Therapeutic patterns and migraine disease burden in switchers of CGRP-targeted monoclonal antibodies - insights from the German NeuroTransData registry.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway have shown good efficacy in migraine prophylaxis. However, a subset of patients does not respond to the first mAb treatment and switches among the available mAbs. The goal of this study is to characterize the switching pattern of migraine patients treated with anti-CGRP(-receptor, -R) mAbs, and to describe the headache burden of those who did not switch, switched once, and switched twice. METHODS: This study used real world data from the NeuroTransData Cohort, a registry of migraine patients treated at outpatient neurology clinics across Germany. Patients who had received at least one anti-CGRP(-R) mAb were included. Headache diaries were collected at baseline and during treatment, along with quality of life measures every three months. Results were summarized for the subgroups of patients who did not switch and those with one and two switches. RESULTS: Of the 655 eligible patients, 479 did not switch, 135 switched once, 35 twice, and 6 three or more times. The ≥ 50% response rates for monthly migraine days were 64.7%, 50.7%, and 25.0% for the no switch, one switch, and two switches groups in their last treatment cycles, respectively. Quality of life measures improved for the no switch and one switch groups, but not for the two switches group. CONCLUSION: Patients who switched among anti-CGRP(-R) mAbs during the course of their treatment still benefited overall but to a lesser extent than those who did not switch. Treatment response in patients who switched twice was markedly lower compared to the no switch and one switch subgroup.

A Dutch cost-effectiveness analysis of fremanezumab versus best supportive care in patients with chronic migraine and inadequate response to prior preventive therapy.

BACKGROUND: Chronic migraine (CM) is the most severe and burdensome subtype of migraine. Fremanezumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway as a migraine preventive therapy. This study aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of fremanezumab from a societal perspective in the Netherlands, using a Markov cohort simulation model. METHODS: The base-case cost-effectiveness analysis adhered to the Netherlands Authority guidelines. Fremanezumab was compared with best supportive care (BSC; acute migraine treatment only) in patients with CM and an inadequate response to topiramate or valproate and onabotulinumtoxinA (Dutch patient group [DPG]). A supportive analysis was conducted in the broader group of CM patients with prior inadequate response to 2-4 different classes of migraine preventive treatments. One-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, fremanezumab is cost saving compared with BSC in the DPG (saving of €2514 per patient) and led to an increase of 1.45 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). In the broader supportive analysis, fremanezumab was cost effective compared with BSC, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2547/QALY gained. Fremanezumab remained cost effective in all sensitivity and scenario analyses. CONCLUSION: In comparison to BSC, fremanezumab is cost saving in the DPG and cost effective in the broader population.

Cost-effectiveness of rimegepant oral lyophilisate compared to best supportive care for the acute treatment of migraine in the UK.

AIMS: Migraine is the most common disabling headache disorder and is characterized by recurrent throbbing head pain and symptoms of photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, and vomiting. Rimegepant 75 mg, an oral lyophilisate calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist, is the first treatment approved for both the acute and preventative treatment of migraine, and the first acute therapy approved in over 20-years. The objective was to assess the cost-utility of rimegepant compared with best supportive care (BSC) in the UK, for the acute treatment of migraine in the adults with inadequate symptom relief after taking at least 2 triptans, or for whom triptans are contraindicated or not tolerated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A de novo model was developed to estimate incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), structured as a decision tree followed by Markov model. Patients received rimegepant or BSC for a migraine attack and were assessed for response (pain relief at 2-h). Responders and non-responders followed different pain trajectories over 48-h cycles. Non-responders discontinued treatment while responders continued treatment for subsequent attacks, with a proportion discontinuing over time. Data sources included a post-hoc pooled analysis of the phase 3 acute rimegepant trials (NCT03235479, NCT03237845, NCT03461757), and a long-term safety study (NCT03266588). The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services over a 20-year time horizon. RESULTS: Rimegepant resulted in an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of £10,309 per QALY gained vs BSC, which is cost-effectiveness at a willingness to pay threshold of £30,000/QALY. Rimegepant generated +0.44 incremental QALYs and higher incremental lifetime costs (£4,492). Improved QALYs for rimegepant were a result of less time spent with severe and moderate headache pain. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the economic value of rimegepant which was found to be cost-effective for the acute treatment of migraine in adults unsuitable for triptans.

