Effectiveness and tolerability of eptinezumab in treating patients with migraine resistant to conventional preventive medications and CGRP (receptor) antibodies: a multicentre retrospective real-world analysis from Germany.


Journal

The journal of headache and pain
ISSN: 1129-2377
Titre abrégé: J Headache Pain
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100940562

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
16 May 2024
Historique:
received: 12 04 2024
accepted: 09 05 2024
medline: 17 5 2024
pubmed: 17 5 2024
entrez: 16 5 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Eptinezumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP mAb) and is used for migraine prophylaxis. Efficacy data are mainly from clinical trials, real-world data are hardly available yet. Reimbursement policy in Germany leads to eptinezumab mainly being used in patients having failed pre-treatment with other CGRP mAb. To date, it is unclear whether eptinezumab is efficacious and well tolerated in this population and how the treatment response differs from patients who are naive to CGRP mAbs. We analysed clinical routine data of 79 patients (episodic migraine (EM): n = 19; chronic migraine (CM): n = 60) from four different centres in Germany. All patients were treated with eptinezumab (100mg). Differences in monthly headache (MHD), migraine (MMD) and acute medication days (AMD) after three months were analysed. The correlation of response with the number of CGRP mAb failures was evaluated. Significance level has been corrected (alpha = 0.017). After three months MHD, MMD and AMD were significantly reduced. In EM, the median reduction for MHD was 4.0 days (IQR: -6.5 to -1.0; p = 0.001), for MMD 3.0 days (IQR: -5.5 to -1.5; p < 0.001) and for AMD 2.0 days (IQR: -5.0 to -0.5; p = 0.006). In CM, median reduction of MHD was 4 days (IQR: -8.0 to 0.0; p < 0.001), 3.0 days (IQR: -6.0 to-1.0; p < 0.001) for MMD and 1.0 day (IQR: -5.0 to 0.0; p < 0.001) for AMD. All patients were resistant to conventional preventive therapies and most to CGRP mAbs. Fourteen patients had never received a CGRP mAb and 65 patients had received at least one mAb without sufficient effectiveness and/or intolerability (one: n = 20, two: n = 28, three: n = 17). There was a significant association between the number of prior therapies and the 30% MHD responder rate (none: 78.6%, one: 45.0%, two: 32.1%, three: 23.5%, p = 0.010). Regarding tolerability, 10.4% (8/77) reported mild side effects. The effectiveness of eptinezumab is significantly reduced in patients who have not previously responded to other CGRP mAbs. However, limitations such as the retrospective nature of the analysis, the small sample size and the short treatment period with only the lower dose of eptinezumab must be considered when interpreting the results.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Eptinezumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP mAb) and is used for migraine prophylaxis. Efficacy data are mainly from clinical trials, real-world data are hardly available yet. Reimbursement policy in Germany leads to eptinezumab mainly being used in patients having failed pre-treatment with other CGRP mAb. To date, it is unclear whether eptinezumab is efficacious and well tolerated in this population and how the treatment response differs from patients who are naive to CGRP mAbs.
METHODS METHODS
We analysed clinical routine data of 79 patients (episodic migraine (EM): n = 19; chronic migraine (CM): n = 60) from four different centres in Germany. All patients were treated with eptinezumab (100mg). Differences in monthly headache (MHD), migraine (MMD) and acute medication days (AMD) after three months were analysed. The correlation of response with the number of CGRP mAb failures was evaluated. Significance level has been corrected (alpha = 0.017).
RESULTS RESULTS
After three months MHD, MMD and AMD were significantly reduced. In EM, the median reduction for MHD was 4.0 days (IQR: -6.5 to -1.0; p = 0.001), for MMD 3.0 days (IQR: -5.5 to -1.5; p < 0.001) and for AMD 2.0 days (IQR: -5.0 to -0.5; p = 0.006). In CM, median reduction of MHD was 4 days (IQR: -8.0 to 0.0; p < 0.001), 3.0 days (IQR: -6.0 to-1.0; p < 0.001) for MMD and 1.0 day (IQR: -5.0 to 0.0; p < 0.001) for AMD. All patients were resistant to conventional preventive therapies and most to CGRP mAbs. Fourteen patients had never received a CGRP mAb and 65 patients had received at least one mAb without sufficient effectiveness and/or intolerability (one: n = 20, two: n = 28, three: n = 17). There was a significant association between the number of prior therapies and the 30% MHD responder rate (none: 78.6%, one: 45.0%, two: 32.1%, three: 23.5%, p = 0.010). Regarding tolerability, 10.4% (8/77) reported mild side effects.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The effectiveness of eptinezumab is significantly reduced in patients who have not previously responded to other CGRP mAbs. However, limitations such as the retrospective nature of the analysis, the small sample size and the short treatment period with only the lower dose of eptinezumab must be considered when interpreting the results.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38755541
doi: 10.1186/s10194-024-01788-1
pii: 10.1186/s10194-024-01788-1
doi:

