Dataset Information

Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review.

ABSTRACT: Combination use of onabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has the potential to be more effective than either therapy alone for migraine prevention. This retrospective, longitudinal chart review included adults with chronic migraine treated at one clinical site with ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA and ≥ 1 month of subsequent combination treatment with CGRP mAbs. Charts at time of mAb prescription (baseline) and up to four visits ~ 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-baseline were reviewed for safety, tolerability, and outcome measures (monthly headache days [MHDs], headache intensity, and migraine-related disability [MIDAS]). Of 300 charts reviewed, 257 patients met eligibility criteria (mean age: 50 years; 82% women). Average headache frequency was 21.5 MHDs before initiation of onabotulinumtoxinA and 12.1 MHDs before adding CGRP mAb therapy. Prescribed mAbs were erenumab (78%), fremanezumab (6%), and galcanezumab (16%). Over the entire study, patients discontinued CGRP mAb more frequently than onabotulinumtoxinA (23 vs. 3%). Adverse events occurred in 28% of patients, most commonly constipation (9%). Compared with onabotulinumtoxinA alone (baseline), MHDs decreased significantly at all visits (mean decrease: 3.5-4.0 MHDs over ~ 6-12 months of combination treatment); 45.1% of patients had clinically meaningful improvement in migraine-related disability (≥ 5-point reduction in MIDAS score) after ~ 6 months. In this real-world study, combination treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA and CGRP mAbs was well tolerated, with no new safety signals identified, and was associated with additional clinically meaningful benefits. More real-world and controlled trials should be considered to further assess safety and potential benefits of combination treatment. Video abstract: Real-world data suggests that CGRP inhibitors improve onabotulinumtoxinA efficacy for chronic migraine (MP4 20,067 kb).

SUBMITTER: Blumenfeld AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8586140 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review.

Blumenfeld Andrew M AM Frishberg Benjamin M BM Schim Jack D JD Iannone Ashley A Schneider Gary G Yedigarova Larisa L Manack Adams Aubrey A

Pain and therapy 20210421 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Combination use of onabotulinumtoxinA and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) has the potential to be more effective than either therapy alone for migraine prevention.<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective, longitudinal chart review included adults with chronic migraine treated at one clinical site with ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA and ≥ 1 month of subsequent combination treatment with CGRP mAbs. Charts at time of mAb prescription ...[more]

PMID: 33880725

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChronic migraine (CM) is a disabling condition with high prevalence in the general population. Until the recent approval of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (Anti-CGRP mAbs), OnabotulinumtoxinA (BoNT-A) was the only treatment specifically approved for CM prophylaxis. Direct comparisons between the two treatments are not available so far.MethodsWe performed an observational, retrospective, multicenter study in Italy to compare the real-world effectiveness of Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A. Patients with CM who had received either treatment according to Italian prescribing regulations were extracted from available clinical databases. Efficacy outcomes included the change from baseline in monthly headache days (MHD), MIgraine Disability ASsessment test (MIDAS), and monthly acute medications (MAM) evaluated at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was MHD change from baseline at 12 months. Safety outcomes included serious adverse events (SAE) and treatment discontinuation. Unadjusted and adjusted models were used for the analyses.ResultsTwo hundred sixteen potentially eligible patients were screened; 183 (86 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 97 BoNT-A) were included. One hundred seventy-one (80 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 91 BoNT-A) and 154 (69 Anti-CGRP mAbs; 85 BoNT-A) patients were included in the efficacy analysis at 6 and 12 months of follow-up, respectively. Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A both resulted in a mean MHD reduction at 6 (-11.5 and -7.2 days, respectively; unadjusted mean difference -4.3; 95%CI -6.6 to -2.0; p = 0.0003) and 12 months (-11.9 and -7.6, respectively; unadjusted mean difference -4.4; 95%CI -6.8 to -2.0; p = 0.0002) of follow-up. Similar results were observed after adjusting for baseline confounders. Anti-CGRP mAbs showed a significant MIDAS (-31.7 and -19.2 points, p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0296, respectively) and MAM reduction (-5.1 and -3.1 administrations, p = 0.0023 and p = 0.0574, respectively) compared to BoNT-A at 6 and 12 months. No SAEs were reported. One patient receiving fremanezumab discontinued treatment due to arthralgia. Treatment discontinuations, mainly for inefficacy, were comparable.ConclusionBoth Anti-CGRP mAbs and BoNT-A were effective in CM patients with Anti-CGRP mAbs presenting higher effect magnitude, with comparable safety. Still, BoNT-A remains a valuable option for CM patients with contraindications to Anti-CGRP mAbs or for frail categories who are candidates to local therapy with limited risk of systemic administration.

