Hypersensitivity to CGRP as a predictive biomarker of migraine prevention with erenumab.

BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to investigate the predictive value of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-induced migraine attacks for effectiveness to erenumab treatment in people with migraine. METHODS: In total, 139 participants with migraine underwent a single experimental day involving a 20-min infusion with CGRP. Following this, the participants entered a 24-week treatment period with erenumab. The primary endpoints were the predictive value of CGRP-induced migraine attacks on the effectiveness of erenumab, defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days, or ≥ 50% reduction in either monthly migraine or monthly headache days of moderate to severe intensity. RESULTS: Among participants with CGRP-induced migraine attacks, 60 of 99 (61%) achieved ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days during weeks 13-24 with erenumab. Conversely, 13 of 25 (52%) where CGRP infusion did not induce a migraine achieved the same endpoint (p = 0.498). There were no significant differences between the ≥50% reduction in either monthly migraine or monthly headache days of moderate to severe intensity between CGRP-sensitive and non-sensitive participants (p = 0.625). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the CGRP-provocation model cannot be used to predict erenumab's effectiveness. It remains uncertain whether this finding extends to other monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP ligand or to gepants.Trial Registration: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04592952).

Effect of erenumab on the reversion from chronic migraine to episodic migraine in an Asian population: A post hoc analysis of the DRAGON study.

BACKGROUND: Erenumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that selectively targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor. It has been proven to be safe and efficacious in patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) as demonstrated in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials including patients from Europe, Japan, and the United States. Reversion from CM to EM, as indicated by a reduction in the frequency of headache days, is an important indicator for efficacy outcome, though it has not been analyzed widely in patients with CM to date. OBJECTIVE: Primary results of the DRAGON study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of erenumab in patients with CM from China and other Asian countries. This post hoc analysis evaluated the rate of reversion from CM to EM in the overall population and in subgroups of patients defined by baseline demographic and clinical characteristics (age, body mass index, gender, prior preventive treatment failure, medication overuse status, and disease duration). METHODS: Reversion from CM to EM was defined as a reduction in headache frequency to < 45 headache days over the 12 weeks of the double-blind treatment period. In addition, migraine-related disability and disease impact on functional impairment were assessed within each treatment group in reverters and non-reverters using the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6), Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary (MPFID), and modified Migraine Disability Assessment (mMIDAS). RESULTS: Overall, 557 patients with CM were randomized to monthly erenumab 70 mg (n = 279) or placebo (n = 278), of whom 52.3% (146 of 279) treated with erenumab reverted from CM to EM compared to 41.0% (114 of 278) in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-2.2; p = 0.007). Treatment with erenumab resulted in a greater mean change (standard error) from baseline in the HIT-6 total score for reverters versus non-reverters compared to placebo (erenumab: -9.5 [0.6] vs. -5.1 [0.5]; placebo: -8.9 [0.7] vs. -4.9 [0.5]). A similar pattern was observed for mMIDAS score in erenumab treatment groups versus placebo (erenumab: -22.1 [1.2] vs. -6.3 [1.8]; placebo: -19.9 [1.3] vs. -7.9 [1.6]). Substantial improvements were reported in MPFID-Physical Impairment (PI) and Everyday Activities (EA) scores in reverters versus non-reverters in erenumab treatment groups (MPFID-PI: -5.9 [0.3] vs. -1.9 [0.6]; MPFID-EA: -7.9 [0.4] vs. -3.4 [0.6]) and in placebo (MPFID-PI: -5.4 [0.4] vs. -1.0 [0.5]; MPFID-EA: -7.1 [0.5] vs. -3.2 [0.5]). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrated that a greater proportion of patients treated with erenumab reverted from CM to EM compared to patients treated with placebo. The reversion from CM to EM was reflected by the greater improvements in patient-reported outcomes in the erenumab group.