Substances chimiques

eptinezumab 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

79

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Ashina M, Saper J, Cady R et al (2020) Eptinezumab in episodic migraine: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (PROMISE-1). Cephalalgia 40:241–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102420905132
doi: 10.1177/0333102420905132 pubmed: 32075406 pmcid: 7066477
Lipton RB, Goadsby PJ, Smith J et al (2020) Efficacy and safety of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine: PROMISE-2. Neurology 94:e1365–e1377. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000009169
doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009169 pubmed: 32209650 pmcid: 7274916
Silberstein S, Diamond M, Hindiyeh NA et al (2020) Eptinezumab for the prevention of chronic migraine: efficacy and safety through 24 weeks of treatment in the phase 3 PROMISE-2 (Prevention of migraine via intravenous ALD403 safety and efficacy–2) study. J Headache Pain 21:120. https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-020-01186-3
doi: 10.1186/s10194-020-01186-3 pubmed: 33023473 pmcid: 7539382
Ashina M, Lanteri-Minet M, Pozo-Rosich P et al (2022) Safety and efficacy of eptinezumab for migraine prevention in patients with two-to-four previous preventive treatment failures (DELIVER): a multi-arm, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial. Lancet Neurol 21:597–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00185-5
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00185-5 pubmed: 35716692
Ashina M, Lanteri-Minet M, Ettrup A et al (2023) Efficacy and safety of eptinezumab for migraine prevention in patients with prior preventive treatment failures: subgroup analysis of the randomized, placebo-controlled DELIVER study. Cephalalgia 43:3331024231170807. https://doi.org/10.1177/03331024231170807
doi: 10.1177/03331024231170807 pubmed: 37125484
Diener H, Marmura MJ, Tepper SJ et al (2021) Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of eptinezumab in patients with a dual diagnosis of chronic migraine and medication-overuse headache: Subgroup analysis of PROMISE-2. Headache 61:125–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14036
doi: 10.1111/head.14036 pubmed: 33314079
Marmura MJ, Diener H-C, Cowan RP et al (2021) Preventive migraine treatment with eptinezumab reduced acute headache medication and headache frequency to below diagnostic thresholds in patients with chronic migraine and medication-overuse headache. Headache 61:1421–1431. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14206
doi: 10.1111/head.14206 pubmed: 34551130 pmcid: 9291601
Zorrilla N, Gelfand AA, Irwin SL (2023) Eptinezumab for adolescents with chronic refractory headache: A retrospective chart review. Headache 63:177–182. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14452
doi: 10.1111/head.14452 pubmed: 36633118
Bader Y, Suliman R, Harb M et al (2023) Effectiveness and safety of eptinezumab in episodic and chronic migraine headache in the UAE: A retrospective study. Neurol Ther 12:1683–1693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40120-023-00521-5
doi: 10.1007/s40120-023-00521-5 pubmed: 37418120 pmcid: 10444733
Suzuki K, Suzuki S, Shiina T et al (2022) Central Sensitization in Migraine: A Narrative Review. J Pain Res 15:2673–2682. https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S329280
doi: 10.2147/JPR.S329280 pubmed: 36101891 pmcid: 9464439
Starling AJ, Kymes S, Asher D et al (2023) Early clinical experience with eptinezumab: results of a retrospective observational study of patient response in the United States. BMC Neurol 23:158. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-023-03204-8
doi: 10.1186/s12883-023-03204-8 pubmed: 37081405 pmcid: 10116681
Buse DC, Winner PK, Charleston L et al (2022) Early response to eptinezumab indicates high likelihood of continued response in patients with chronic migraine. J Headache Pain 23:29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-022-01387-y
doi: 10.1186/s10194-022-01387-y pubmed: 35189811 pmcid: 8903499
Dodick DW, Gottschalk C, Cady R et al (2020) Eptinezumab demonstrated efficacy in sustained prevention of episodic and chronic migraine beginning on day 1 after dosing. Headache 60:2220–2231. https://doi.org/10.1111/head.14007
doi: 10.1111/head.14007 pubmed: 33165938 pmcid: 7756794
Lambru G, Caponnetto V, Hill B et al (2023) Long-term effect of switching from an anti-CGRP receptor to an anti-CGRP ligand antibody in treatment-refractory chronic migraine: a prospective real-world analysis. Neurotherapeutics 20:1284–1293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-023-01394-0