Project description:IntroductionCombination use of atogepant and onabotulinumtoxinA has the potential to be more effective than either alone for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine (CM) due to their complementary mechanisms of action. This analysis collected real-world data to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of adding atogepant to onabotulinumtoxinA as a combination preventive treatment for CM.MethodsThis retrospective, longitudinal, multicenter chart review included adults with CM who received ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of onabotulinumtoxinA before ≥ 1 month of onabotulinumtoxinA and atogepant combination treatment. Charts at atogepant prescription (index date) and two subsequent onabotulinumtoxinA treatment visits (~ 3 and ~ 6 months post-index) were reviewed for change from baseline in monthly headache days (MHDs), ≥ 50% reduction in MHDs, discontinuation rates, and adverse events (AEs).ResultsOf the 55 charts that met safety analysis criteria, 31 had data on headache days at index and first post-index visit and were eligible for effectiveness analysis (mean age 46.7 years, 94.5% female). For those with data available prior to onabotulinumtoxinA treatment (n = 25), the mean MHD was 24.0 days, reduced by 8.15 days after onabotulinumtoxinA treatment. After atogepant was added, MHD was incrementally reduced by 4.53 days and 8.75 days from index date to the first (N = 31) and second (N = 23) post-index onabotulinumtoxinA treatment visit, respectively. A ≥ 50% reduction in MHDs was achieved by 45.2% of patients ~ 3 months post-index. Atogepant and onabotulinumtoxinA were discontinued by 16.1% and 6.5% of patients, respectively. In the safety population, 32.7% of patients experienced ≥ 1 AE. No serious AEs were reported.ConclusionsThis real-world study of patients with CM demonstrated that adding atogepant to onabotulinumtoxinA as a combination preventive treatment for CM was effective by providing an additional reduction in MHDs over ~ 3 and ~ 6 months of combination treatment. Safety results were consistent with the known safety profiles of onabotulinumtoxinA and atogepant, with no new safety signals identified.

Project description:BackgroundTo date, real-world evidence on persistence to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or onabotulinumtoxinA have excluded eptinezumab. This retrospective cohort study was performed to compare treatment persistency among patients with migraine on anti-CGRP mAbs (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, or eptinezumab) or onabotulinumtoxinA.MethodsThis retrospective study used IQVIA PharmMetrics data. Adult patients with migraine treated with an anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA who had 12 months of continuous insurance enrollment before starting treatment were included. A "most recent treatment episode" analysis was used in which the most recent episode was defined as the latest treatment period with the same drug (anti-CGRP mAb or onabotulinumtoxinA) without a ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply on/after June 25, 2020, to December 31, 2021. Patients were indexed at the start of their most recent episode. Patients were considered non-persistent and discontinued the therapy associated with their most recent episode if there was ≥ 15-day gap in medication supply. A Cox proportional-hazards model estimated the discontinuation hazard between treatments. The gap periods and cohort definition were varied in sensitivity analyses.ResultsThe study included 66,576 patients (median age 46 years, 88.6% female). More eptinezumab-treated patients had chronic migraine (727/1074), ≥ 3 previous acute (323/1074) or preventive (333/1074) therapies, and more prior treatment episodes (3) than other treatment groups. Based on a 15-day treatment gap, patients on subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs had a 32% (95% CI: 1.19, 1.49; erenumab), 42% (95% CI: 1.27, 1.61; galcanezumab), and 58% (95% CI: 1.42, 1.80; fremanezumab) higher discontinuation hazard than those receiving eptinezumab, with this relationship attenuated, but still statistically significant based on 30-day and 60-day treatment gaps. There was no significant difference in the discontinuation hazard between eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA. Based on a 15-day treatment gap among patients who newly initiated therapy, the discontinuation hazard of subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs remained significantly higher compared to eptinezumab and onabotulinumtoxinA.ConclusionPatients treated with eptinezumab demonstrated persistency that was higher than subcutaneous anti-CGRP mAbs and similar to onabotulinumtoxinA.