Real-life assessment of erenumab in refractory chronic migraine with medication overuse headache.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether erenumab is effective and safe in refractory chronic migraine with medication overuse headache. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentric, real-life study, chronic migraine with medication overuse headache patients who received erenumab were recruited. Study inclusion was limited to patients who previously failed onabotulinumtoxinA in addition to at least three other pharmacological commonly used migraine preventive medication classes. RESULTS: Of 396 patients who received erenumab, 38% (n = 149) met inclusion criteria. After 3 months, 51% (n = 76) and 20% (n = 30) patients achieved ≥ 50% and ≥ 75% reduction in monthly headache days, respectively. Monthly pain medications intake decreased from 46.1 ± 35.3 to 16.8 ± 13.9 (p < 0.001), while monthly headache days decreased from 25.4 ± 5.4 to 14.1 ± 8.6 (p < 0.001). Increasing efficacy of erenumab over the study period was observed. Allodynia was a negative predictive factor of erenumab response (odds ratio = 0.47; p = 0.03). Clinical conversion to episodic migraine with no medication overuse was observed in 64% (n = 96) patients. No serious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Erenumab reduced significantly migraine frequency and pain medication intake in refractory chronic migraine with MOH patients.

Erenumab patient characteristics, medication adherence, and treatment patterns in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To describe patient characteristics, adherence, and treatment patterns, among adult migraine patients in the United States prescribed erenumab. BACKGROUND: Migraine is a highly prevalent and debilitating disease characterized by recurrent attacks of moderate to severe headache accompanied by non-headache symptoms. Erenumab is a first-in-class calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor (CGRP-R) antagonist indicated for migraine prophylaxis in adults. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study used IQVIA's open-source longitudinal pharmacy (LRx) and medical (Dx) claims databases to identify adult migraine patients with an initial claim (index date) for erenumab between May 1, 2018 and April 30, 2019. Patients were required to have ≥180 days of follow-up. Erenumab dosing patterns, persistence, and adherence (using medication possession ratio [MPR] and proportion of days covered [PDC]), and discontinuation of other commonly prescribed acute and prophylactic anti-migraine therapies were assessed. Dose changes in acute therapies after initiation of erenumab were assessed in a subset of patients with an adequate trial of erenumab (≥2 additional erenumab claims within the 80 days following the index claim). RESULTS: A total of 64,174 patients met the study criteria. Mean (SD) age was 48 (13) years and 85.2% (n = 54,656) were female. The initial erenumab dose was 70 mg for the majority of patients (65.1%; n = 41,790); most (81.4%; n = 34,019) maintained their index dose during follow-up. Overall, 30.8% (n = 19,797) of patients had a PDC ≥ 0.80 and 41.7% (n = 26,769) had a MPR ≥ 0.80. Discontinuation rates of acute and other prophylactic migraine therapies after initiation of erenumab (among users of the respective therapies) were 48.7% (22,965/47,190) and 36.1% (16,602/46,006), respectively. Dose decreases among triptan, ergot compound, opioid, and barbiturate users were observed after initiation of erenumab. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all patients had prior use of acute or preventive therapy. Adherence to erenumab was higher than traditional oral prophylactic migraine therapies; however, overall adherence was still suboptimal. The decrease in use of acute and preventive prescription medications following initiation of erenumab suggests effectiveness in the real-world setting.

Erenumab in the prevention of high-frequency episodic and chronic migraine: Erenumab in Real Life in Italy (EARLY), the first Italian multicenter, prospective real-life study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of erenumab in a real-life migraine population, while trying to identify responsiveness predictors. BACKGROUND: Erenumab is a fully human Ig-2 monoclonal antibody blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, indicated for migraine prophylaxis. Phase II and III trials demonstrated that erenumab is effective, safe, and well tolerated in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine (CM), showing an early onset of action. METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective, cohort, and real-life study. We considered for enrolment all consecutive patients aged 18-65 affected by high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM) or CM, with or without medication overuse, visited at nine Italian Headache Centers from December 20, 2018 to September 30, 2019. Each patient was treated with erenumab 70 mg, administered subcutaneously every 4 weeks. Treatment duration was planned to last from 6 to 12 months, depending on the patient's response. The primary endpoint was the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs) at weeks 9-12 compared to baseline. Secondary endpoints included changes in monthly analgesics intake, ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% responder rates and any variation in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Headache Impact Test scores (HIT). RESULTS: In total, 372 migraine patients were treated with at least one dose of erenumab 70 mg. At weeks 9-12, erenumab decreased MMDs by 4.5 ± 4.1 days (mean ± SD) in patients with HFEM and by 9.3 ± 9.1 (mean ± SD) days in those with CM compared to baseline. At weeks 9-12 VAS score was reduced by 1.9 ± 1.9 (mean ± SD), HIT score by 10.7 ± 8.8 (mean ± SD), and median monthly analgesics intake passed from 12.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 10.0-14.0) to 5.0 (IQR 3.0-7.0) in HFEM. In CM patients, VAS was reduced by 1.7 ± 2.0 (mean ± SD), HIT by 9.7 ± 10.4 (mean ± SD), and median monthly analgesics intake passed from 20.0 (IQR 15.0-30.0) to 8.0 (IQR 5.0-15.0). At week 12, ≥50% responders were 60/101 (59.4%) for HFEM and 146/263 (55.5%) for CM, ≥75% responders were 17/101 (16.8%) and 59/263 (22.4%) and 100% responders 1/101 (1.0%) and 3/263 (1.1%), respectively. Erenumab responsiveness in HFEM was positively associated with unilateral pain localization (OR: 3.03, 95% CI: 1.24-7.40; p = 0.015), whereas in CM responsiveness was positively associated with and baseline migraine frequency (OR: 1.06, 95% CI:1.02-1.11; p = 0.031), dopaminergic symptoms (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.14-3.52; p = 0.015), and negatively associated with psychiatric comorbidities (OR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.20-0.93; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Erenumab 70 mg is effective, safe, and well tolerated in real life. Easily obtainable clinical features might be of help in predicting patient's responsiveness.

Assessment of immunogenicity from galcanezumab phase 3 trials in patients with episodic or chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND: This analysis characterizes the immunogenicity profile of galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its activity, in phase 3 migraine trials. METHODS: Immunogenicity data were analyzed from baseline and double-blind, placebo-controlled phases of the 3-month chronic migraine study REGAIN, the 6-month episodic migraine studies EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2, and from baseline and open-label phases of the 12-month chronic and episodic migraine Study CGAJ. The incidence of baseline antidrug antibodies, treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies, neutralizing antidrug antibodies, and the effect of antidrug antibody titer on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed. The relationship between antidrug antibody status and efficacy was explored using average change in monthly migraine headache days. Safety analyses assessed the potential relationship between treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies and hypersensitivity events or adverse events related to injection sites. FINDINGS: Across studies, 5.9-11.2% of patients had baseline antidrug antibodies. The incidence of treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies was 2.6-12.4% in the galcanezumab group and 0.5-1.7% in the placebo group. The majority of treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies were detected approximately 3-6 months after first study drug dose. Overall, the observed antidrug antibody titer did not impact galcanezumab concentrations, calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations, or galcanezumab efficacy. There was no evidence that hypersensitivity events or adverse events related to injection sites were mediated by treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies. INTERPRETATION: These data showed that immunogenicity did not impact galcanezumab concentrations, calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations, or the efficacy and hypersensitivity profile of galcanezumab in patients with migraine.

The Headache Pipeline: Excitement and Uncertainty.

There are many new treatment options available for migraine and more are coming. Three calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist monoclonal antibodies have been approved and a 4th is due in early 2020. Small molecule CGRP receptor-blocking oral compounds, both for acute care and prevention, are also coming. Four neurostimulators are available, with others on the way. New acute treatments coming soon include the 5HT1F agonist lasmiditan, a zolmitriptan intradermal micro-needle patch, and a nasal mist sumatriptan with a permeability enhancer. Farther out, three novel dihydroergotamine delivery systems, and a liquid-filled capsule of celecoxib show early promise. A new, safer form of methysergide is in the works, as is a longer-duration onabotulinumtoxinA. As always with new products, questions regarding safety, tolerability, cost, and insurance coverage will need to be addressed. Despite these concerns and uncertainties, a robust headache treatment pipeline is good for patients who are not satisfied with the results of their treatment and/or cannot tolerate existing treatments.

An Intraperitoneal Treatment with Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Regulates Appetite, Energy Intake/Expenditure, and Metabolism.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a 37-amino acid neuropeptide expressed both centrally and peripherally. CGRP has been shown to be involved in arteriolar dilation, cardiovascular regulation, pain transmission, migraine, and gastrointestinal physiology. Our current research is aimed at analyzing CGRP's impact on appetite/satiety, body metabolism, and energy homeostasis. Our study investigated the effects of a single-dose intraperitoneal (IP) treatment with CGRP on food and water consumption, energy expenditure, physical activity, respirometry, and a panel of plasma metabolic hormones in C57Bl/6 wild-type (WT) mice. After a CGRP IP injection at a dose of 2 nmol (10 µM CGRP in 200 µl of saline), a significant reduction in food intake and metabolic parameters as RQ, VCO2, and VO2 was observed. CGRP-injected mice had also significantly lower total energy expenditure (TEE) with no changes in activity levels compared to vehicle-injected controls. CGRP treatment in mice induced significantly lower plasma levels of glucagon and leptin but higher levels of amylin. Our data show that a single dose of CGRP peptide significantly decreased food consumption and altered calorimetric parameters and plasma metabolic hormone levels, thus confirming that CGRP plays a pivotal role in the regulation of appetite and metabolism. Future studies are necessary to analyze CGRP's long-term impact on body metabolism and its potential effects on appetite, obesity, and metabolic disorders.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of erenumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: Results from the US societal and payer perspectives.

Objectives To assess the cost-effectiveness of erenumab 140 mg ("erenumab") for the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine and chronic migraine. Study design A hybrid Monte Carlo patient simulation and Markov cohort model was constructed to compare erenumab to no preventive treatment or onabotulinumtoxinA among adult ( ≥ 18 years) patients with episodic migraine and chronic migraine who failed prior preventive therapy from the US societal and payer perspectives. Methods Patients entered the model one at a time and were assigned to a post-treatment monthly migraine day category based on baseline monthly migraine days and treatment effect. Using monthly cycles, patients were followed for 2 years and accumulated costs and utilities associated with their post-treatment monthly migraine days. The primary outcome included the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio presented as cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. Results With an annual drug price of erenumab of $6900, treatment with erenumab in the societal perspective ranges from a dominant strategy versus no preventive treatment among chronic migraine patients to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $122,167 versus no preventive treatment among episodic migraine patients. When excluding indirect costs (i.e. payer perspective), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are cost-effective among chronic migraine patients ($23,079 and $65,720 versus no preventive treatment and onabotulinumtoxinA, respectively), but not among episodic migraine patients ($180,012 versus no preventive treatment). Model results were sensitive to changes in monthly migraine days, health utilities, and treatment costs. Conclusion The use of erenumab may be a cost-effective approach to preventing monthly migraine days among patients with chronic migraine versus onabotulinumtoxinA and no preventive treatment in the societal and payer perspectives, but is less likely to offer good value for money for those with episodic migraine, unless lost productivity costs are considered.

Aimovig for Migraine Prevention: The New Kid May Have Trouble Fitting in.

Aimovig (erenumab-aooe), codeveloped by Amgen and Novartis, has been recently approved for the prevention of migraines. Its mechanism of action is different than other migraine medications. But perhaps more interestingly, it is the first drug recently developed specifically for migraine prevention.