Cardiovascular safety of dihydroergotamine mesylate delivered by precision olfactory delivery (INP104) for the acute treatment of migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To report the cardiovascular (CV) safety of dihydroergotamine mesylate (DHE) administered by precision olfactory delivery (INP104) from two clinical trials. BACKGROUND: Although the absolute risk is low, migraine is associated with an increased risk of CV events. DHE is a highly effective acute treatment for migraine, but due to its theoretical risk of promoting arterial vasoconstriction, DHE is contraindicated in patients with CV disease or an unfavorable risk factor profile. The INP104 is a novel drug-device combination product approved for acute treatment of migraine that delivers DHE to the upper nasal space using precision olfactory delivery (POD®). METHODS: The STOP 101 was a Phase 1 open-label study that assessed the safety, tolerability, and bioavailability of INP104 1.45 mg, intravenous DHE 1.0 mg, and MIGRANAL (nasal DHE) 2.0 mg in healthy participants. The STOP 301 was a pivotal Phase 3, open-label study that assessed the safety, tolerability, and exploratory efficacy of INP104 1.45 mg over 24 and 52 weeks in patients with migraine. In both studies, active or a history of CV disease, as well as significant CV risk factors, were exclusion criteria. RESULTS: In STOP 101, 36 participants received one or more doses of investigational product. Treatment with intravenous DHE, but not INP104 or nasal DHE, resulted in clinically relevant changes from baseline in systolic blood pressure (BP; 11.4 mmHg, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.9-15.0) and diastolic BP (13.3 mmHg, 95% CI 9.4-17.1) at 5 min post-dose, persisting up to 30 min post-dose for systolic BP (6.3 mmHg; 95% CI 3.0-9.5) and diastolic BP (7.9 mmHg, 95% CI 3.9-11.9). None of the treatments produced any clinically meaningful electrocardiogram (ECG) changes. In STOP 301, 354 patients received one or more doses of INP104. Over 24 weeks, five patients (1.4%) experienced a non-serious, vascular treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). Minimal changes were observed for BP and ECG parameters over 24 or 52 weeks. Off-protocol concomitant use of triptans and other ergot derivatives did not result in any TEAEs. CONCLUSION: In two separate studies, INP104 demonstrated a favorable CV safety profile when used in a study population without CV-related contraindications.

Safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of repetitive intravenous dihydroergotamine for refractory chronic migraine with cardiovascular risk factors: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Dihydroergotamine (DHE), like triptans, is contraindicated in patients with ischemic heart disease or coronary vasospasm. Its true safety, tolerability, and efficacy in patients with cardiovascular risk without ischemic heart disease or coronary vasospasm remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of repetitive intravenous DHE in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Jefferson Headache Center inpatient unit for refractory chronic migraine patients treated with our intravenous DHE protocol between January 1, 2019, and October 15, 2019. We evaluated tolerability and effectiveness outcomes based on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease 10-year calculated risk scores, stratified into low (<5.0%) and elevated (≥5.0%) risk. Data were presented in mean ± standard deviation or median (25th percentile, 75th percentile) if non-normally distributed. RESULTS: Among 347 patients (median age of 46 [36, 57], female n = 278 [80.1%]), who received inpatient intravenous DHE, 227 patients (age 53 [45, 60], female 81.1%) had calculable risk scores, 64 (28.2%) had elevated risk, and 38 (16.7%) had cardiology consultations. There were no clinically significant electrocardiogram abnormalities or cardiovascular adverse events. The median hospital length of stay was 6 (5, 7) days. Compared to the low-risk group, those with elevated risk had higher nausea (31.3% vs. 14.1%, p = 0.008), but similar initial DHE dose (0.5 [0.25, 0.5] vs. 0.5 [0.25, 0.5], p = 0.009), lower final DHE dose (0.75 [0.5, 1] vs. 1 [0.75, 1] p < 0.001), and lower pain reduction after admission (-3.8 [2.1, 6] vs. -5 [3, 7] p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving intravenous DHE by the Jefferson Headache Center inpatient headache protocol had significantly reduced pain severity at discharge. No clinically significant cardiac or electrocardiogram abnormalities were detected in patients with elevated (or low) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. Repetitive intravenous DHE used by our protocol was safe in refractory chronic migraine patients.

The Gut-brain Connection and Episodic Migraine: an Update.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Historical evidence suggests a shared underlying etiology for migraine and gastrointestinal (GI) disorders that involves the gut-brain axis. Here we provide narrative review of recent literature on the gut-brain connection and migraine to emphasize the importance of tailoring treatment plans for patients with episodic migraine who experience GI comorbidities and symptoms. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent population-based studies report the prevalence of migraine and GI disorders as comorbidities as well as overlapping symptomology. American Headache Society (AHS) guidelines have integrated GI symptoms as part of migraine diagnostic criteria and recommend nonoral therapies for patients with GI symptoms or conditions. Nasal delivery is a recommended nonoral alternative; however, it is important to understand potential adverse events that may cause or worsen GI symptoms in some patients due to the site of drug deposition within the nasal cavity with some nasal therapies. Lastly, clinical perspectives emphasize the importance of identifying GI symptoms and comorbidities in patients with episodic migraine to best individualize migraine management. Support for an association between the gut-brain axis and migraine continues to prevail in recent literature; however, the relationship remains complex and not well elucidated. The presence of GI comorbidities and symptoms must be carefully considered when making treatment decisions for patients with episodic migraine.

Trial of Galcanezumab in Prevention of Episodic Cluster Headache.

BACKGROUND: Episodic cluster headache is a disabling neurologic disorder that is characterized by daily headache attacks that occur over periods of weeks or months. Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to calcitonin gene-related peptide, may be a preventive treatment for cluster headache. METHODS: We enrolled patients who had at least one attack every other day, at least four total attacks, and no more than eight attacks per day during a baseline assessment, as well as a history of cluster headache periods lasting at least 6 weeks, and randomly assigned them to receive galcanezumab (at a dose of 300 mg) or placebo, administered subcutaneously at baseline and at 1 month. The primary end point was the mean change from baseline in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks across weeks 1 through 3 after receipt of the first dose. The key secondary end point was the percentage of patients who had a reduction from baseline of at least 50% in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks at week 3. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Recruitment was halted before the trial reached the planned sample size of 162 because too few volunteers met the eligibility criteria. Of 106 enrolled patients, 49 were randomly assigned to receive galcanezumab and 57 to receive placebo. The mean (±SD) number of cluster headache attacks per week in the baseline period was 17.8±10.1 in the galcanezumab group and 17.3±10.1 in the placebo group. The mean reduction in the weekly frequency of cluster headache attacks across weeks 1 through 3 was 8.7 attacks in the galcanezumab group, as compared with 5.2 in the placebo group (difference, 3.5 attacks per week; 95% confidence interval, 0.2 to 6.7; P = 0.04). The percentage of patients who had a reduction of at least 50% in headache frequency at week 3 was 71% in the galcanezumab group and 53% in the placebo group. There were no substantial between-group differences in the incidence of adverse events, except that 8% of the patients in the galcanezumab group had injection-site pain. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab administered subcutaneously at a dose of 300 mg once monthly reduced the weekly frequency of attacks of episodic cluster headache across weeks 1 through 3 after the initial injection, as compared with placebo. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02397473.).

Variability in recurrence rates with acute treatments for migraine: why recurrence is not an appropriate outcome measure.

BACKGROUND: Headache recurrence is a common feature of acute therapies, whether approved or still in development, and continues to be a significant problem for both the patient and the clinician. Further complicating this issue is lack of standardization in definitions of recurrence used in clinical trials, as well as disparity in patient characteristics, rendering a comparison of different acute medications challenging. Recurrence has serious clinical implications, which can include an increased risk for new-onset chronic migraine and/or development of medication overuse headache. The aim of this review is to illustrate variability of recurrence rates depending on prevailing definitions in the literature for widely used acute treatments for migraine and to emphasize sustained response as a clinically relevant endpoint for measuring prolonged efficacy. BODY: A literature search of PubMed for articles of approved acute therapies for migraine that reported recurrence rates was performed. Study drugs of interest included select triptans, gepants, lasmiditan, and dihydroergotamine mesylate. An unpublished post hoc analysis of an investigational dihydroergotamine mesylate product that evaluated recurrence rates using several different definitions of recurrence common in the literature is also included. Depending on the criteria established by the clinical trial and the definition of recurrence used, rates of recurrence vary considerably across different acute therapies for migraine, making it difficult to compare results of different trials to assess the sustained (i.e., over a single attack) and the prolonged (i.e., over multiple attacks) efficacy of a particular study medication. CONCLUSION: A standardized definition of recurrence is necessary to help physicians evaluate recurrence rates of different abortive agents for migraine. Sustained pain relief or freedom may be more comprehensive efficacy outcome measures than recurrence. Future efficacy studies should be encouraged to use the recommended definition of sustained pain freedom set by the International Headache Society.

Medication overuse in a subgroup analysis of phase 3 placebo-controlled studies of galcanezumab in the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine.