Project description:BackgroundThe total burden of migraine includes not only the episodes with headache pain but extends throughout the interictal periods. Interictal symptoms and associated psychological responses may profoundly impact well-being and drive treatment-seeking behavior.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted with participants aged ≥ 18 years, 250 with episodic migraine (EM) and 250 with chronic migraine (CM), having ≥ 4 monthly migraine headache days. All were naïve to galcanezumab or began ≤ 6 months before survey completion. The study evaluated factors associated with the Migraine Interictal Burden Scale (MIBS-4), including social determinants of health and well-being. Multiple linear regression, logistic regression, and random forests (RF) were used to explore predictors of MIBS-4.ResultsThe majority of participants (90%) were female with a mean (standard deviation) age of 40.6 (± 12.0) years and 18.1 (± 12.7) years since the first migraine episode. Sociodemographically, the EM and CM groups were similar. Common comorbidities were anxiety disorder (45%) and depression (44%). Migraine family history was reported in 59% of participants. MIBS-4 was correlated with a number of diverse variables, including well-being, anxiety sensitivity, income, aura symptoms, and the worst migraine pain in the year before starting galcanezumab. Linear and logistic regression identified years since the first symptom, worst migraine attack pain, premonitory symptoms, and income as significant predictors. RF explained more of the variance than multiple linear regression and introduced additional concepts to the prediction of MIBS, identifying well-being (WHO-5 total score), the WHO-5 item "cheerful and in good spirits," worry about exercise, and fear of missing social obligations as significant predictors. Socioeconomic status and income were also critical explanatory variables for interictal burden (IIB) based on regression modeling and RF. Still, income was the only variable significantly associated with IIB across regression and RF methods.ConclusionsInterictal burden should be considered in the medical care of people with migraine. This additional burden is holistic, with psychosocial and socioeconomic elements in addition to residual symptoms. It is essential to consider this when assessing the impact of IIB.

Project description:IntroductionMigraine shows a significantly higher prevalence in women, especially during reproductive age when menstrual-related hormonal fluctuations represent the most common migraine trigger. Indeed, over 50% of patients report a higher occurrence of migraine attacks during the perimenstrual window. Menstrual migraine attacks are consistently referred to as more disabling, less responsive to symptomatic treatments, longer in duration, and more prone to relapse than non-menstrual migraine attacks. Evidence strongly suggests that estrogen fluctuations are involved in migraine attacks worsening during the perimenstrual window through several mechanisms directly or indirectly involving the CGRP pathway. We aimed to evaluate whether mAbs blocking CGRP-ligand or receptor (CGRP-mAbs) could represent an effective and safe preventive treatment for menstrual migraine attacks in patients with menstrual-related migraine (MRM) with previous treatment failures.MethodsForty patients with MRM with at least three previous treatment failures received monthly CGRP-mAbs. At the baseline and after six CGRP-mAbs administrations, patients underwent to extensive interviews to assess frequency, duration, intensity, and responsiveness to painkiller intake of migraine attacks occurring during the perimenstrual window.ResultsAfter six administrations of CGRP-mAbs we observed a reduction of median menstrual migraine frequency (from 5 to 2 days per month), pain intensity (from 8/10 to 6/10), and attacks duration (from 24 to 8 h) (p < 0.001). Nevertheless, a significant increase in the percentage of responding to migraine painkillers was observed from 42.5% at baseline to 95% at T1 (p < 0.001).ConclusionsCGRP-mAbs could represent a safe and effective preventive therapeutic strategy able to reduce the disabling burden of menstrual migraine attack frequency, duration, intensity, and significantly improve the response to painkillers. These findings could be related to and further indirectly prove the greater influence of CGRP-mediated mechanisms in the pathophysiology of menstrual migraine attacks.

Project description:BackgroundTherapeutic options for migraine prevention in non-responders to monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) and its receptor are often limited. Real-world data have shown that non-responders to the CGRP-receptor mAb erenumab may benefit from switching to a CGRP ligand mAb. However, it remains unclear whether, vice versa, erenumab is effective in non-responders to CGRP ligand mAbs. In this study, we aim to assess the efficacy of erenumab in patients who have previously failed a CGRP ligand mAb.MethodsThis monocentric retrospective cohort study included patients with episodic or chronic migraine in whom a non-response (< 30% reduction of monthly headache days during month 3 of treatment compared to baseline) to the CGRP ligand mAbs galcanezumab or fremanezumab led to a switch to erenumab, and who had received at least 3 administrations of erenumab. Monthly headache days were retrieved from headache diaries to assess the ≥30% responder rates and the absolute reduction of monthly headache days at 3 and 6 months of treatment with erenumab in this cohort.ResultsFrom May 2019 to July 2022, we identified 20 patients who completed 3 months of treatment with erenumab after non-response to a CGRP ligand mAb. Fourteen patients continued treatment for ≥6 months. The ≥30% responder rate was 35% at 3 months, and 45% at 6 months of treatment with erenumab, respectively. Monthly headache days were reduced from 18.6 ± 5.9 during baseline by 4.1 ± 3.1 days during month 3, and by 7.0 ± 4.8 days during month 6 compared to the month before treatment with erenumab (p < 0.001, respectively). Responders and non-responders to erenumab did not differ with respect to demographic or headache characteristics.ConclusionSwitching to erenumab in non-responders to a CGRP ligand mAb might be beneficial in a subgroup of resistant patients, with increasing responder rates after 6 months of treatment. Larger prospective studies should aim to predict which subgroup of patients benefit from a switch.

Dataset Information

Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review.

Publications

Real-World Evidence for Control of Chronic Migraine Patients Receiving CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy Added to OnabotulinumtoxinA: A Retrospective Chart Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets