complex diagnosis (chronic migraine overlapping another primary or secondary headache) (47.1% vs. 14.3%), higher monthly headache days (30 vs. 25.5) and migraine days (20 vs. 12), a higher frequency of daily headache (76.5% vs. 48.2%), and failed more preventive therapies (5.5 vs. 3). Based on logistic regressions, erenumab responsiveness did not significantly associate with duration of migraine, presence of aura, medication overuse, number of concurrent preventives, response to onabotulinumtoxinA or triptans, or certain comorbidities and substance use. Conclusions: This work may help improve selection of patients who may benefit from erenumab, but further prospective research studies are needed.

Gender Differences in 3-Month Outcomes of Erenumab Treatment-Study on Efficacy and Safety of Treatment With Erenumab in Men.

Objective: We reported gender-specific data on the efficacy and safety of erenumab, a monoclonal antibody antagonizing the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor.Methods: Our pooled patient-level analysis of real-world data included patients treated with erenumab and followed up for 12 weeks. We considered the following outcomes at weeks 9–12 of treatment compared with baseline: 0–29%, 30–49%, 50–75%, and ≥75% responder rates, according to the decrease in monthly headache days (MHDs), rate of treatment stopping, change in MHDs, monthly migraine days (MMDs), monthly days of acute medication and triptan use, and Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) score from baseline to weeks 9–12. Outcomes were compared between men and women by the chi-squared test or t-test, as appropriate. An analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed to identify factors influencing the efficacy outcomes.Results: We included 1,410 patients from 16 centers, of which 256 (18.2%) were men. Men were older than women and had a lower number of MHDs at baseline. At weeks 9–12, compared with baseline, 46 (18.0%) men had a ≥75% response, 75 (29.3%) had a 50–74% response, 35 (13.7%) had a 30–49% response, and 86 (33.6%) had a 0–29% response, while 14 (5.5%) stopped the treatment. The corresponding numbers for women were 220 (19.1%), 314 (27.2%), 139 (12.0%), 402 (34.8%), and 79 (6.8%). No gender difference was found in any of the outcomes. The ANCOVA showed that gender did not influence the efficacy of outcomes.Conclusion: We found that erenumab is equally safe and effective in men compared with women after 12 weeks.

Erenumab for Migraine Prevention in a 1-Year Compassionate Use Program: Efficacy, Tolerability, and Differences Between Clinical Phenotypes.

During a 1-year compassionate use program, 156 patients with migraine self-administered a monthly dose of erenumab 140 mg with a subcutaneous autoinjector. Main inclusion criteria were: ≥ 4 migraine days/month and ≥two prior prophylactic treatment failures. The patients covered the migraine severity spectrum from episodic migraine (EM) (n = 80) to chronic migraine (CM) (n = 76). During the 3rd month of treatment, monthly headache days decreased by 45.7% in EM and 35.5% in CM. The 50% responder rate for reduction in monthly headache days was significantly higher in EM (55%) than in CM (43%) (p = 0.05). In both the migraine subgroups, the clinical improvement vs. baseline was already significant during the 1st month of treatment (p < 0.001). There were also significant reductions in mean headache severity, duration, and monthly days with acute drug intake. The 30% responder rate at 3 months was 60% in CM and 54.1% of patients reversed from CM to EM. The therapeutic effect was maintained at 12 months when 50% responder rates, considering discontinuation for lack of efficacy or adverse effects as 0% response, still were 51% in EM and 41% in CM. A total of 10 patients with EM (12.5%) and 23 patients with CM (30.3%) had discontinued treatment, considering the treatment as ineffective. At 3 months, 48% of patients reported non-serious adverse events among which the most frequent was constipation (20.5%); corresponding figures at 12 months were 30 and 15%. Discontinuation due to an adverse effect for the entire 12 month period was rare (3.8%). The lower efficacy in CM than in EM was mainly due to a very low 50% responder rate in patients with CM with continuous pain (13%) as compared to CM with pain-free periods (58%) (p < 0.001). Similarly, the 50% responder rate was lower in patients with ≥two prior prophylactic treatment failures (40.5%) compared to those with two failures (70%) (p < 0.05). There was no significant efficacy difference between low (4–7 migraine days/month, n = 22) and high frequency (8–14 days, n = 59) EM nor between patients with CM with (n = 50) or without (n = 26) acute medication overuse. Erenumab had no effect on the frequency of auras. Taken together, erenumab 140 mg monthly was highly effective for migraine prophylaxis over the whole severity spectrum of the disease, except in patients with continuous headaches. Its effect is significant after the first injection, quasi-maximal after the second injection, and does not wear off after 12 months. The most frequent adverse effect was constipation. These results are compared to those published for erenumab in the pivotal randomized placebo-controlled trials and to those reported in several recent real-world studies.

Burden of Migraine in Japan: Results of the ObserVational Survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment, and Care Of MigrainE (OVERCOME [Japan]) Study.

IntroductionThe ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment, and Care Of MigrainE study in Japan (OVERCOME [Japan]) assessed the impact and burden of migraine in Japan.MethodsOVERCOME (Japan) was a cross-sectional, observational, population-based web survey of Japanese people with migraine conducted between July and September 2020. The burden and impact of migraine were assessed using the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MSQ), Migraine Interictal Burden Scale (MIBS-4), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-Migraine scale. Results were stratified by average number of monthly headache days (0–3, 4–7, 8–14, ≥ 15).ResultsIn total, 17,071 Japanese people with migraine completed the survey. Of these, 14,033 (82.2%) met International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition criteria for migraine and 9667 (56.6%) reported a physician diagnosis of migraine. Overall, 20.7% of respondents experienced moderate-to-severe disability (MIDAS). Moderate-to-severe interictal burden (MIBS-4) was experienced by 41.5% of respondents. MSQ scores in all domains were lowest in respondents with the most frequent headaches (≥ 15 monthly headache days) and highest in those with the lowest frequency headaches (≤ 3 monthly headache days), indicating poorer quality of life in those with more frequent headaches. Work time missed due to migraine (absenteeism) increased with increasing headache frequency, from 3.8 to 6.2%; presenteeism affected 29.8–49.9% of work time. Although migraine burden was greatest in people with the most frequent headaches, those with the lowest headache frequency still experienced substantial disability, interictal burden, and impacts on productivity and quality of life. There was also substantial unmet need for migraine care: 36.5% of respondents had ever hesitated to seek medical care for their headaches, and 89.8% had never used preventive medication.ConclusionIn Japan, the burden of migraine and barriers to migraine care are substantial. Improving patient awareness and healthcare provider vigilance may help improve patient outcomes.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40120-021-00305-9.

Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of Fremanezumab for Migraine Preventive Treatment in Japanese Outpatients: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study.

IntroductionEarly discontinuation and poor adherence are common limitations of conventional preventive migraine medications that limit their long-term efficacy. Therefore, a migraine preventive medication with favorable long-term safety is warranted.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of fremanezumab for the preventive treatment of chronic or episodic migraine in Japanese patients.MethodsIn this 52-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study, fremanezumab monthly or quarterly was administered in newly enrolled Japanese patients with chronic migraine or episodic migraine. Safety was assessed by monitoring of treatment-emergent adverse events, including injection-site reactions, laboratory and vital sign assessments. Newly enrolled patients and rollover patients from previous phase IIb/III trials who did not receive fremanezumab in this study were included in the immunogenicity testing cohort (n = 587). Efficacy outcomes included changes from baseline in the average monthly migraine days and headache days of at least moderate severity. Other efficacy outcomes included changes in disability scores.ResultsA total of 50 patients were enrolled with chronic migraine (monthly, n = 17; quarterly, n = 17) or episodic migraine (monthly, n = 8; quarterly, n = 8). The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events were nasopharyngitis (64.0%) and injection-site reactions (erythema, 24.0%; induration, 10.0%; pain, 8.0%; pruritus, 6.0%). The discontinuation rate was low (4.0% from adverse events, 2.0% from a lack of efficacy) and no deaths were reported. The incidence of anti-drug antibody development was low (2.4%). Fremanezumab reduced monthly migraine days and headache days of at least moderate severity from 1 month after initial administration, and this effect was maintained with no worsening throughout 12 months. Fremanezumab also led to sustained reductions in any acute headache medication use and headache-related disability at 12 months.ConclusionsFremanezumab administered monthly and quarterly was well tolerated in patients with chronic migraine and episodic migraine and led to sustained improvements in monthly migraine days and headache days of at least moderate severity throughout 12 months.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03303105.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01119-2.

Effect of antibody switch in non-responders to a CGRP receptor antibody treatment in migraine: A multi-center retrospective cohort study.

BackgroundSwitching between antibody classes might be a treatment option in migraine patients who have not responded to one class of a CGRP-(receptor) monoclonal antibody (mAb), but there are no efficacy data so far. In this real-world analysis, we assessed the treatment response to a CGRP-mAb in patients that have previously failed the CGRP-receptor-mAb erenumab.MethodsWe analyzed retrospective headache diary data of 78 patients with migraine who switched between CGRP-mAbs classes at four German headache centers either due to lack of efficacy or intolerable side effects. Among these, we identified 25 patients who did not respond to erenumab after three treatment cycles (defined as <30% reduction of monthly headache days) and had complete headache documentation at least one month before and during both treatments. We assessed the ≥30% responder rate at month three after switching from erenumab to a CGRP-mAb (galcanezumab or fremanezumab) (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints included ≥50% responder rate, monthly headache days, and monthly days with acute medication use. In an exploratory subgroup analysis patients were stratified for daily and non-daily headache.ResultsThe switch from erenumab to a CGRP-mAb led to a ≥30% response in one-third (32%) of the patients after three treatment cycles. A ≥50% response was achieved in 12% of the patients. Monthly headache days were reduced in month three compared to baseline (20.8 ± 7.1 to 17.8 ± 9.1; p = 0.009). Stratified analysis revealed that no patient with daily headache (n = 9) responded to the treatment switch, while a 30% response was achieved by 50% of patients with non-daily headache (n = 16).ConclusionOur findings demonstrate that a relevant proportion of erenumab non-responders might benefit from a treatment switch to a CGRP-mAb. Switching seems to be a promising treatment option especially in migraine patients with non-daily headache.

Resting-state occipital alpha power is associated with treatment outcome in patients with chronic migraine.

Preventive treatment is crucial for patients with chronic migraine (CM). This study explored the association between resting-state cortical oscillations and 3-month treatment outcome in patients with CM. Treatment-naïve patients with CM were recruited with their demographic data, psychosocial data, and headache profiles as well as the healthy controls (HCs). Resting-state cortical activities were recorded using an electroencephalogram and analysed using source-based and electrode-based spectral power method. The regions of interest were the bilateral primary somatosensory (S1) and visual (V1) cortices. After 3-month treatment with flunarizine, patients with CM were categorized into responders and nonresponders. Demographic, clinical, and electroencephalogram data from 72 patients with CM and 50 HCs were analysed. Elevated anxiety, depression, and stress were observed in patients with CM. Theta power in bilateral S1 and alpha and gamma powers in the right S1 increased in patients with CM. Nonresponders (n = 34) exhibited larger alpha powers in bilateral V1 than those in responders (n = 38). Alpha powers also exhibited significant correlations with changes of monthly headache days. Notably, in responders and nonresponders, occipital alpha powers did not differ at baseline and in the third month. In conclusion, patients with CM who were not responsive to preventive treatment were associated with augmented resting-state occipital alpha activity. Moreover, changes in migraine attack frequency were associated with baseline occipital alpha power. However, the prognostic feature of visual alpha oscillation seems to be inherent because it is not altered by flunarizine treatment. These findings may be useful for developing personalised migraine treatment plans.

Intracranial pressure directly predicts headache\xa0morbidity in idiopathic intracranial hypertension

ObjectiveHeadache is the predominant disabler in idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). The aim was to characterise headache and investigate the association with intracranial pressure.MethodsIIH:WT was a randomised controlled parallel group multicentre trial in the United Kingdom investigating weight management methods in IIH. Participants with active IIH (evidenced by papilloedema) and a body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m2 were recruited. At baseline, 12 months and 24 months headache characteristics and quality of life outcome measures were collected and lumbar puncture measurements were performed.ResultsSixty-six women with active IIH were included with a mean age of 32.0 years (SD ± 7.8), and mean body mass index of 43.9 ± 7.0 kg/m2. The headache phenotype was migraine-like in 90%. Headache severity correlated with ICP at baseline (r = 0.285; p = 0.024); change in headache severity and monthly headache days correlated with change in ICP at 12 months (r = 0.454, p = 0.001 and r = 0.419, p = 0.002 respectively). Cutaneous allodynia was significantly correlated with ICP at 12 months. (r = 0.479, p < 0.001). Boot strap analysis noted a positive association between ICP at 12 and 24 months and enabled prediction of both change in headache severity and monthly headache days. ICP was associated with significant improvements in quality of life (SF-36).ConclusionsWe demonstrate a positive relationship between ICP and headache and cutaneous allodynia, which has not been previously reported in IIH. Those with the greatest reduction in ICP over 12 months had the greatest reduction in headache frequency and severity; this was associated with improvement of quality of life measures.Trial registrationThis work provides Class IIa evidence of the association of raised intracranial pressure and headache. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02124486.

Efficacy of galcanezumab in patients with migraine and history of failure to 3\u20134 preventive medication categories: subgroup analysis from CONQUER study

BackgroundChronic migraine (CM) and episodic migraine (EM) are associated with substantial headache-related disability, poor quality of life and global societal burden. In this subgroup analysis from the CONQUER study, we report efficacy outcomes from a pre-specified analysis of galcanezumab versus placebo in patients with CM or EM and 3–4 prior preventive medication category failures due to inadequate efficacy (after at least 2 months at maximum tolerated dose), or safety or tolerability reasons. The patient population is of particular interest due to evidence of decreased quality of life and increased economic burden among patients with migraine that is inadequately managed and is of interest to decision-makers globally.MethodsKey outcomes included overall mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days and proportions of patients achieving ≥30% (CM), ≥50%, and ≥ 75% reduction (response rates) in monthly migraine headache days across Months 1–3. Patient functioning and disability were evaluated at Month 3.ResultsOf the 462 randomized patients, 186 (40.3%) had a history of 3–4 preventive category failures. Galcanezumab versus placebo resulted in significantly (P ≤ .001) larger overall mean reduction in monthly migraine headache days (total: − 5.49 versus − 1.03; CM: − 6.70 versus − 1.56; EM: − 3.64 versus − 0.65). Similarly, the ≥50% response rate was significantly (P ≤ .001) higher with galcanezumab versus placebo (total: 41.0 versus 12.7; CM: 41.5 versus 8.4; EM: 41.1 versus 16.5). In the CM group, the ≥30% response rate was significantly higher in the galcanezumab group than the placebo group (CM, 57.5 versus 19.8, P ≤ .0001) as was the ≥75% response rate (13.3 versus 2.6, P ≤ .05). Galcanezumab also resulted in significant (P < .0001) improvements in patient functioning and reductions in disability.ConclusionsGalcanezumab was effective in a difficult-to-treat population of patients with CM or EM who had failed 3–4 prior preventive medication categories.Trial registrationCONQUER. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03559257.