Evaluation of the risk of hypertension in patients treated with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in a real-life study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the rate of hypertension incoming in patients treated with monoclonal antibodies against the calcitonin gene-related peptide. BACKGROUND: The monoclonal antibodies blocking the calcitonin gene-related peptide are unquestionable effective in the prevention of migraine. Despite this, the development of hypertension has been detected in some patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted at the University Hospital of Modena. Patients were visited quarterly up to 1 year. RESULTS: Globally, no significant increase in the blood pressure was detected. The 5.7% of the patients developed a significant increase in their blood pressure. In particular, patients with a pre-existing hypertension were more likely to have a significant increase in the blood pressure. CONCLUSION: The risk of developing hypertension during a treatment with anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies seems low. Anyway, patients with a pre-existing hypertension should be cautiously monitored because they are more likely to develop hypertension.

Blood pressure monitoring in elderly migraineurs starting an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody: a real-world prospective study.

BACKGROUND: While monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the CGRP pathway have revolutionized migraine management due to their improved tolerance and adherence, concerns remain about their potential impact on blood pressure (BP), especially in older patients, due to CGRP-mediated vasodilation blockade. Given the growing use of these therapies in older populations, assessing their cardiovascular (CV) safety is of paramount importance. METHODS: This multicentric observational prospective study focused on migraine sufferers aged ≥ 60 who began erenumab, galcanezumab, or fremanezumab for prevention. Baseline, three-month, and twelve-month BP measurements were collected. Changes in antihypertensive medication and "Newly or Worsened Hypertensive" patients (NWHP) were assessed. RESULTS: Among 155 patients receiving anti-CGRP mAbs (40 Erenumab, 47 Galcanezumab, 68 Fremanezumab), 42.5% had hypertension history and 39% were on antihypertensive treatment. No significant systolic or diastolic BP changes occurred at any time point compared to baseline (all p > 0.05), with no differences between the three groups. After one year, 20/155 (12.9%) patients were considered NWHP; 11/20 had prior hypertension, and 5/11 adjusted antihypertensive therapy. Among 9/20 newly hypertensive patients, 5/9 had a single measurement above the normal threshold with no requirement for new pharmacological therapy. A higher baseline BP value was associated with increased BP (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The study concludes that treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs over one year does not significantly affect BP in patients aged ≥ 60, nor does it increase the incidence of hypertension compared to general population trends. Nonetheless, continuous monitoring and further long-term studies are necessary to fullya scertain the cardiovascular safety of these medications in the elderly.

Real-world effectiveness of Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies compared to OnabotulinumtoxinA (RAMO) in chronic migraine: a retrospective, observational, multicenter, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic 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. METHODS: We 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. RESULTS: Two 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. CONCLUSION: Both 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.

Persistent effectiveness of CGRP antibody therapy in migraine and comorbid medication overuse or medication overuse headache - a retrospective real-world analysis.

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with migraine who have concomitant medication overuse (MO) or medication overuse headache (MOH) is a major problem in clinical practice. Detoxification of acute analgesics before or during initiation of prophylactic therapy has long been recommended although this concept has recently been questioned. Additionally, relapse after detoxification is a common problem. This real-world study analyses the initial and sustained effectiveness of prophylactic migraine therapy with CGRP (receptor) antibodies without prior detoxification in patients with comorbid MO or MOH for up to one year. METHODS: A retrospective real-world analysis was performed on 291 patients (episodic migraine (EM) with MO (EM-MO; n = 35), EM without MO (EM-noMO; n = 77), chronic migraine (CM) with MOH (CM-MOH; n = 109), CM without MOH (CM-noMOH; n = 70). All patients began treatment with either erenumab (n = 173), fremanezumab (n = 70) or galcanezumab (n = 48) without prior detoxification. Data were available for up to 12 months of treatment. Responder rates for monthly headache days (MHD), monthly migraine days (MMD) and monthly acute medication intake (AMD) were analysed. RESULTS: All groups showed a significant reduction in MHD, MMD and AMD at the last observed time point compared to baseline. In patients with CM and MOH, 60.6% (66/109) no longer fulfilled the definition of MO or MOH and a further 13.8% (15/109) had only EM-MO. In the EM cohort, 89% (31/35) of MO patients lost their MO during therapy. MHD and AMD 30% responder rates were comparable for CM-MOH and CM-noMOH (MHD: CM-MOH: 56.0% vs. CM-noMOH: 41.4%, p = 0.058, AMD: CM-MOH: 66.1% vs. CM-noMOH: 52.9%, p = 0.077). MMD responder rate did not differ significantly (after Bonferroni adjustment) (CM-MOH: 62.4% vs. CM-noMOH: 47.1%, p = 0.045, α = 0.017). After successful initiation of therapy, 15.4% of the initial CM-MOH patients relapsed and met the criterion for CM-MOH at the end of follow-up. There were no antibody specific differences in response to therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our data confirms the effectiveness of CGRP antibody treatment in migraine patients with additional MOH or MO in a real-world setting. Low relapse rates after initial successful therapy support an early start of CGRP antibody treatment in patients with MOH or MO. TRIAL REGISTRATION: No registration, retrospective analysis.

