Project description:ObjectiveAtogepant is a newly approved medication for the prevention of migraine. This review aims to discuss the efficacy, safety, cost, and place in therapy of atogepant.MethodsThe authors performed a systematic search for sources, including articles, abstracts, and poster presentations. Queried databases were the National Institute of Health, US National Library of Medicine Clinical Trials, PubMed, European PMC, and the Cochrane Library. Search terms included atogepant, QULIPTA™, AGN-241689, MK-803, and N02CD07. Full-text, English language, randomized-controlled trials from 1 February 2012 to 1 February 2022 were included in the review. Additional relevant prescribing information, abstracts, and articles identified through the search were considered for inclusion in this review. A total of 193 database entries were evaluated for inclusion in this narrative review. Three articles representing two randomized controlled trials were reviewed.Results and conclusionsAtogepant, a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, is a daily oral treatment for migraine prevention. In placebo-controlled clinical trials, atogepant decreased mean monthly migraine days (MMD) over 12 weeks in patients with episodic migraine. Major treatment-related adverse effects include nausea and constipation. Long-term placebo-controlled efficacy and safety studies, chronic migraine studies, and studies in patients that failed more than two classes of preventive therapies are still pending. Atogepant represents one of many novel therapies for the prevention of migraine. To date, no head-to-head comparisons of atogepant versus other agents indicated for migraine prevention have been published. Atogepant offers patients an alternative therapy to injectable or infusion monoclonal antibody treatments and offers an alternative to non-specific migraine medications that are associated with poor tolerability. Due to its high cost and narrower therapeutic indications, atogepant may be reserved for a small subset of migraineurs who prefer oral therapy.
Project description:BackgroundMigraine is a common and recurrent type of headache. Avoiding trigger factors is not often successful in reducing headache frequency, duration, and severity. Prophylactic medications may be effective but are limited by strict indications and daily medication intake. This review aimed to investigate the durable effect of acupuncture on episodic migraine.MethodsSeven databases including Medline, Embase, PubMed, etc., were searched for English and Chinese literature from their inception to 23 November 2022. Two independent reviewers screened the retrieved studies and extracted the data. Primary outcomes were monthly migraine days, monthly migraine attacks, and VAS score at 3 months post-treatment. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Meta-analysis was conducted where applicable.ResultsFifteen studies were included in this review. Acupuncture reduced the number of migraine attacks (MD -0.68; 95% CI -0.93, -0.43; p < 0.001), the number of days with migraine (MD -0.86; 95% CI -1.18, -0.55; p < 0.001), and VAS score (MD -1.01; 95% CI -1.30, -0.72; p < 0.001) to a greater degree than sham acupuncture at 3 months after treatment. Significant differences in reducing pain intensity of migraine in favor of acupuncture compared with waitlist (MD -1.84; 95% CI -2.31, -1.37; p < 0.001) or flunarizine (MD -2.00; 95% CI -2.35, -1.65; p < 0.001) at 3 months after treatment were found, and the differences reached the minimal clinically important difference (MCID).ConclusionThis review found that the durable effect of acupuncture for episodic migraine lasted at least 3 months after treatment. More high-quality studies with longer follow-up periods in the future are needed to confirm the findings.
