Association between response to triptans and response to erenumab: real-life data.

BACKGROUND: Triptans and erenumab are both migraine-specific agents acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway. Therefore, response to triptans might be associated with response to erenumab. MAIN BODY: In our study, consecutive patients referring to the Headache Centers of the Abruzzo region from January 2019 to March 2020 and treated with erenumab were interviewed about past use and efficacy of triptans. Triptan users were classified as 'triptan responders' if they were headache-free 2 h after treating ≥3 migraine attacks with ≥1 triptan. We considered patients as 'erenumab responders', if they had a ≥ 50% mean reduction in monthly migraine days between the 4th and the 6th month from treatment start compared with baseline. Of 91 triptan users, 73 (80.2%) were triptan responders and 58 (63.7%) were erenumab responders. The odds ratio of being erenumab responder was 3.64 (95% CI, 1.25-10.64) for triptan users as compared to non-users. (P = 0.014). Besides, starting erenumab improved triptan response in both erenumab responders and non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: Our data of an association between response to triptans and response to erenumab can be useful for patient advice and to improve the understanding of migraine pathophysiology and treatment.

Conversion from chronic to episodic migraine in patients treated with erenumab: real-life data from an Italian region.

BACKGROUND: Most patients treated with erenumab in clinical practice have chronic migraine (CM). We assessed the rate and possible predictors of conversion from CM to episodic migraine (EM) in a real-life study. MAIN BODY: We performed a subgroup analysis of patients treated with erenumab from January 2019 to February 2020 in the Abruzzo region, central Italy. Treatment was provided according to current clinical practice. For the purpose of the present study, we included patients fulfilling the definition of CM for the three months preceding erenumab treatment and with at least 6 months of follow-up after treatment. We assessed the rate of conversion to EM from baseline to Months 4-6 of treatment and during each month of treatment. To test the clinical validity of conversion to EM, we also assessed the decrease in monthly headache days (MHDs), acute medication days, and median headache intensity on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). We included in our study 91 patients with CM. At Months 4-6, 62 patients (68.1%) converted from CM to EM; the proportion of converters increased from Month 1 to Month 5. In the overall group of patients, median MHDs decreased from 26.5 (IQR 20-30) to 7.5 (IQR 5-16; P < 0.001) compared with baseline, while median acute medication days decreased from 21 (IQR 16-30) to 6 (IQR 3-10; P < 0.001) and median NRS scores decreased from 8 (IQR 7-9) to 6 (IQR 4-7; P < 0.001). Significant decreases were found both in converters and in non-converters. We found no significant predictors of conversion to EM among the patients' baseline characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, two thirds of patients with CM converted to EM during 6 months of treatment with erenumab. MHDs, acute medication use, and headache intensity decreased regardless of conversion from CM to EM.

Real-life data on the efficacy and safety of erenumab in the Abruzzo region, central Italy.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of erenumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody inhibiting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRPr), for the prevention of migraine in a real-life setting. MAIN BODY: We included in our observational study all patients with episodic or chronic migraine treated with erenumab during the year 2019 in the Abruzzo region, central Italy, and with a 6-month follow-up. We included 89 patients; 76 (85.4%) received 6 doses of erenumab, 11 (12.4%) autonomously withdrew the drug due to perceived inefficacy, and 2 (2.2%) due to adverse events. Seventy-eight patients (87.6%) were female, with a mean age of 46.8 ± 11.2 years; 84 (94.4%) had chronic migraine, and 64 (71.9%) medication overuse. All patients had ≥2 prior preventive treatment failures. Fifty-three patients (69.7%) had a 50% decrease in monthly migraine days (MMDs) within the first three doses; 46 (71.9%) of 64 patients withdrew medication overuse. In the 76 patients who completed a 6-dose treatment, erenumab decreased median MMDs from 19 (interquartile range [IQR] 12-27.5) to 4 (IQR 2-9.5; P < 0.001), median monthly days of analgesic use from 10 (IQR 4.5-20) to 2 IQR 0-5; P < 0.001), and median monthly days of triptan use from 5 (IQR 0-15.5) to 1 (IQR 0-4; P < 0.001). We recorded 27 adverse events in 20 (22.5%) patients, the most common being constipation (13.5%). One adverse event, i.e. allergic reaction, led to treatment discontinuation in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-life data confirm the efficacy and tolerability of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in a difficult-to-treat population of patients with a high prevalence of chronic migraine and medication overuse.

Cranial autonomic symptoms and response to monoclonal antibodies targeting the Calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway: A real-world study.

Objective: Cranial autonomic symptoms (CAS), including conjunctival injection, tearing, nasal congestion or rhinorrhea, eyelid edema, miosis or ptosis, and forehead or facial sweating ipsilateral to headache, are often reported by patients with migraine during headache attacks. CAS is a consequence of the activation of the trigeminovascular system, which is the target of monoclonal antibodies acting on the CGRP pathway. Therefore, we hypothesized that patients with CAS might have higher trigeminovascular activation than those without CAS leading to a better response to anti-CGRP treatments. Methods: We performed a prospective analysis including patients with episodic or chronic migraine treated with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (i.e., erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab) between 2019 and 2021. The observation period included a 12-week baseline before treatment with anti-CGRP antibodies and a 12-week treatment follow-up. We evaluated the prevalence of CAS in our cohort and compared disease characteristics and treatment response (i.e., 12-week monthly headache days and 0-29, 30-49, 50-74, 75-99, and 100% monthly headache days reduction from baseline) among patients with and without CAS using the χ2 test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Mann-Whitney U-test. Results: Out of 136 patients, 88 (65%) had CAS. Both patients with and without CAS reported a significant decrease in monthly headache days from baseline. During the 12-week follow-up, the median difference in monthly headache days from baseline was higher in patients with CAS (-10, IQR-15 to-6) than in those without CAS (6, IQR 12 to 3; P = 0.009). However, the proportions of patients with 0 to 29, 30 to 49, 50 to 74, 75 to 99, and 100% response rates did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions: In our cohort, the presence of CAS was associated with a greater response to monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway. CAS could be a clinical marker of trigeminovascular activation and thus be related to a better response to CGRP treatments.