Is erenumab an efficient alternative for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in Spain? Results of a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The reimbursement of erenumab in Spain and other European countries is currently restricted because of the cost of this novel therapy to patients with migraine who have experienced previous failures to traditional preventive treatments. However, this reimbursement policy should be preferably based on cost-effectiveness studies, among other criteria. This study performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of erenumab versus topiramate for the prophylactic treatment of episodic migraine (EM) and versus placebo for chronic migraine (CM). METHODS: A Markov model with a 10-year time horizon, from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System, was constructed based on data from responder and non-responder patients. A responder was defined as having a minimum 50% reduction in the number of monthly migraine days (MMD). A hypothetical cohort of patients with EM with one or more prior preventive treatment failures and patients with CM with more than two treatment failures was considered. The effectiveness score was measured as an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost per migraine day (MD) avoided. Data from clinical outcomes and patient characteristics were obtained from erenumab clinical trials (NCT02066415, STRIVE, ARISE, LIBERTY and HER-MES). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to validate the robustness of the model. RESULTS: After a 10-year follow-up, the estimated QALYs were 5.88 and 6.11 for patients with EM treated with topiramate and erenumab, respectively. Erenumab showed an incremental cost per patient of €4,420 vs topiramate. For CM patients, erenumab resulted in 0.756 QALYs gained vs placebo; and an incremental cost of €1,814. Patients treated with erenumab achieved reductions in MD for both EM and CM (172 and 568 MDs, respectively). The incremental cost per QALY gained with erenumab was below the Spanish threshold of €30,000/QALY for both health and societal perspectives (EM €19,122/QALY and CM €2,398/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Erenumab is cost-effective versus topiramate as a preventive treatment for EM and versus placebo for patients with CM from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

MicroRNA profiling in women with migraine: effects of CGRP-targeting treatment.

BACKGROUND: Migraine lacks biomarkers that can trace the biological pathways of the disease and predict the effectiveness of treatments. Monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway - including erenumab - offer the opportunity of investigating potential migraine biomarkers due to their specific mechanism of action in preventing both episodic (EM) and chronic (CM) migraine. Our study aims at evaluating the expression levels of circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) according to migraine type, before and after treatment with erenumab and based on treatment response, in order to identify miRNAs with potential role as epigenetic biomarkers. METHODS: The study included women aged 25-50 years with EM or CM treated with erenumab according to clinical indications. MiRNAs expression levels were assessed before (baseline) and after a 16-week treatment with erenumab, 140 mg every four weeks (post-treatment). An extensive miRNAs profiling was performed by qRT-PCR in small, pooled groups of ≤ 8 women each, classified according to migraine frequency (EM and CM) and the degree of response to erenumab. The expression levels of selected miRNAs were also validated using single miRNA assays in each woman with EM and CM. RESULTS: During the study, 36 women with migraine (19 with EM and 17 with CM) out of 40 who were initially screened, performed the assessment of miRNA expression at baseline and post-treatment, Erenumab treatment significantly improved migraine burden in both EM and CM. MiRNA profiling revealed differential expression levels of a wide set of miRNAs (hsa-let-7d-3p, hsa-miR-106b-3p, hsa-miR-122-5p, hsa-miR-143-3p, hsa-miR-144-3p, hsa-miR-16-5p, hsa-miR-181a-5p, hsa-miR-221-3p, hsa-miR-25-3p, hsa-miR-29b-2-5p, hsa-miR-326, miR-363-3p, hsa-miR-424-5p, hsa-miR-485-3p, hsa-miR-532-5p, hsa-miR-543, hsa-miR-629-5p, hsa-miR-660-5p, hsa-miR-92a-3p) depending on treatment response. Among them, single miRNA assays confirmed the progressive decrease of hsa-miR-143-3p expression levels in relation to increasing response to erenumab in women with EM (7 with low, 6 with medium, and 6 with high response; p = 0.02). Additionally, single assays showed higher hsa-miR-34a-5p and hsa-miR-382-5p expression levels at baseline in women with CM compared with those with EM (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0007, respectively), as well as their expression level decrease in women with CM from baseline to follow-up (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that targeting the CGRP pathway in migraine changes the expression levels of certain miRNAs. These miRNA levels are linked to the levels of response to CGRP receptor blockage. Future research challenges include assigning specific functions to the modulated miRNAs to unravel pathways modulated by the disease and the treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in clinicaltrials.gov with code NCT04659226 and in the Novartis database with code CAMG334AIT05T.