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of manual acupuncture as prophylactic treatment for acupuncture naive patients with episodic migraine without aura.DesignMulticentre, randomised, controlled clinical trial with blinded participants, outcome assessment, and statistician.SettingSeven hospitals in China, 5 June 2016 to 15 November 2018.Participants150 acupuncture naive patients with episodic migraine without aura.Interventions20 sessions of manual acupuncture at true acupuncture points plus usual care, 20 sessions of non-penetrating sham acupuncture at heterosegmental non-acupuncture points plus usual care, or usual care alone over 8 weeks.Main outcome measuresChange in migraine days and migraine attacks per four weeks during weeks 1-20 after randomisation compared with baseline (four weeks before randomisation).ResultsAmong 150 randomised patients (mean age 36.5 (SD 11.4) years; 123 (82%) women), 147 were included in the full analysis set. Compared with sham acupuncture, manual acupuncture resulted in a significantly greater reduction in migraine days at weeks 13 to 20 and a significantly greater reduction in migraine attacks at weeks 17 to 20. The reduction in mean number of migraine days was 3.5 (SD 2.5) for manual versus 2.4 (3.4) for sham (adjusted difference -1.4, 95% confidence interval -2.4 to -0.3; P=0.005) at weeks 13 to 16 and 3.9 (3.0) for manual versus 2.2 (3.2) for sham (adjusted difference -2.1, -2.9 to -1.2; P<0.001) at weeks 17 to 20. At weeks 17 to 20, the reduction in mean number of attacks was 2.3 (1.7) for manual versus 1.6 (2.5) for sham (adjusted difference -1.0, -1.5 to -0.5; P<0.001). No severe adverse events were reported. No significant difference was seen in the proportion of patients perceiving needle penetration between manual acupuncture and sham acupuncture (79% v 75%; P=0.891).ConclusionsTwenty sessions of manual acupuncture was superior to sham acupuncture and usual care for the prophylaxis of episodic migraine without aura. These results support the use of manual acupuncture in patients who are reluctant to use prophylactic drugs or when prophylactic drugs are ineffective, and it should be considered in future guidelines.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02765581.
Project description:PurposeThe monoclonal antibody fremanezumab has been shown effective and well tolerated in numerous Phase 2 and Phase 3 trials. This subgroup analysis of the international HALO episodic migraine (EM; [NCT02629861]) trial and a similarly designed phase 2b/3 trial in Japanese and Korean patients (NCT03303092) sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fremanezumab in Japanese patients with EM.Patients and methodsIn both trials, eligible patients were randomly assigned at baseline to receive subcutaneous monthly fremanezumab, quarterly fremanezumab, or placebo in a 1:1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the mean change from baseline in the monthly (28-day) average number of migraine days during the 12-week period after the first dose of fremanezumab or placebo. Secondary endpoints assessed other aspects of efficacy, including disability and medication use.ResultsA total of 301 patients in the Japanese and Korean phase 2b/3 trial and 75 patients in the HALO EM trial were Japanese with baseline and treatment characteristics similar between treatment groups. According to ANCOVA analysis of the primary endpoint, both fremanezumab quarterly and monthly led to greater reductions in the monthly (28-day) average number of migraine days than placebo. This was supported by MMRM analysis of the primary endpoint over the initial 4 weeks, highlighting the rapid onset of action of fremanezumab. Results of secondary endpoint analysis supported the primary endpoint analyses. Fremanezumab was well tolerated with no new safety signals seen in this population of Japanese patients.ConclusionFremanezumab appears to be an effective and well-tolerated preventive medication for Japanese patients with EM.
Project description:BackgroundAcupuncture is often used for migraine prophylaxis but its effectiveness is still controversial. This review (along with a companion review on 'Acupuncture for tension-type headache') represents an updated version of a Cochrane review originally published in Issue 1, 2001, of The Cochrane Library.ObjectivesTo investigate whether acupuncture is a) more effective than no prophylactic treatment/routine care only; b) more effective than 'sham' (placebo) acupuncture; and c) as effective as other interventions in reducing headache frequency in patients with migraine.Search strategyThe Cochrane Pain, Palliative & Supportive Care Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field Trials Register were searched to January 2008.Selection criteriaWe included randomized trials with a post-randomization observation period of at least 8 weeks that compared the clinical effects of an acupuncture intervention with a control (no prophylactic treatment or routine care only), a sham acupuncture intervention or another intervention in patients with migraine.Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers checked eligibility; extracted information on patients, interventions, methods and results; and assessed risk of bias and quality of the acupuncture intervention. Outcomes extracted included response (outcome of primary interest), migraine attacks, migraine days, headache days and analgesic use. Pooled effect size estimates were calculated using a random-effects model.Main resultsTwenty-two trials with 4419 participants (mean 201, median 42, range 27 to 1715) met the inclusion criteria. Six trials (including two large trials with 401 and 1715 patients) compared acupuncture to no prophylactic treatment or routine care only. After 3 to 4 months patients receiving acupuncture had higher response rates and fewer headaches. The only study with long-term follow up saw no evidence that effects dissipated up to 9 months after cessation of treatment. Fourteen trials compared a 'true' acupuncture intervention with a variety of sham interventions. Pooled analyses did not show a statistically significant superiority for true acupuncture for any outcome in any of the time windows, but the results of single trials varied considerably. Four trials compared acupuncture to proven prophylactic drug treatment. Overall in these trials acupuncture was associated with slightly better outcomes and fewer adverse effects than prophylactic drug treatment. Two small low-quality trials comparing acupuncture with relaxation (alone or in combination with massage) could not be interpreted reliably.Authors' conclusionsIn the previous version of this review, evidence in support of acupuncture for migraine prophylaxis was considered promising but insufficient. Now, with 12 additional trials, there is consistent evidence that acupuncture provides additional benefit to treatment of acute migraine attacks only or to routine care. There is no evidence for an effect of 'true' acupuncture over sham interventions, though this is difficult to interpret, as exact point location could be of limited importance. Available studies suggest that acupuncture is at least as effective as, or possibly more effective than, prophylactic drug treatment, and has fewer adverse effects. Acupuncture should be considered a treatment option for patients willing to undergo this treatment.
Project description:ImportanceMigraine is a disabling neurological disease characterized by severe headache attacks. Treatment options reduce migraine frequency for many patients, but adverse effects lead to discontinuation in many patients.ObjectiveTo demonstrate that galcanezumab is superior to placebo in the prevention of episodic migraine with or without aura.Design, setting, and participantsThe EVOLVE-1 (Evaluation of LY2951742 in the Prevention of Episodic Migraine 1) trial was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled (January 11, 2016, to March 22, 2017) trial comparing galcanezumab (120 mg and 240 mg) vs placebo. Patients received treatments once monthly for 6 months (subcutaneous injection via prefilled syringe) and were followed up for 5 months after their last injection. It was a multicenter, clinic-based study involving 90 sites in North America. Participants in the study were adults (aged 18 to 65 years) with at least a 1-year history of migraine, 4 to 14 migraine headache days per month and a mean of at least 2 migraine attacks per month within the past 3 months, and were diagnosed prior to age 50 years. During the study, no other preventive medications were allowed. A total of 1671 patients were assessed; 809 did not meet study entry or baseline criteria, and 858 were included in the intent-to-treat population.InterventionsPatients were randomized (2:1:1) to monthly placebo, galcanezumab, 120 mg, and galcanezumab, 240 mg.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was overall mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days during the treatment period. Secondary measures included at least 50%, at least 75%, and 100% reduction in monthly migraine headache days, migraine headache days with acute medication use, and scores from the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire, Patient Global Impression of Severity, and Migraine Disability Assessment. Treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events were reported.ResultsOf the 1671 patients assessed, 858 (mean age, 40.7 years; 718 women [83.7%]) met study entry criteria and received at least 1 dose of investigational product. The primary objective was met for both galcanezumab doses; treatment with galcanezumab significantly reduced monthly migraine headache days (both P < .001) by 4.7 days (120 mg) and 4.6 days (240 mg) compared with placebo (2.8 days). All key secondary objectives were also significant after multiplicity adjustment. There were no meaningful differences between 120-mg and 240-mg doses of galcanezumab on measures of efficacy. Completion rate during treatment was high (81.9%; n = 718), and the incidence of discontinuation owing to adverse events was less than 5% across all treatment groups.Conclusions and relevanceGalcanezumab 120-mg and 240-mg monthly injections provided clinical benefits and improved functioning. The incidence rate of adverse events was low, demonstrating the favorable tolerability profile of galcanezumab.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02614183.