doi: 10.1007/s13311-023-01394-0 pubmed: 37430146 pmcid: 10480365
Overeem LH, Peikert A, Hofacker MD et al (2022) Effect of antibody switch in non-responders to a CGRP receptor antibody treatment in migraine: A multi-center retrospective cohort study. Cephalalgia 42:291–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/03331024211048765
doi: 10.1177/03331024211048765 pubmed: 34644203
Overeem LH, Lange KS, Fitzek MP et al (2023) Effect of switching to erenumab in non-responders to a CGRP ligand antibody treatment in migraine: A real-world cohort study. Front Neurol 14:1154420. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2023.1154420
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1154420 pubmed: 37034092 pmcid: 10075077
Bhakta M, Vuong T, Taura T et al (2021) Migraine therapeutics differentially modulate the CGRP pathway. Cephalalgia 41:499–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102420983282
doi: 10.1177/0333102420983282 pubmed: 33626922 pmcid: 8054164
Basedau H, Sturm L-M, Mehnert J et al (2022) Migraine monoclonal antibodies against CGRP change brain activity depending on ligand or receptor target - an fMRI study. Elife 11:e77146. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.77146
doi: 10.7554/eLife.77146 pubmed: 35604755 pmcid: 9126581
Straube A, Broessner G, Gaul C et al (2023) Real-world effectiveness of fremanezumab in patients with migraine switching from another mAb targeting the CGRP pathway: a subgroup analysis of the Finesse Study. J Headache Pain 24:59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-023-01593-2
doi: 10.1186/s10194-023-01593-2 pubmed: 37221478 pmcid: 10207758
Kaltseis K, Filippi V, Frank F et al (2023) Monoclonal antibodies against CGRP (R): non-responders and switchers: real world data from an austrian case series. BMC Neurol 23:174. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-023-03203-9
doi: 10.1186/s12883-023-03203-9 pubmed: 37118682 pmcid: 10142255
Al-Hassany L, Boucherie DM, Creeney H et al (2023) Future targets for migraine treatment beyond CGRP. J Headache Pain 24:76. https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-023-01567-4
doi: 10.1186/s10194-023-01567-4 pubmed: 37370051 pmcid: 10304392
Swerts DB, Benedetti F, Peres MFP (2022) Different routes of administration in chronic migraine prevention lead to different placebo responses: a meta-analysis. Pain 163:415–424. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002365
doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002365 pubmed: 34252914
Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(1):1-211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102417738202 .

Auteurs

Armin Scheffler (A)

Department of Neurology and Centre for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), West German Headache Centre, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, Essen, 45147, Germany. armin.scheffler@uk-essen.de.

Pauline Wenzel (P)

Department of Neurology and Centre for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), West German Headache Centre, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.

Merle Bendig (M)

Department of Neurology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Astrid Gendolla (A)

Praxis Gendolla, Essen, Germany.

Jale Basten (J)

Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.

Christoph Kleinschnitz (C)

Department of Neurology and Centre for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), West German Headache Centre, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.

Michael Nsaka (M)

Department of Neurology and Centre for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), West German Headache Centre, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.

Diana Lindner (D)

Department of Neurology and Centre for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), West German Headache Centre, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.

Steffen Naegel (S)

Department of Neurology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, University Hospital Halle, Halle (Saale), Germany.
Department of Neurology, Alfried-Krupp Krankenhaus, Essen, Germany.

Philipp Burow (P)

Department of Neurology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, University Hospital Halle, Halle (Saale), Germany.

Robert Fleischmann (R)

Department of Neurology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Dagny Holle (D)

Department of Neurology and Centre for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences (C-TNBS), West German Headache Centre, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, Essen, 45147, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH