Effectiveness, tolerability and response predictors of preventive anti-CGRP mAbs for migraine in patients over 65 years old: a multicenter real-world case-control study.

CGRP elderly migraine old predictor response

Journal

Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.)
ISSN: 1526-4637
Titre abrégé: Pain Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100894201

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
17 Oct 2023
Historique:
received: 02 08 2023
revised: 19 09 2023
accepted: 08 10 2023
medline: 17 10 2023
pubmed: 17 10 2023
entrez: 17 10 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To evaluate clinical characteristics, effectiveness, and tolerability of preventive anti-CGRP mAbs in the elderly. Anti-CGRP mAbs have demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with migraine although there is limited information regarding the elderly. We performed a multicenter case-control study of cases(patients over 65 years old) and controls(sex-matched patients under 55 years old) with migraine receiving anti-CGRP mAbs. We included the demographic characteristics, effectiveness-reduction in the number of monthly headache days(MHD) and monthly migraine days(MMD),30%,50% and 75% responder rates- and treatment emergent adverse events(TEAEs);the primary endpoint was the 50% response rate regarding MHD at weeks 20-24; exploratory 50% response predictors in the elderly were evaluated. 228 patients were included-114 cases,114 controls-. Among cases 84.2%(96/114) were women,79.8%(91/114)CM;mean age of cases 70.1 years old(range:66-86);mean age of controls was 42.9 years old(range:38-49). Cases had a higher percentage of vascular risk factors(p < 0.05),older age of onset(p < 0.001) and more reported prior preventive treatments(p < 0.001). Regarding effectiveness, in cases, 50% response rate was achieved by 59.2%(90/152) at 20-24 weeks, with lower reduction in the MHD at 8-12 weeks [5(7.2),8(9.1);p=0.001] and a higher reduction in MMD at 20-24 weeks [10.7(9.1), 9.2(7.7);p=0.04] compared to the control group. The percentage of a TEAEs was similar in the two groups. Diagnosis of EM(p = 0.003) and lower number of MHD at baseline(p < 0.001) were associated with a 50% response in the elderly in univariate analysis. Our study provides real world evidence of effectiveness and safety of anti-CGRP mAbs for migraine in patients without upper age-limit and possible predictors of anti-CGRP response in the elderly.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37847661
pii: 7320018
doi: 10.1093/pm/pnad141
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Auteurs

Alicia Gonzalez-Martinez (A)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa & Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Ancor Sanz-García (A)

Data Analysis Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.

David García-Azorín (D)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Department of Medicine, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.

Jaime Samuel Rodriguez-Vico (JS)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.

Alex Jaimes (A)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.

Andrea Gómez García (A)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.

Javier Casas Limón (J)

Headache Unit Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcón, Alcorcón, Spain.

Javier Díaz de Terán (J)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid.

María Sastre-Real (M)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid.

Javier Membrilla (J)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid.

Germán Latorre (G)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Fuenlabrada, Spain.

Carlos Calle de Miguel (C)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de Fuenlabrada, Fuenlabrada, Spain.

Sendoa Gil Luque (SG)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Castilla y León, Spain.

Cristina Trevino-Peinado (C)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario Severo Ochoa, Leganés, Spain.

Sonia Quintas (S)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa & Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Patricia Heredia (P)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa & Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Ana Echavarría Íñiguez (AE)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.

Ángel Guerrero-Peral (Á)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.
Department of Medicine, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.

Álvaro Sierra (Á)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain.

Nuria González-García (N)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid.

Jesús Porta-Etessam (J)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid.

Ana Beatriz Gago-Veiga (AB)

Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitario de la Princesa & Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Princesa (IIS-Princesa), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Classifications MeSH