Project description:ImportanceFremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, may be effective for treating episodic migraine.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of fremanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic migraine with a monthly dosing regimen or a single higher dose.Design and settingRandomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial conducted at 123 sites in 9 countries from March 23, 2016 (first patient randomized), to April 10, 2017, consisting of a screening visit, 28-day pretreatment period, 12-week treatment period, and final evaluation at week 12.ParticipantsStudy participants were aged 18 to 70 years with episodic migraine (6-14 headache days, with at least 4 migraine days, during 28-day pretreatment period). Patients who had previous treatment failure with 2 classes of migraine-preventive medication were excluded.InterventionsPatients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous monthly dosing of fremanezumab (n = 290; 225 mg at baseline, week 4, and week 8); a single higher dose of fremanezumab, as intended to support a quarterly dose regimen (n = 291; 675 mg of fremanezumab at baseline; placebo at weeks 4 and 8); or placebo (n = 294; at baseline, week 4, and week 8).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was mean change in mean number of monthly migraine days during the 12-week period after the first dose.ResultsAmong 875 patients who were randomized (mean age, 41.8 [SD, 12.1] years; 742 women [85%]), 791 (90.4%) completed the trial. From baseline to 12 weeks, mean migraine days per month decreased from 8.9 days to 4.9 days in the fremanezumab monthly dosing group, from 9.2 days to 5.3 days in the fremanezumab single-higher-dose group, and from 9.1 days to 6.5 days in the placebo group. This resulted in a difference with monthly dosing vs placebo of -1.5 days (95% CI, -2.01 to -0.93 days; P < .001) and with single higher dosing vs placebo of -1.3 days (95% CI, -1.79 to -0.72 days; P < .001). The most common adverse events that led to discontinuation were injection site erythema (n = 3), injection site induration (n = 2), diarrhea (n = 2), anxiety (n = 2), and depression (n = 2).Conclusions and relevanceAmong patients with episodic migraine in whom multiple medication classes had not previously failed, subcutaneous fremanezumab, compared with placebo, resulted in a statistically significant 1.3- to 1.5-day reduction in the mean number of monthly migraine days over a 12-week period. Further research is needed to assess effectiveness against other preventive medications and in patients in whom multiple preventive drug classes have failed and to determine long-term safety and efficacy.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02629861.
Project description:ImportanceGalcanezumab (LY2951742), a monoclonal antibody against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is one of a novel class of new medicines for migraine prevention.ObjectiveTo assess whether at least 1 dose of galcanezumab was superior to placebo for episodic migraine prevention.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized clinical trial was conducted in the United States (July 7, 2014, to August 19, 2015) in clinics of 37 licensed physicians with a specialty including, but not limited to, psychiatry, neurology, internal medicine, and primary care. Subcutaneous injections of galcanezumab, 5, 50, 120, or 300 mg, or placebo were given monthly during the 3-month treatment period. A total of 936 patients were assessed; 526 did not meet study entry or baseline criteria and 410 patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or galcanezumab. Analyses were conducted on an intent-to-treat population, which included all patients who were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study drug.InterventionsShort-term migraine treatments were allowed as needed except for opioids or barbiturates.Main outcomes and measuresTo determine if at least 1 of the 4 doses of galcanezumab tested was superior to placebo for migraine prevention measured by the mean change from baseline in the number of migraine headache days 9 weeks to 12 weeks after randomization.ResultsOf the 936 patients assessed, 410 met entry criteria (aged 18-65 years with 4-14 migraine headache days per month and migraine onset prior to age 50 years) and were randomized to receive placebo or galcanezumab. For the primary end point, galcanezumab, 120 mg, significantly reduced migraine headache days compared with placebo (99.6% posterior probability -4.8 days; 90% BCI, -5.4 to -4.2 days vs 95% superiority threshold [Bayesian analysis] -3.7 days; 90% BCI, -4.1 to -3.2 days). Adverse events reported by 5% or more of patients in at least 1 galcanezumab dose group and more frequently than placebo included injection-site pain, upper respiratory tract infection, nasopharyngitis, dysmenorrhea, and nausea.Conclusions and relevanceMonthly subcutaneous injections of galcanezumab, both 120 mg and 300 mg, demonstrated efficacy (repeated-measures analysis) for the preventive treatment of migraine and support further development in larger phase 3 studies. All dosages were safe and well tolerated for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02163993.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:A phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of erenumab for the prevention of episodic migraine in Japanese patients was conducted. BACKGROUND:Previous global clinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy of erenumab in the prevention of migraine. METHODS:Patients were randomized to placebo or erenumab 28, 70, or 140 mg administered subcutaneously once per month for 6 months. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in mean monthly migraine days over months 4-6 of the double-blind treatment phase. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving ≥50% reduction from baseline in mean monthly migraine days (≥50% response) and change from baseline in mean monthly acute migraine-specific medication treatment days (MSMD) and mean Headache Impact Test (HIT-6™) scores. Efficacy outcomes were also determined at months 1, 2, and 3. RESULTS:Four hundred and seventy five patients were randomized 2:1:2:2 to placebo and erenumab 28, 70, and 140 mg, respectively. Greater reductions in monthly migraine days were observed for erenumab vs placebo with differences of -1.25 (95% CI: -2.10 to -0.41; P = .004), -2.31 (95% CI: -3.00 to -1.62; P < .001), and -1.89 (95% CI: -2.58 to -1.20; P < .001) days for erenumab 28, 70, and 140 mg. The odds of having a ≥50% response were 3.2, 5.6, and 4.7 times greater for erenumab 28 mg (95% CI: 1.30-7.88; P = .009), 70 mg (95% CI: 2.60-12.06; P < .001), and 140 mg (95% CI: 2.24-9.99; P < .001) than for placebo. Greater reductions from baseline in mean acute monthly MSMD were observed for erenumab vs placebo with differences of -1.07 (95% CI: -1.80 to -0.35; P = .004), -2.07 (95% CI: -2.66 to -1.49; P < .001), and -2.04 (95% CI: -2.63 to -1.45; P < .001) days for erenumab 28, 70, and 140 mg. Erenumab 70 and 140 mg also resulted in greater improvements in HIT-6™ scores. The safety profile was similar across treatment groups. The most common adverse event was nasopharyngitis, which occurred in 29.4% of patients in the placebo group and 28.9%-33.3% of patients in the erenumab groups. CONCLUSION:Monthly subcutaneous injections of erenumab 70 mg demonstrated statistically significant and numerically maximal efficacy with a favorable safety profile, suggesting that erenumab is a potential new therapy for migraine prevention in Japan.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate onset of effect of galcanezumab in patients with episodic migraine. BACKGROUND:Galcanezumab is a monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide and is indicated for preventive treatment of migraine. DESIGN/METHODS:Data on the primary outcome measure were analyzed from 2 previously published double-blind, Phase 3 studies (EVOLVE-1 [N = 858] and EVOLVE-2 [N = 915]) wherein adult patients with episodic migraine were randomized to receive monthly subcutaneous injections of galcanezumab 120 mg (with 240-mg loading dose) or 240 mg or placebo for up to 6 months. Monthly onset of effect was defined as the earliest month at which galcanezumab achieved and subsequently maintained statistical superiority to placebo on the mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days (MHDs). If onset occurred in Month 1, weekly onset was evaluated and defined as the earliest week at which galcanezumab statistically separated from placebo and maintained statistical separation for remaining weeks in that month. Day of onset of effect was also analyzed, as were monthly and weekly onset, for occurrence of ?50% reduction from baseline in number of MHDs. RESULTS:For both studies, change from baseline in monthly MHDs showed a statistically significant separation of galcanezumab from placebo at Month 1 and each subsequent month (each P < .001). Analysis of the first month for both studies indicated onset of effect in the first week, with galcanezumab-treated patients having significantly higher odds of having fewer MHDs in the first week (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] for EVOLVE-1, 2.71 [2.00, 3.66], and for EVOLVE-2, 2.88 [2.16, 3.86]; both P < .001) and each subsequent week compared with placebo-treated patients (P ? .004). Daily analysis showed onset of effect at Day 1 (first day after injection day). Galcanezumab also demonstrated superiority to placebo on occurrence of ?50% reduction in MHDs starting at Week 1 (percentage of patients with 50% response in galcanezumab group vs placebo group for EVOLVE-1, 54.3% vs 32.4% [P < .001], and for EVOLVE-2, 59.4% vs 38.0% [P < .001]). CONCLUSION:Rapid onset of preventive effect on the first day after injection of galcanezumab was confirmed in both studies of episodic migraine.