INTRODUCTION: Acute medication overuse is prevalent in patients with migraine. METHODS: In three phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies, patients with episodic migraine (EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2) or chronic migraine (REGAIN) were randomized 2:1:1 to monthly subcutaneous injections of placebo or galcanezumab 120 or 240 mg for 3 or 6 months. This subgroup analysis evaluated mean changes in the number of monthly migraine headache days in each treatment among patients with versus without baseline acute medication overuse via mixing modelling with repeated measures. RESULTS: The percentages of patients with baseline medication overuse in placebo, galcanezumab 120-mg and 240-mg groups, respectively, were 19.4%, 17.3%, and 19.3% for EVOLVE-1/-2 (pooled; post hoc), and 63.4%, 64.3%, and 64.1% for REGAIN (a priori). Both galcanezumab doses demonstrated significant improvement compared with placebo for overall least squares mean change in monthly migraine headache days in patients with baseline medication overuse in both the episodic and chronic migraine studies (p ≤ 0.001). Furthermore, both galcanezumab doses reduced average monthly medication overuse rates compared to placebo (p < 0.001) in both patient populations with medication overuse at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab appears to be effective for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine in patients who overuse acute medications.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02614183, NCT02614196, and NCT02614261.

Efficacy of galcanezumab in patients with migraine who did not benefit from commonly prescribed preventive treatments.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab is a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody (mAb) indicated for the preventive treatment of migraine. While galcanezumab has demonstrated efficacy in patients who did not respond to prior preventive medications in general, its efficacy in patients who did not benefit from individual, commonly prescribed preventive treatments due to inadequate efficacy or safety/tolerability remains unknown. METHODS: CONQUER was a 3-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b study that enrolled patients with episodic or chronic migraine who had 2 to 4 migraine preventive medication category failures in the past 10 years. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive placebo (N = 230) or galcanezumab 120 mg/month (240 mg loading dose; N = 232). Post hoc analyses were conducted to determine the efficacy of galcanezumab in patients who had not benefited from six of the most commonly prescribed migraine preventive medications. The mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days and ≥ 50 % response rates were assessed over months 1-3. Improvement in Migraine-Specific Questionnaire Role Function-Restrictive (MSQ-RFR) scores were assessed at month 3. The endpoints were estimated via mixed model with repeated measures. RESULTS: The most common treatment failures due to inadequate efficacy or safety/tolerability, which at least 20 % of patients reported trying without benefit, included topiramate, amitriptyline, propranolol, valproate or divalproex, onabotulinum toxin A, and metoprolol. Patients who had not previously benefited from these treatments had a greater mean reduction in monthly migraine headache days across months 1-3 in the galcanezumab group compared to placebo (all p < 0.01). More patients treated with galcanezumab experienced a ≥ 50 % reduction from baseline in monthly migraine headache days across months 1-3 compared to placebo (all p < 0.05). Galcanezumab-treated patients had a greater improvement in mean MSQ-RFR scores at month 3 compared to placebo (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this population, galcanezumab was effective in reducing monthly migraine headache days, improving response rates, and enhancing quality of life in patients who had not previously benefited from topiramate, amitriptyline, propranolol, valproate or divalproex, onabotulinum toxin A, and/or metoprolol due to inadequate efficacy or safety/tolerability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03559257 (CONQUER).

A link between gastrointestinal disorders and migraine: Insights into the gut-brain connection.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a complex, multifaceted, and disabling headache disease that is often complicated by gastrointestinal (GI) conditions, such as gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, and cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS). Functional dyspepsia and CVS are part of a spectrum of disorders newly classified as disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI). Gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia are both associated with delayed gastric emptying, while nausea and vomiting are prominent in CVS, which are also symptoms that commonly occur with migraine attacks. Furthermore, these gastric disorders are comorbidities frequently reported by patients with migraine. While very few studies assessing GI disorders in patients with migraine have been performed, they do demonstrate a physiological link between these conditions. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the available studies supporting a link between GI comorbidities and migraine, including historical and current scientific evidence, as well as provide evidence that symptoms of GI disorders are also observed outside of migraine attacks during the interictal period. Additionally, the importance of route of administration and formulation of migraine therapies for patients with GI symptoms will be discussed. METHODS: A literature search of PubMed for articles relating to the relationship between the gut and the brain with no restriction on the publication year was performed. Studies providing scientific support for associations of gastroparesis, functional dyspepsia, and CVS with migraine and the impact these associations may have on migraine treatment were the primary focus. This is a narrative review of identified studies. RESULTS: Although the association between migraine and GI disorders has received very little attention in the literature, the existing evidence suggests that they may share a common etiology. In particular, the relationship between migraine, gastric motility, and vomiting has important clinical implications in the treatment of migraine, as delayed gastric emptying and vomiting may affect oral dosing compliance, and thus, the absorption and efficacy of oral migraine treatments. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence of a link between migraine and GI comorbidities, including those under the DGBI classification. Many patients do not find adequate relief with oral migraine therapies, which further necessitates increased recognition of GI disorders in patients with migraine by the headache community.

STOP 301: A Phase 3, open-label study of safety, tolerability, and exploratory efficacy of INP104, Precision Olfactory Delivery (POD® ) of dihydroergotamine mesylate, over 24/52 weeks in acute treatment of migraine attacks in adult patients.

OBJECTIVE: To report the safety, tolerability, exploratory efficacy, and patient acceptability of INP104 for the acute treatment of migraine from the Phase 3 STOP 301 trial. BACKGROUND: Dihydroergotamine (DHE) has long been used to treat migraine, but intravenous administration is invasive, frequently associated with adverse events (AEs), and not suitable for at-home administration. INP104 is an investigational drug device that delivers DHE mesylate to the upper nasal space using a Precision Olfactory Delivery technology and was developed to overcome the shortcomings of available DHE products. METHODS: STOP 301 was an open-label, 24-week safety study, with a 28-week extension period. After a 28-day screening period where patients used their "best usual care" to treat migraine attacks, patients were given INP104 (1.45 mg) to self-administer nasally with self-recognized attacks. The primary objective of this study was to assess safety and tolerability, with a specific focus on nasal mucosa and olfactory function. Exploratory objectives included efficacy assessments of migraine measures and a patient acceptability questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 360 patients entered the 24-week treatment period, with 354 patients dosing at least once. INP104-related treatment-emergent AEs were reported by 36.7% (130/354) of patients, and 6.8% (24/354) discontinued treatment due to AEs over 24 weeks. No new safety signals were observed following delivery to the upper nasal space. Pain freedom, the most bothersome symptom freedom, and pain relief at 2 h post-INP104 were self-reported by 38.0% (126/332), 52.1% (173/332), and 66.3% (167/252) of patients, respectively. A low recurrence rate at 24 and 48 h was observed (7.1% [9/126] and 14.3% [18/126], respectively). Most patients found INP104 easy to use and preferred it over their current therapy. CONCLUSIONS: INP104 has the potential to deliver rapid symptom relief, without injection, that is well tolerated and suitable for outpatient use. Results suggest INP104 may be a promising treatment for patients with migraine.

Effect of galcanezumab on severity and symptoms of migraine in phase 3 trials in patients with episodic or chronic migraine.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated a significant reduction in monthly migraine headache days compared with placebo. Here, we analyze data from 3 randomized clinical trials (2 episodic trials [EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2] and 1 chronic trial [REGAIN]), to examine if galcanezumab also alleviates the severity and symptoms of migraine. METHODS: The episodic migraine trials were 6-month, double-blind studies in patients with episodic migraine (4-14 monthly migraine headache days). The chronic migraine trial was a 3-month, double-blind study in patients with chronic migraine (≥ 15 headache days per month, where ≥ 8 met criteria for migraine). Patients (18-65 years) were randomized to placebo or galcanezumab 120 mg with a 240-mg loading dose or 240 mg. Patients recorded headache characteristics, duration, severity, and presence of associated symptoms with each headache. The outcomes analyzed were changes from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days with nausea and/or vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia, aura, and prodromal symptoms other than aura. Additional outcomes analyzed included the number of moderate-to-severe monthly migraine headache days, number of severe migraine headache days, and mean severity of remaining migraine headache days. Change from baseline in the proportion of days with nausea and/or vomiting and the proportion of days with photophobia and phonophobia among the remaining monthly migraine headache days were also analyzed. RESULTS: Galcanezumab was superior to placebo in reducing the frequency of migraine headache days with associated symptoms of migraine such as nausea and/or vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia, and prodromal symptoms. Galcanezumab reduced the frequency of migraine headache days with aura in the episodic migraine studies. There was a significant reduction in the proportion of remaining migraine headache days with nausea and/or vomiting for the episodic and chronic migraine studies, and with photophobia and phonophobia for the episodic migraine studies. Galcanezumab was superior to placebo in reducing the number of monthly moderate-to-severe migraine headache days and the overall and monthly severe migraine headache days. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab reduces the frequency of migraine headache days and can alleviate potentially disabling non-pain symptoms on days when migraine is present in patients with episodic or chronic migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT, NCT02614183 (EVOLVE-1), registered 25 November 2015; NCT, NCT02614196 , (EVOLVE-2), registered 25 November 2015; NCT, NCT02614261 (REGAIN), registered 25 November 2015.

Evaluation of LY573144 (lasmiditan) in a preclinical model of medication overuse headache.

BACKGROUND: Medication overuse is a significant issue that complicates the treatment of headache disorders. The most effective medications for the acute treatment of migraine all have the capacity to induce medication overuse headache (MOH). Novel acute migraine-specific treatments are being developed. However, because the mechanism(s) underlying medication overuse headache are not well understood, it is difficult to predict whether any particular acute medication will induce MOH in susceptible individuals. LY573144 (lasmiditan), a 5-HT1F receptor agonist, has recently been shown to be effective in the acute treatment of migraine in phase 3 trials. The aim of this study is to determine whether frequent administration of lasmiditan induces behaviors consistent with MOH in a pre-clinical rat model. METHODS: Sprague Dawley rats were administered six doses of lasmiditan (10 mg/kg), sumatriptan (10 mg/kg), or sterile water orally over 2 weeks and cutaneous allodynia was evaluated regularly in the periorbital and hindpaw regions using von Frey filaments. Testing continued until mechanosensitivity returned to baseline levels. Rats were then submitted to bright light stress (BLS) or nitric oxide (NO) donor administration and were again evaluated for cutaneous allodynia in the periorbital and hindpaw regions hourly for 5 hours. RESULTS: Both lasmiditan and sumatriptan exhibited comparable levels of drug-induced cutaneous allodynia in both the periorbital and hindpaw regions, which resolved after cessation of drug administration. Both lasmiditan and sumatriptan pre-treatment resulted in cutaneous allodynia that was evoked by either BLS or NO donor. CONCLUSIONS: In a pre-clinical rat model of MOH, oral lasmiditan, like sumatriptan, induced acute transient cutaneous allodynia in the periorbital and hindpaw regions that after resolution could be re-evoked by putative migraine triggers. These results suggest that lasmiditan has the capacity to induce MOH through persistent latent peripheral and central sensitization mechanisms.

Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache: Results from 3-month double-blind treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To report efficacy and safety of galcanezumab in adults with chronic cluster headache. BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide and inhibits its biological activity. METHODS: This study comprised a prospective baseline period, a 12-week double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment period, and a 52-week open-label period. Up to six protocol-specified concomitant preventive medications were allowed if patients were on a stable dose for 2 months prior to the prospective baseline period. Patients were randomized 1:1 to monthly subcutaneous galcanezumab (300 mg) or placebo. The primary endpoint was overall mean change from baseline in weekly attack frequency with galcanezumab compared to placebo. Key secondary endpoints were ≥50% response rate and percentage of patients meeting sustained response. Results from the double-blind treatment period are reported. RESULTS: A total of 237 patients were randomized and treated (120 placebo; 117 galcanezumab). At baseline, the mean age was 45 years and 63% were using ≥1 preventive drug. The primary endpoint was not met; mean change in weekly attack frequency was -4.6 placebo versus -5.4 galcanezumab (p = 0.334). Key secondary endpoints also were not met. Injection site-related treatment-emergent adverse events were more common in the galcanezumab than the placebo group, with significantly more injection site erythema. CONCLUSION: Treatment with galcanezumab 300 mg did not achieve its primary and key secondary endpoints. This study underscores the potential distinct biology of cCH as well as the significant unmet need for safe, effective, and well-tolerated preventive treatment. The safety profile of galcanezumab in cCH is consistent with that observed in trials of episodic CH and migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02438826; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02438826.

Systematic Review: Acupuncture vs Standard Pharmacological Therapy for Migraine Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Standard pharmacological treatment of migraine has many shortcomings. Acupuncture is becoming a more widely used therapy for the prevention and treatment of migraine, but its effectiveness is still in question when compared to the pharmacological treatments even though very few of these have Class A and B evidence for migraine prevention. This is a systematic review of data from existing randomized trials that compare the effectiveness of acupuncture treatment with conventional migraine preventative medications. METHODS: Custom-designed strategy was used for searching Pubmed (includes MEDLINE), Scopus (includes EMBASE). The inclusion criteria were English language and randomized trials. No date restriction was utilized. We included randomized trials and randomized controlled trials in adult patients that compared the clinical effects of acupuncture with a standard migraine preventive medication in patients with a diagnosis of chronic or episodic migraine with or without aura. We excluded letters and studies on acupuncture for headaches other than migraine. Two reviewers checked eligibility; extracted information on patients, interventions, methods, and results; and assessed the quality of the acupuncture intervention based on the American Academy of Neurology Classification of evidence matrix for therapeutic trials. The present review was not registered. RESULTS: Out of the 706 search results, 7 clinical trials, with a total of 1430 participants, met inclusion criteria for trials comparing the effectiveness of acupuncture to standard pharmacologic treatment. Several of the studies showed acupuncture to be more effective than standard pharmacological treatments for migraine prevention; however, methodological heterogeneity precluded aggregation of these data. CONCLUSIONS: There is growing evidence that acupuncture is just as effective and has fewer side effects than many of the standard pharmaceutical agents that are currently used. However, the heterogeneity of the existing studies limits the effective comparison and analysis.

The Role of Diet and Nutrition in Migraine Triggers and Treatment: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a disabling primary headache disorder often associated with triggers. Diet-related triggers are a common cause of migraine and certain diets have been reported to decrease the frequency of migraine attacks if dietary triggers or patterns are adjusted. OBJECTIVE: The systematic literature review was conducted to qualitatively summarize evidence from the published literature regarding the role of diet patterns, diet-related triggers, and diet interventions in people with migraine. METHODS: A literature search was carried out on diet patterns, diet-related triggers, and diet interventions used to treat and/or prevent migraine attacks, using an a priori protocol. MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched to identify studies assessing the effect of diet, food, and nutrition in people with migraine aged ≥18 years. Only primary literature sources (randomized controlled trials or observational studies) were included and searches were conducted from January 2000 to March 2019. The NICE checklist was used to assess the quality of the included studies of randomized controlled trials and the Downs and Black checklist was used for the assessment of observational studies. RESULTS: A total of 43 studies were included in this review, of which 11 assessed diet patterns, 12 assessed diet interventions, and 20 assessed diet-related triggers. The overall quality of evidence was low, as most of the (68%) studies assessing diet patterns and diet-related triggers were cross-sectional studies or patient surveys. The studies regarding diet interventions assessed a variety of diets, such as ketogenic diet, elimination diets, and low-fat diets. Alcohol and caffeine uses were the most common diet patterns and diet-related triggers associated with increased frequency of migraine attacks. Most of the diet interventions, such as low-fat and elimination diets, were related to a decrease in the frequency of migraine attacks. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited high-quality randomized controlled trial data on diet patterns or diet-related triggers. A few small randomized controlled trials have assessed diet interventions in preventing migraine attacks without strong results. Although many patients already reported avoiding personal diet-related triggers in their migraine management, high-quality research is needed to confirm the effect of diet in people with migraine.

Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes in Adult Patients With Episodic or Chronic Migraine Treated With Galcanezumab: Data From Three Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, and REGAIN Studies.

OBJECTIVE: Blood pressure (BP), pulse, electrocardiogram (ECG), and clinical cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with episodic or chronic migraine treated for up to 6 months with galcanezumab compared to placebo were evaluated. BACKGROUND: Calcitonin gene-related peptide, a potent microvascular vasodilator, has a hypothesized protective role in CV health. Increased CV risks have been reported in patients with migraine. METHODS: In 2 similarly designed episodic migraine 6-month studies and 1 chronic migraine 3-month study, data from patients randomized (1:1:2) to subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab 120 mg/month (following initial 240 mg loading dose) or 240 mg/month or placebo were pooled. Treatment comparisons for cardiovascular treatment-emergent adverse events (CV TEAE) and categorical and mean changes in BP, pulse, and ECG were evaluated using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Mean changes from baseline in BP, pulse, and ECG were evaluated using the analysis of covariance model. RESULTS: Overall, among galcanezumab 120 mg (n = 705) and 240 mg (n = 730), and placebo (n = 1451) groups, the percentage of patients reporting ≥1 CV TEAE was low and was similar between the galcanezumab 120 mg (2.6%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.9; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.5,1.5) and galcanezumab 240 mg (3.3%; OR = 1.1; 95% CI: 0.7,1.9), and placebo (2.9%) groups. The frequency of any individual CV TEAE, broad or narrow term, was ≤1.4%. The CV-related serious adverse events that occurred in the galcanezumab 240 mg group (n = 3; acute myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, and transient ischemic attack) and placebo group (n = 3; pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and myocardial infarction) were not considered treatment related. Four placebo- and 1 galcanezumab-treated patient discontinued due to a CV TEAE. Least squares mean and categorical changes from baseline in BP, pulse, and QT interval corrected using Fridericia's correction were similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this 6-month treatment trial, the percentages of galcanezumab- and placebo-treated patients that reported CV TEAEs or serious adverse events were low and similar between groups with few discontinuations. Thus, no clinically meaningful treatment group differences were observed for changes in BP, pulse, or ECG parameters. Additional longer-term studies in a broader and larger cohort are required to better characterize CV safety.