Migraine evolution after the cessation of CGRP(-receptor) antibody prophylaxis: a prospective, longitudinal cohort study

BackgroundNational and international guidelines recommend stopping migraine prophylaxis with CGRP(-receptor) monoclonal antibodies after 6–12 months of successful therapy. In this study, we aimed to analyze the course of migraine for four months after the cessation of CGRP(-receptor) antibodies use.MethodsThis longitudinal cohort study included patients with migraine who received a CGRP-(receptor) antibody for ≥8 months before treatment cessation. We analyzed headache data in the four-week period prior to mAb treatment initiation (baseline), in the month before the last mAb injection, in weeks 5–8 and 13–16 after last treatment. Primary endpoint of the study was the change of monthly migraine days from the month before last treatment to weeks 13–16. Secondary endpoints were changes in monthly headache days and monthly days with acute medication use.ResultsA total of 62 patients equally distributed between prophylaxis with the CGRP-receptor antibody erenumab and the CGRP antibodies galcanezumab or fremanezumab participated in the study. Patients reported 8.2 ± 6.6 monthly migraine days in the month before last treatment. Monthly migraine days gradually increased to 10.3 ± 6.8 in weeks 5–8 (p = 0.001) and to 12.5 ± 6.6 in weeks 13–16 (p < 0.001) after drug cessation. Monthly migraine days in weeks 13–16 were not different from baseline values (−0.8 ± 5.4; p > 0.999). Monthly headache days and monthly days with acute medication use showed a similar pattern.ConclusionsThe cessation of CGRP(-receptor) antibodies migraine prophylaxis was associated with a significant increase of migraine frequency and acute medication intake over time.

Is There a Gender Difference in the Response to onabotulinumtoxinA in Chronic Migraine? Insights from a Real-Life European Multicenter Study on 2879 Patients.

IntroductionMigraine is mostly a female disorder because of its lower prevalence in men. Less than 20% of patients included in the available studies on migraine treatments are men; hence, the evidence on migraine treatments might not apply to men. The aims of the present study were to provide reliable information on the effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA (BT-A) for chronic migraine in men and to compare clinical benefits between men and women.MethodsWe performed a pooled patient-level gender-specific analysis of real-life data on BT-A for chronic migraine of patients followed-up to 9 months. We reported the 50% responder rates during each BT-A cycle, defined as percentage of reduction in monthly headache days (MHDs) compared to baseline, along with 75% and 30% responder rates. We also reported the mean decrease in MHDs and in days of acute medication use (DAMs) during each BT-A cycle as compared to baseline. We also evaluated the reasons for stopping the treatment within the third cycle.ResultsWe included an overall cohort of 2879 patients, 522 of whom (18.1%) were men. In men, 50% responder rates were 27.7% during the first BT-A cycle, 29.2% during the second, and 35.6% during the third cycle; in women, the corresponding rates were 26.6%, 33.5%, and 41.0%. In the overall cohort, responder rates did not differ between men and women during the first two cycles; during the third cycle, the distribution was different (P < 0.001) mostly because of higher rates of treatment stopping and non-responders in men. In the propensity score matched cohort, the trend was maintained but lost its statistical significance. Both men and women had a significant decrease in MHDs and in DAMs with BT-A treatment (P < 0.001). There were no gender differences in those changes with the only exception of MHD decrease which, during the third cycle, was lower in men than in women (7.4 vs 8.2 days, P = 0.016 in the overall cohort and 9.1 vs 12.5 days, P = 0.009 in the propensity score matched cohort). At the end of follow-up, 152 men and 485 women stopped BT-A treatment (29.1% vs 20.6%; P < 0.001). The relative proportion of patients stopping treatment because of inadequate response (less than 30% decrease in MHDs from baseline) was higher in men than in women (42.8% vs 39.6%), while the proportion of patients stopping because of adverse events was higher in women than in men (5.6% vs 0%; P = 0.031).ConclusionsOur pooled analysis suggests that the response to BT-A is significant in both men and women with a small gender difference in favor of women. Men tended to stop the treatment more frequently than women. We emphasize the need for more gender-specific data on migraine treatments from randomized controlled trials and observational studies.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00328-y.