Improvement of comorbid anxiety and depression in patients with migraine treated with injectable preventive calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists: Review of clinical evidence.

Background: Migraine is often associated with depression and anxiety, leading to a diminished quality of life. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonists have shown promise in treating migraines, but their effects on concurrent depression and anxiety have not been clarified. Methods: A literature review was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Ovid Medline, and EMBASE focusing on phase 3 clinical trials, post-hoc analysis studies, and real-world evidence (RWE) published in the past 5 years. The review primarily utilized patient-reported outcome tools, such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory-II, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD)-7, and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), to assess anxiety and depression in relation to CGRP-targeted monoclonal antibodies. Results: Out of 260 studies, 17 met the inclusion criteria. Eptinezumab lacked sufficient evidence regarding its impact on depression and anxiety. While sufficient evidence on its effect on comorbid anxiety was not available, fremanezumab was shown to significantly improve comorbid depression in one study while not achieving statistical significance in another. Erenumab and galcanezumab showed significant improvement in comorbid depression, implying possible benefits in patients with migraine. Galcanezumab showed faster relief from depressive symptoms than other injectable CGRP antagonists. Galcanezumab also exhibited improvements in GAD-7 scores for anxiety, although not statistically significant, whereas RWE showed promising HARS scores for both galcanezumab and erenumab. Conclusions: Galcanezumab and erenumab appear to be more effective in improving concurrent depressive and anxiety symptoms in migraine patients than fremanezumab. Notably, these psychometric questionnaires were not the primary outcome measures of the trials and were not specifically designed to investigate the effects of these medications on depression or anxiety. Further research is needed to fully understand the impact of CGRP antagonists on mental health disorders associated with migraines. These findings have implications for enhancing the overall well-being and quality of life in individuals with migraines and comorbid psychiatric conditions.

Anti-CGRP mAbs for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: An Overview Review and a Cost Saving Analysis in the Global Scenario.

Objectives: Migraine is a neurological disease with a high frequency of incidence. The new monoclonal antibodies selective for the calcitonin gene-related peptide and its ligand (anti-CGRP mAbs) have been marketed both in the USA and EU based on the positive efficacy results in the prevention of migraine. This search has been carried out with the aim of collecting real-world evidence on the effectiveness of anti-CGRP mAbs, performing a cost-savings analysis, and comparing performances among anti-CGRP mAbs medicines marketed in the American and European market. Methods: The literature review has been performed in PubMed database on 31 December 2022; the cost of the unitary dose of anti-CGRP mAbs has been extracted consulting an American national database. Results: The results confirm efficacy and good tolerability of anti-CGRP mAbs, determining a difference in the purchase price. In fact, all extracted studies showed a protective risk factor exposure in monthly migraine days reduction for all the anti-CGRP mAbs, whereas the cost analysis showed that using eptinezumab, in a quarter there is a cost saving of at least $425 per patient, compared with the other anti-CGRP mAbs. Conclusions: With equal efficacy and equal safety, anti-CGRP mAbs should be prescribed also regard to the cost established at the negotiation, making sure to guarantee the best treatment to the patients, but at the same time impacting as little as possible to the healthcare services resources.

New migraine prophylactic drugs: Current evidence and practical suggestions for non-responders to prior therapy.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor (anti-CGRP(-R) mAbs) and small-molecule CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) are new mechanism-based prophylactic drugs developed to address the unmet needs of pre-existing migraine prophylactic medications. However, several uncertainties remain in their real-world applications. METHODS: This is a narrative review of the literature on the use of CGRP-targeting novel therapeutics in specific situations, including non-responders to prior therapy, combination therapy, switching, and treatment termination. In the case of lack of available literature, we made suggestions based on clinical reasoning. RESULTS: High-quality evidence supports the use of all available anti-CGRP(-R) mAbs (erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and eptinezumab) in non-responders to prior therapy. There is insufficient evidence to support or reject the efficacy of combining CGRP(-R) mAbs or gepants with oral migraine prophylactic agents or botulinum toxin A. Switching from one CGRP(-R) mAb to another might benefit a fraction of patients. Currently, treatment termination depends on reimbursement policies, and the optimal mode of termination is discussed. CONCLUSIONS: New prophylactic drugs that target the CGRP pathway are promising treatment options for patients with difficult-to-treat migraine. Individualized approaches using a combination of new substances with oral prophylactic drugs or botulinum toxin A, switching between new drugs, and adjusting treatment duration could enhance excellence in practice.

Longitudinal differences in iron deposition in periaqueductal gray matter and anterior cingulate cortex are associated with response to erenumab in migraine.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this longitudinal study was to determine whether brain iron accumulation, measured using magnetic resonance imaging magnetic transverse relaxation rates (T2*), is associated with response to erenumab for the treatment of migraine. METHODS: Participants (n = 28) with migraine, diagnosed using international classification of headache disorders 3rd edition criteria, were eligible if they had six to 25 migraine days during a four-week headache diary run-in phase. Participants received two treatments with 140 mg erenumab, one immediately following the pre-treatment run-in phase and a second treatment four weeks later. T2* data were collected immediately following the pre-treatment phase, and at two weeks and eight weeks following the first erenumab treatment. Patients were classified as erenumab responders if their migraine-day frequency at five-to-eight weeks post-initial treatment was reduced by at least 50% compared to the pre-treatment run-in phase. A longitudinal Sandwich estimator approach was used to compare longitudinal group differences (responders vs non-responders) in T2* values, associated with iron accumulation. Group visit effects were calculated with a significance threshold of p = 0.005 and cluster forming threshold of 250 voxels. T2* values of 19 healthy controls were used for a reference. The average of each significant region was compared between groups and visits with Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons with significance defined as p < 0.05. RESULTS: Pre- and post-treatment longitudinal imaging data were available from 28 participants with migraine for a total of 79 quantitative T2* images. Average subject age was 42 ± 13 years (25 female, three male). Of the 28 subjects studied, 53.6% were erenumab responders. Comparing longitudinal T2* between erenumab responders vs non-responders yielded two comparisons which survived the significance threshold of p < 0.05 after correction for multiple comparisons: the difference at eight weeks between the erenumab-responders and non-responders in the periaqueductal gray (mean ± standard error; responders 43 ± 1 ms vs non-responders 32.5 ± 1 ms, p = 0.002) and the anterior cingulate cortex (mean ± standard error; responders 50 ± 1 ms vs non-responders 40 ± 1 ms, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Erenumab response is associated with higher T2* in the periaqueductal gray and anterior cingulate cortex, regions that participate in pain processing and modulation. T2* differences between erenumab responders vs non-responders, a measure of brain iron accumulation, are seen at eight weeks post-treatment. Less iron accumulation in the periaqueductal gray and anterior cingulate cortex might play a role in the therapeutic mechanisms of migraine reduction associated with erenumab.