Rapid Onset of Effect of Galcanezumab for the Prevention of Episodic Migraine: Analysis of the EVOLVE Studies.

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.

Phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of lasmiditan for acute treatment of migraine.

Lasmiditan, a serotonin 5-HT1F receptor agonist, was effective for acute treatment of patients with migraine in a phase 3 double-blind randomized controlled study. The current study was designed to replicate these findings in a generalizable population of patients with migraine, including those with a cardiovascular medical history. This prospective, double-blind, phase 3 multicentre study randomly assigned patients with migraine with and without aura (1:1:1:1 ratio) to oral lasmiditan 200 mg, 100 mg, 50 mg, or placebo. Patients were instructed to dose at home within 4 h of onset of migraine attack of at least moderate intensity and not improving. The primary objective was to assess the proportion of patients' headache pain-free and most bothersome symptom-free at 2 h post-dose for each dose of lasmiditan versus placebo (NCT02605174). Patients (n = 3005) were assigned and treated (n = 2583, safety population): 1938 lasmiditan (200 mg n = 528, 100 mg n = 532, and 50 mg n = 556 included in primary analysis) and 645 placebo (540 included in primary analysis). Most patients (79.2%) had ≥1 cardiovascular risk factor at baseline, in addition to migraine. Lasmiditan was associated with significantly more pain freedom at 2 h (lasmiditan 200 mg: 38.8%, odds ratio 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.8-3.1, P < 0.001; 100 mg: 31.4%, odds ratio 1.7, 1.3-2.2, P < 0.001; 50 mg: 28.6%, odds ratio 1.5, 1.1-1.9, P = 0.003 versus placebo 21.3%) and freedom from most bothersome symptom at 2 h (lasmiditan 200 mg: 48.7%, odds ratio 1.9, 95% confidence interval 1.4-2.4, P < 0.001; 100 mg: 44.2%, odds ratio 1.6, 1.2-2.0, P < 0.001; 50 mg: 40.8%, odds ratio 1.4, 1.1-1.8, P = 0.009 versus placebo 33.5%). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 253 of 649 (39.0%), 229 of 635 (36.1%), and 166 of 654 (25.4%) of patients on lasmiditan 200, 100, and 50 mg, respectively, versus 75 of 645 (11.6%) on placebo. Most adverse events were CNS-related and included dizziness, somnolence and paraesthesia. Lasmiditan was effective at 2 h post-dose for acute treatment of migraine at all oral doses tested. Efficacy and safety were consistent with the previous phase 3 study.

Onset of efficacy and duration of response of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: a post-hoc analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: As new migraine prevention treatments are developed, the onset of a preventive effect, how long it is maintained and whether patients initially non-responsive develop clinically meaningful responses with continued treatment can be assessed. METHODS: Analyses were conducted post-hoc of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II-a study in patients with episodic migraine receiving galcanezumab 150 mg or placebo biweekly for 12 weeks (Lancet Neurol 13:885, 2014). The number of migraine headache days per week, and onset of efficacy measured as the first week galacanezumab separated from placebo were determined. Patients with ≥50%, ≥75% and 100% reduction in migraine headache days from baseline at months 1, 2 and 3 were calculated and defined as sustained responses. Non-responders (<50% response) at month 1 or 2 who then showed ≥50%, ≥75% and 100% response at later time-points were calculated. RESULTS: Patients were randomised to galcanezumab (n=107) or placebo (n=110). A significant (p=0.018) change of -0.89±0.11 (galcanezumab) vs -0.53±0.11 (placebo) migraine headache days indicated onset at week 1. Forty-seven per cent of galcanezumab and 25% of placebo patients responding at month 1 maintained response through months 2 and 3. Of non-responders at month 1, 27% on galcanezumab and 20% on placebo responded on months 2 and 3, and 50% of galcanezumab non-responders in months 1 and 2 responded on month 3, vs 24% on placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The onset of efficacy of galcanezumab is within 1 week in a majority of patients, and patients receiving galcanezumab are twice more likely to maintain responses than placebo patients. Early non-responders may respond by month 2 or month 3. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01625988.

Efficacy of galcanezumab in patients with chronic migraine and a history of preventive treatment failure.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy of galcanezumab in chronic migraine has been demonstrated in a pivotal Phase 3 study. Here, we assess efficacy in patients who have failed ≥2 and ≥1 prior migraine preventives for efficacy and/or safety reasons, and in those who never failed. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS: REGAIN (NCT02614261) was a Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with chronic migraine. Patients were randomized 2:1:1 to receive placebo, galcanezumab 120 mg/240 mg once monthly during a double-blind treatment period lasting three months. Subgroup analyses were conducted among patients who failed ≥2 and ≥1 prior preventives and who never failed previously. Outcomes assessed were change from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days, proportion of patients with ≥50% and ≥75% response (reduction in monthly migraine headache days), change in number of monthly migraine headache days with acute medication use and change in patient functioning per Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire Role Function Restrictive (MSQ RF-R) domain score. RESULTS: Treatment with galcanezumab versus placebo resulted in significant improvements (p < 0.01) in overall reduction (Months 1-3) from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days in patients with prior failures (LS mean change [SE]: ≥2 prior failures: galcanezumab 120 mg: -5.35 (0.71); galcanezumab 240 mg: -2.77 (0.66); placebo: -1.01 (0.54); ≥1 prior failures: galcanezumab 120 mg: -5.53 (0.60), galcanezumab 240 mg: -3.53 (0.59); placebo: -2.02 (0.49). Similarly, significant results were seen with galcanezumab versus placebo for ≥50% and ≥75% response rates, reductions in acute medication use and improvements in MSQ RF-R domain score. In the subgroup with no prior preventive failures, results were statistically significant for the 240 mg galcanezumab group versus placebo on all outcome measures, and for the 120 mg group on the reduction in migraine headache days with acute medication use. There was also a higher placebo response observed in the patients with no prior preventive failures. CONCLUSION: Galcanezumab is consistently efficacious versus placebo in reducing monthly migraine headache days and several other key outcomes in patients with chronic migraine who have failed ≥2 or ≥1 preventives previously. In the subgroup with no prior failures, greater numerical differences were seen with galcanezumab, but statistical separation from placebo varied by dose and outcome. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER NUMBER: NCT02614261.

CGRP and the Trigeminal System in Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this narrative review is to provide an overview of migraine pathophysiology, with an emphasis on the role of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) within the context of the trigeminovascular system. BACKGROUND: Migraine is a prevalent and disabling neurological disease that is characterized in part by intense, throbbing, and unilateral headaches. Despite recent advances in understanding its pathophysiology, migraine still represents an unmet medical need, as it is often underrecognized and undertreated. Although CGRP has been known to play a pivotal role in migraine for the last 2 decades, this has now received more interest spurred by the early clinical successes of drugs that block CGRP signaling in the trigeminovascular system. DESIGN: This narrative review presents an update on the role of CGRP within the trigeminovascular system. PubMed searches were used to find recent (ie, 2016 to November 2018) published articles presenting new study results. Review articles are also included not as primary references but to bring these to the attention of the reader. Original research is referenced in describing the core of the narrative, and review articles are used to support ancillary points. RESULTS: The trigeminal ganglion neurons provide the connection between the periphery, stemming from the interface between the primary afferent fibers of the trigeminal ganglion and the meningeal vasculature and the central terminals in the trigeminal nucleus caudalis. The neuropeptide CGRP is abundant in trigeminal ganglion neurons, and is released from the peripheral nerve and central nerve terminals as well as being secreted within the trigeminal ganglion. Release of CGRP from the peripheral terminals initiates a cascade of events that include increased synthesis of nitric oxide and sensitization of the trigeminal nerves. Secreted CGRP in the trigeminal ganglion interacts with adjacent neurons and satellite glial cells to perpetuate peripheral sensitization, and can drive central sensitization of the second-order neurons. A shift in central sensitization from activity-dependent to activity-independent central sensitization may indicate a mechanism driving the progression of episodic migraine to chronic migraine. The pathophysiology of cluster headache is much more obscure than that of migraine, but emerging evidence suggests that it may also involve hypersensitivity of the trigeminovascular system. Ongoing clinical studies with therapies targeted at CGRP will provide additional, valuable insights into the pathophysiology of this disorder. CONCLUSIONS: CGRP plays an essential role in the pathophysiology of migraine. Treatments that interfere with the functioning of CGRP in the peripheral trigeminal system are effective against migraine. Blocking sensitization of the trigeminal nerve by attenuating CGRP activity in the periphery may be sufficient to block a migraine attack. Additionally, the potential exists that this therapeutic strategy may also alleviate cluster headache as well.