Safety and tolerability of monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway and gepants in migraine prevention: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background Direct comparisons of the tolerability and safety of migraine preventive treatments targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway are lacking. This study aimed to compare the safety and tolerability of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies and gepants in migraine prevention. Methods A network meta-analysis of phase 3 randomized controlled trials assessing the safety and tolerability of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (erenumab, eptinezumab, fremanezumab, or galcanezumab) and gepants (atogepant, rimegepant) in migraine prevention was performed. Primary outcomes were treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included any adverse events, adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation and individual adverse events. Results We included 19 randomized controlled trials, comprising 14,584 patients. Atogepant 120 mg (OR 2.22, 95% CI [1.26, 3.91]) and galcanezumab 240 mg (OR 1.63, 95% CI [1.33, 2.00]) showed the largest odds of treatment-emergent adverse events compared to placebo. While eptinezumab 30 mg had greater odds of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (OR 2.62, 95% CI [1.03,6.66]). No significant differences in serious adverse events were found between active treatments and placebo. Eptinezumab was associated with the lowest odds of treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events compared to placebo, whereas erenumab was associated with the lowest odds of any adverse events and quarterly fremanezumab with the lowest odds of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. Conclusion Monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway and gepants are a safe and well tolerated option for migraine prevention.

[1]  R. Cady,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Eptinezumab in Patients With Chronic Migraine: PROMISE-2. , 2023, Neurology.

[2]  D. García‐Azorín,et al.  Persistence, use of resources and costs in patients under migraine preventive treatment: the PERSEC study , 2022, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[3]  M. Silvestrini,et al.  Atogepant for the Prevention of Episodic Migraine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety , 2022, Neurology and Therapy.

[4]  S. Sacco,et al.  European Headache Federation guideline on the use of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene related peptide pathway for migraine prevention – 2022 update , 2022, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[5]  L. Bendtsen,et al.  Real-world long-term efficacy and safety of erenumab in adults with chronic migraine: a 52-week, single-center, prospective, observational study , 2022, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[6]  L. Edvinsson Iron deficiency screening is a key issue in chronic inflammatory diseases: A call of actions. , 2022, Journal of internal medicine.

[7]  Zhong Wang,et al.  The efficacy and safety of atogepant for the prophylactic treatment of migraine: evidence from randomized controlled trials , 2022, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[8]  Shuu-Jiun Wang,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness and Tolerability of the Pharmacology of Monoclonal Antibodies Targeting the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide and Its Receptor for the Prevention of Chronic Migraine: a Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials , 2021, Neurotherapeutics.

[9]  R. Lipton,et al.  Atogepant for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine. , 2021, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  K. Hirata,et al.  Efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for chronic migraine prevention: Multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group trial in Japanese and Korean patients , 2021, Headache.

[11]  Miki Ishida,et al.  Efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for episodic migraine prevention: Multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group trial in Japanese and Korean patients , 2021, Headache.

[12]  Shuu-Jiun Wang,et al.  Randomised, controlled trial of erenumab for the prevention of episodic migraine in patients from Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America: The EMPOwER study , 2021, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[13]  K. Hirata,et al.  Erenumab treatment for migraine prevention in Japanese patients: Efficacy and safety results from a Phase 3, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study , 2021, Headache.

[14]  P. Pozo‐Rosich,et al.  The impact of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in resistant migraine patients: a real-world evidence observational study , 2021, Journal of Neurology.

[15]  C. You,et al.  Efficacy and Safety of Monoclonal Antibody Against Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide or Its Receptor for Migraine: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis , 2021, Frontiers in Pharmacology.

[16]  R. Cady,et al.  Long-term safety and tolerability of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine: a 2-year, open-label, phase 3 trial , 2021, BMC Neurology.

[17]  D. Dodick,et al.  Understanding the migraine treatment landscape prior to the introduction of calcitonin gene‐related peptide inhibitors: Results from the Assessment of TolerabiliTy and Effectiveness in MigrAINe Patients using Preventive Treatment (ATTAIN) study , 2021, Headache.

[18]  S. Silberstein,et al.  Long‐term efficacy and safety of erenumab in migraine prevention: Results from a 5‐year, open‐label treatment phase of a randomized clinical trial , 2021, European journal of neurology.

[19]  R. Lipton,et al.  Oral rimegepant for preventive treatment of migraine: a phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial , 2020, The Lancet.

[20]  Eun Sug Park,et al.  Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 , 2020, Lancet.

[21]  S. Aurora,et al.  Safety and efficacy of galcanezumab in patients for whom previous migraine preventive medication from two to four categories had failed (CONQUER): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial , 2020, The Lancet Neurology.

[22]  A. Szegedi,et al.  Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of orally administered atogepant for the prevention of episodic migraine in adults: a double-blind, randomised phase 2b/3 trial , 2020, The Lancet Neurology.

[23]  R. Lipton,et al.  Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of migraine attacks in episodic migraine in adults , 2020, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[24]  J. Olesen,et al.  Two‐Hour CGRP Infusion Causes Gastrointestinal Hyperactivity: Possible Relevance for CGRP Antibody Treatment , 2020, Headache.

[25]  A. Maassenvandenbrink,et al.  Pharmacological treatment of migraine: CGRP and 5-HT beyond the triptans. , 2020, Pharmacology & therapeutics.

[26]  R. Cady,et al.  Eptinezumab in episodic migraine: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (PROMISE-1) , 2020, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[27]  Gaigai Li,et al.  Efficacy and safety of calcitonin-gene-related peptide binding monoclonal antibodies for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine – an updated systematic review and meta-analysis , 2019, BMC Neurology.

[28]  R. Lipton,et al.  Does Mindfulness‐Based Cognitive Therapy for Migraine Reduce Migraine‐Related Disability in People with Episodic and Chronic Migraine? A Phase 2b Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial , 2019, Headache.

[29]  H. Diener,et al.  Fremanezumab versus placebo for migraine prevention in patients with documented failure to up to four migraine preventive medication classes (FOCUS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial , 2019, The Lancet.

[30]  Natalie S Blencowe,et al.  RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials , 2019, BMJ.

[31]  Gerta Rücker,et al.  Network meta‐analysis of rare events using the Mantel‐Haenszel method , 2019, Statistics in medicine.

[32]  The American Headache Society Position Statement On Integrating New Migraine Treatments Into Clinical Practice , 2018, Headache.

[33]  M. Ferrari,et al.  Efficacy and tolerability of erenumab in patients with episodic migraine in whom two-to-four previous preventive treatments were unsuccessful: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b study , 2018, The Lancet.

[34]  R. Conley,et al.  Evaluation of Galcanezumab for the Prevention of Episodic Migraine: The EVOLVE-1 Randomized Clinical Trial , 2018, JAMA neurology.

[35]  M. Matharu,et al.  Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: Results of the EVOLVE-2 Phase 3 randomized controlled clinical trial , 2018, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[36]  S. Silberstein,et al.  Effect of Fremanezumab Compared With Placebo for Prevention of Episodic Migraine: A Randomized Clinical Trial , 2018, JAMA.

[37]  R. Lipton,et al.  Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine in adults , 2018, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[38]  D. Dodick,et al.  ARISE: A Phase 3 randomized trial of erenumab for episodic migraine , 2018, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[39]  Theo Vos,et al.  Migraine is first cause of disability in under 50s: will health politicians now take notice? , 2018, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[40]  T. Steiner,et al.  Poor medical care for people with migraine in Europe – evidence from the Eurolight study , 2018, The Journal of Headache and Pain.

[41]  M. Arnold Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition , 2018, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[42]  P. Goadsby,et al.  A Controlled Trial of Erenumab for Episodic Migraine , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[43]  S. Silberstein,et al.  Fremanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[44]  Tianjing Li,et al.  Network meta-analysis: an introduction for clinicians , 2017, Internal and Emergency Medicine.

[45]  Hossam M. Hammady,et al.  Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews , 2016, Systematic Reviews.

[46]  H. Diener,et al.  New therapeutic approaches for the prevention and treatment of migraine , 2015, The Lancet Neurology.

[47]  Gerta Rücker,et al.  Ranking treatments in frequentist network meta-analysis works without resampling methods , 2015, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[48]  S. Silberstein,et al.  Episodic and Chronic Migraine Headache: Breaking Down Barriers to Optimal Treatment and Prevention , 2015, Headache.

[49]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[50]  L. Bloudek,et al.  Systematic Review of Migraine Prophylaxis Adherence and Persistence , 2014, Journal of managed care pharmacy : JMCP.

[51]  R. Ohrbach,et al.  The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version) , 2013, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[52]  W. Becker,et al.  Patterns of Use and Reasons for Discontinuation of Prophylactic Medications for Episodic Migraine and Chronic Migraine: Results From the Second International Burden of Migraine Study (IBMS‐II) , 2013, Headache.

[53]  J. Olesen The International Classification of Headache Disorders , 2008, Headache.

[54]  R. Lipton,et al.  Migraine prevalence, disease burden, and the need for preventive therapy , 2007, Neurology.

[55]  Alexander J Sutton,et al.  What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data. , 2004, Statistics in medicine.

[56]  S. Aurora,et al.  Galcanezumab in chronic migraine The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled REGAIN study , 2022 .