Two-year, real-world erenumab persistence and quality of life data in 82 pooled patients with abrupt onset, unremitting, treatment refractory headache and a migraine phenotype: New daily persistent headache or persistent post-traumatic headache in the majority of cases.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with New Daily Persistent Headache and Persistent Post-Traumatic Headache belong to a heterogeneous group of primary and secondary headache disorders, with the common clinical feature that these conditions start abruptly, continue unabated, and are refractory to conventional migraine preventive treatments. OBJECTIVE: This is a real-world, medium-term audit to explore whether erenumab improves quality of life in a pooled group of 82 abrupt-onset, unremitting and treatment refractory patients, where the diagnosis is new daily persistent headache and persistent post-traumatic headache in the majority of cases. METHODS: Eighty-two patients were treated with erenumab every 28 days over a two to three-year period, beginning in December 2018. These patients were "longstanding chronic" and refractory with a median of eight (IQR 4-12) prior failed migraine preventive treatments and median duration of disease of seven (IQR 3-11) years. The starting dose of erenumab was 70 mg in 79% of cases and 140 mg in the remaining patients (individuals with a BMI of more than 30). All patients were asked to complete three migraine specific Quality of Life questionnaires or Patient Reported Outcome Measures before starting treatment and typically at 3-12 intervals until the end of June 2021 or cessation of treatment. The Patient Reported Outcome Measures included: Headache Impact Test-6, Migraine Associated Disability Assessment test and Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. Patients generally only stayed on treatment after 6-12 months if there was deemed to be an improvement of at least 30% and there were no significant side effects. The longest treated cases have quality of life data for 30 months after starting erenumab. RESULTS: Of the 82 patients, 29 (35%) had improvement in Quality of Life scores, with no significant side effects, and wished to stay on treatment. Fifty-three patients (65%) stopped treatment during the first 6-25 months due to lack of efficacy and/or patient reported side effects (n = 33 and n = 17, respectively) or a combination of both, pregnancy planning (n = 2), and lost to follow up (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in Quality of Life scores were recorded by one-third of patients over a period of 11-30 months, with a 35% persistence after a median of 26 months of treatment. This contrasts with our recently published, treatment resistant, chronic migraine cohort where the persistence with erenumab treatment was almost 55% after a median time of 25 months.

Emerging drugs for the preventive treatment of migraine: a review of CGRP monoclonal antibodies and gepants trials.

INTRODUCTION: Migraine is a leading cause of years lived with disability and preventive strategies represent a mainstay to reduce health-related disability and improve quality of life of migraine patients. Until a few years ago, migraine prevention was based on drugs developed for other clinical indications and relocated in the migraine therapeutic armamentarium, characterized by unfavorable tolerability profiles. The advent of monoclonal antibodies against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) and gepants, CGRP receptor antagonists, has been a turning point in migraine prevention owing to advantageous efficacy, safety and tolerability profiles.Nevertheless, while in an ideal scenario a drug characterized by significant greater efficacy and tolerability compared to existing therapeutic strategies should be adopted as a first-line treatment, cost-effectiveness analyses available for monoclonal antibodies against CGRP pathway tend to limit their administration to more severe migraine phenotypes. AREAS COVERED: The present narrative review aims to provide a critical appraisal of phase II and III CGRP-mAbs and gepants trials to analyze their use in clinical practice. EXPERT OPINION: Despite monoclonal antibodies against CGRP pathway and gepants can be undoubtedly considered top-of-the-range treatments, there are still issues deserving to be addressed in the coming years as the risk of off-target effects as well as their economic sustainability based on the considerable migraine burden.

An observational study on monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin-gene-related peptide and its receptor.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Based on their pharmacological target, two classes of calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been identified: antibodies against the CGRP ligand-galcanezumab, fremanezumab, eptinezumab-and antibodies against the CGRP receptor (CGRP-R), erenumab. The aim of the present study was to compare anti-CGRP versus anti-CGRP-R mAbs in patients with high frequency episodic and chronic migraine. METHODS: All patients on monthly treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs with an available 6 months' follow-up at January 2022 were included. Data on efficacy outcome were collected following one (T1), three (T3) and six (T6) months of treatment, and included monthly headache/migraine days, the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) and Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6) scores, pain intensity, analgesics consumption and response rates (>50% headache days reduction compared to baseline). RESULTS: In all, 152 patients were enrolled, of whom 68 were in treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs (49 galcanezumab, 19 fremanezumab) and 84 with the anti-CGRP-R (erenumab). MIDAS scores were significantly lower in the anti-CGRP group at T1 and T3 (respectively p < 0.02 and p < 0.03) as well as the number of mean migraine days at T3 (p < 0.01). At T3 and T6 outcome measures were comparable, although a significantly higher percentage of super-responders was found in the anti-CGRP group (respectively p < 0.04 and p < 0.05), with a similar overall percentage of responders. CONCLUSIONS: The present study on a real-world sample confirms the beneficial effect of both anti-CGRP and anti-CGRP-R mAbs, with a more favorable outcome for anti-CGRP antibodies.

Both perimenstrual and nonperimenstrual migraine days respond to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (receptor) antibodies.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) (receptor) antibodies effectively reduce overall migraine attack frequency, but whether there are differences in effect between perimenstrual and nonperimenstrual migraine days has not been investigated. METHODS: We performed a single-arm study among women with migraine. Participants were followed with electronic E-diaries during one (pretreatment) baseline month and 6 months of treatment with either erenumab or fremanezumab. Differences in treatment effect on perimenstrual and nonperimenstrual migraine days were assessed using a mixed effects logistic regression model, with migraine day as dependent variable; treatment, menstrual window, and an interaction term (treatment × menstrual window) as fixed effects; and patient as a random effect. RESULTS: There was no interaction between the menstrual window and treatment effect, indicating that the reduction in migraine days under treatment was similar during the menstrual window and the remainder of the menstrual cycle (odds ratio for treatment = 0.44, 95% confidence interval = 0.38-0.51). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support prophylactic use of anti-CGRP (receptor) antibodies for women with menstrual migraine, as this leads to consistent reductions in number of migraine days during the entire menstrual cycle.

Response to erenumab assessed by Headache Impact Test-6 is modulated by genetic factors and arterial hypertension: An explorative cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Response predictors to erenumab (ERE) in migraine patients would benefit their clinical management. We investigate associations between patients' clinical characteristics and polymorphisms at calcitonin receptor-like receptor (CALCRL) and receptor activity-modifying protein 1 (RAMP1) genes and response to ERE treatment measured as clinically meaningful improvement on the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) score. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of a prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated study involves 110 migraine patients starting ERE 70 mg/month. Demographics, medical history, and migraine-related burden measured by HIT-6 score were collected during 3 months before and after ERE start. Selected polymorphic variants of CALCRL and RAMP1 genes were determined using real-time polymerase chain reaction. Logistic regression models identified independent predictors for response to ERE, defined as HIT-6 score improvement ≥ 8 points (HIT-6 responders [HIT-6 RESP] vs. HIT-6 nonresponders). RESULTS: At Month 3, 58 (52.7%) patients were HIT-6 RESP. Comorbid hypertension predicted a lower probability of being HIT-6 RESP (odds ratio [OR] = 0.160, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.047-0.548, p = 0.003). Compared to major alleles, minor alleles CALCRL rs6710852G and RAMP rs6431564G conferred an increased probability of being HIT-6 RESP (for each G allele: OR = 2.82, 95% CI = 1.03-7.73, p = 0.043; OR = 2.10, 95% CI = 1.05-4.22, p = 0.037). RAMP1 rs13386048A and RAMP1 rs12465864G decreased this probability (for each rs13386048A, OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.28-0.98, p = 0.042; for each rs12465864G, OR = 0.32, 95% CI = 0.13-0.75, p = 0.009). A genetic risk score based on the presence and number of identified risk alleles was independently associated with HIT-6 RESP (OR = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.33-0.72, p = 0.0003), surviving Bonferroni correction. CONCLUSIONS: Response to ERE was associated with comorbid hypertension and specific allelic variants in CALCRL and RAMP1 genes. Results require confirmation in future studies.

Patterns of response to anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies during first 6 months of treatment in resistant migraine patients: Impact on outcome.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The response pattern to monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene-related peptide (anti-CGRP MAbs) shown in migraine prevention clinical trials is not always reproducible at an individual level. This study was undertaken to describe patterns of start and consistency of the response to anti-CGRP MAbs during the first 6 months of treatment and the association with baseline clinical characteristics. METHODS: This is a prospective clinical cohort observational study. We included migraine patients treated with erenumab or galcanezumab evaluated at baseline and after 3 and 6 months (M3, M6) of treatment. The response was categorized according to reduction in monthly headache days (MHD): Sustained-response (SustainedR, ≥50% at M3 and M6), Short-Response (ShortR, M3 ≥50% and M6 <50%), Late-Response (LateR, M3 <50% and M6 ≥50%), Limited-Response (LimitedR, 25%-50% at M3 and M6), and No-Response (NoR, <25% at M3 and M6). Response patterns were compared at baseline and with outcome variables at M3 and M6. RESULTS: We included 357 patients with a headache frequency of 21.0 (interquartile range = 16.0-28.0) MHD, and 84.0% (300/357) were chronic migraine. The distribution according to response pattern was 37.0% (110/297) SustainedR, 16.8% (50/297) LateR, 10.4% (31/297) ShortR, 22.6% (67/297) LimitedR, and 13.1% NoR (39/297). The SustainedR and LateR groups showed statistically significant anxiety and depression score reduction at M3 and M6 compared to the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Initial response to anti-CGRP MAbs is not consistent in all patients. Persistence of anxiety and depression might be associated with lower response rates at M6.

Visual hypersensitivity in patients treated with anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (receptor) monoclonal antibodies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of treatment with anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP; receptor) antibodies on visual hypersensitivity in patients with migraine. BACKGROUND: Increased visual sensitivity can be present both during and outside migraine attacks. CGRP has been demonstrated to play a key role in light-aversive behavior. METHODS: In this prospective follow-up study, patients treated for migraine with erenumab (n = 105) or fremanezumab (n = 100) in the Leiden Headache Center were invited to complete a questionnaire on visual sensitivity (the Leiden Visual Sensitivity Scale [L-VISS]), pertaining to both their ictal and interictal state, before starting treatment (T0) and 3 months after treatment initiation (T1). Using a daily e-diary, treatment effectiveness was assessed in weeks 9-12 compared to a 4-week pre-treatment baseline period. L-VISS scores were compared between T0 and T1. Subsequently, the association between the reduction in L-VISS scores and the reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) was investigated. RESULTS: At 3 months, the visual hypersensitivity decreased, with a decrease in mean ± standard deviation (SD) ictal L-VISS (from 20.1 ± 7.7 to 19.2 ± 8.1, p = 0.042) and a decrease in mean ± SD interictal L-VISS (from 11.8 ± 6.6 to 11.1 ± 7.0, p = 0.050). We found a positive association between the reduction in MMD and the decrease in interictal L-VISS (ß = 0.2, p = 0.010) and the reduction in ictal L-VISS (ß = 0.3, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A decrease in visual hypersensitivity in patients with migraine after treatment with anti-CGRP (receptor) antibodies is positively associated with clinical response on migraine.

Post hoc analysis of clinical trial data and pharmacokinetic data to assess wearing-off of erenumab within monthly treatment cycle.

BACKGROUND: Treatment wearing-off has been reported for calcitonin gene-related peptide-pathway monoclonal antibodies, including erenumab, specifically in the last week of the monthly dosing cycle. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the consistency of erenumab effect throughout the monthly treatment cycle. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of four pivotal double-blind, randomized controlled studies of erenumab in episodic and chronic migraine, we assessed wearing-off based on change in weekly migraine days at week 4 versus average over weeks 1-3 in each monthly dosing cycle. Analyses were conducted at each monthly dosing cycle in all patients, in responders (≥50% reduction in weekly migraine days), and in consistent responders (response in ≥2monthly cycles). RESULTS: There was no evidence of wearing-off in the full study populations of two global studies (N = 946 and N = 656) and two Japan studies (N = 475 and N = 261). In the full study population, mean change in weekly migraine days at week 4 compared with the average over week 1-3 ranged from 0.15 days improvement to 0.19 days worsening in the placebo group and 0.08 days improvement to 0.20 days worsening in the erenumab groups. A subgroup of responders experienced wearing-off, but the extent of wearing-off did not differ between erenumab and placebo groups. The mean change in weekly migraine days at week 4 compared with the average over weeks 1-3 ranged from 0.34 to 0.61 days worsening in the placebo group and 0.27 to 0.78 days worsening in the erenumab groups. Few patients had persistent wearing-off in ≥2 consecutive monthly treatment cycles. For erenumab-treated responders, serum erenumab concentrations were similar among patients experiencing wearing-off and those maintaining response. CONCLUSION: No systematic wearing-off with erenumab was identified. Further research is needed to determine if wearing-off reported for some patients in clinical practice reflects a true treatment response pattern or normal fluctuations in migraine frequency.