Effectiveness and safety of monthly versus quarterly fremanezumab for migraine prevention: An Italian, multicenter, real-life study.
CGRP
headache
prevention
severity
therapies
Journal
European journal of neurology
ISSN: 1468-1331
Titre abrégé: Eur J Neurol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9506311
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Sep 2024
04 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
10
06
2024
received:
06
03
2024
accepted:
28
06
2024
medline:
5
9
2024
pubmed:
5
9
2024
entrez:
5
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Fremanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide for migraine prevention, is available in monthly (225 mg) and quarterly (675 mg) doses. Previous studies showed efficacy and safety for both regimens, but a real-life comparison is lacking. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of monthly and quarterly fremanezumab in a real-life setting. This Italian, prospective, multicenter study enrolled 95 migraine patients. During a 3-month treatment period, patients received either monthly or quarterly fremanezumab (49 monthly, 46 quarterly). A 6-month treatment period involved 79 patients (43 monthly, 36 quarterly). Monthly headache (MHD) and migraine days (MMD), number of days (AMD) and pills (AMP) of acute medication intake, and Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) test, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores were recorded at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of treatment. Adverse events (AEs), responder rates, and medication overuse were also investigated. Both monthly and quarterly treatments led to significant reductions in MMD, MHD, AMP, AMD, HIT-6, MIDAS, and NRS scores after 3 and 6 months. The monthly regimen exhibited a slightly greater reduction in MMD and MHD after the first quarter, with no significant difference observed after 6 months. The most common AE was transient injection-site reaction, without between-group differences. Responder rates and resolution of medication overuse did not significantly differ between the groups. Both monthly and quarterly regimens were effective and safe, with a tendency for an advantage of the monthly regimen only in the first quarter of treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
Fremanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide for migraine prevention, is available in monthly (225 mg) and quarterly (675 mg) doses. Previous studies showed efficacy and safety for both regimens, but a real-life comparison is lacking. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of monthly and quarterly fremanezumab in a real-life setting.
METHODS
METHODS
This Italian, prospective, multicenter study enrolled 95 migraine patients. During a 3-month treatment period, patients received either monthly or quarterly fremanezumab (49 monthly, 46 quarterly). A 6-month treatment period involved 79 patients (43 monthly, 36 quarterly). Monthly headache (MHD) and migraine days (MMD), number of days (AMD) and pills (AMP) of acute medication intake, and Headache Impact Test (HIT-6), Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) test, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores were recorded at baseline and after 3 and 6 months of treatment. Adverse events (AEs), responder rates, and medication overuse were also investigated.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Both monthly and quarterly treatments led to significant reductions in MMD, MHD, AMP, AMD, HIT-6, MIDAS, and NRS scores after 3 and 6 months. The monthly regimen exhibited a slightly greater reduction in MMD and MHD after the first quarter, with no significant difference observed after 6 months. The most common AE was transient injection-site reaction, without between-group differences. Responder rates and resolution of medication overuse did not significantly differ between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Both monthly and quarterly regimens were effective and safe, with a tendency for an advantage of the monthly regimen only in the first quarter of treatment.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e16410Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Neurology.
Références
Steiner TJ, Stovner LJ. Global epidemiology of migraine and its implications for public health and health policy. Nat Rev Neurol. 2023;19(2):109‐117.
Edvinsson L, Haanes KA, Warfvinge K, Krause DN. CGRP as the target of new migraine therapies—successful translation from bench to clinic. Nat Rev Neurol. 2018;14(6):338‐350.
Sacco S, Bendtsen L, Ashina M, et al. European Headache Federation guideline on the use of monoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene related peptide or its receptor for migraine prevention. J Headache Pain. 2019;20:6.
Dodick DW, Silberstein SD, Bigal ME, et al. Effect of fremanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic migraine: a randomized clinical trial. Jama. 2018;319:1999‐2008.
Silberstein SD, Dodick DW, Bigal ME, et al. Fremanezumab for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2113‐2122.
Ferrari MD, Diener HC, Ning X, 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. Lancet Lond Engl. 2019;394:1030‐1040.
Ashina M, Cohen JM, Gandhi SK, du E. Reduction in the severity and duration of headache following fremanezumab treatment in patients with episodic and chronic migraine. Headache. 2021;61:916‐926.
Silberstein SD, Cohen JM, Seminerio MJ, Yang R, Ashina S, Katsarava Z. The impact of fremanezumab on medication overuse in patients with chronic migraine: subgroup analysis of the HALO CM study. J Headache Pain. 2020;21:114.
Fiedler‐Kelly J, Passarell J, Ludwig E, Levi M, Cohen‐Barak O. Effect of fremanezumab monthly and quarterly doses on efficacy responses. Headache. 2020;60:1376‐1391.
Barash S, Ramirez Campos V, Ning X, et al. Comment on: Gao B, Lu Q, Wan R, Wang Z, Yang Y, Chen Z, Wang Z. “Monthly versus quarterly fremanezumab for the prevention of migraine: a systemic review and meta‐analysis from randomized controlled trials”. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2021;394(11):2343‐2346.
Driessen MT, Cohen JM, Patterson‐Lomba O, et al. Real‐world effectiveness of fremanezumab in migraine patients initiating treatment in the United States: results from a retrospective chart study. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:47.
Argyriou AA, Dermitzakis EV, Xiromerisiou G, et al. Efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for migraine prophylaxis in patients with at least three previous preventive failures: prospective, multicenter, real‐world data from a Greek registry. Eur J Neurol. 2023;30(5):1435‐1442.
Barbanti P, Egeo G, Aurilia C, et al. Fremanezumab in the prevention of high‐frequency episodic and chronic migraine: a 12‐week, multicenter, real‐life, cohort study (the FRIEND study). J Headache Pain. 2022;23:46.
Barbanti P, Egeo G, Aurilia C, et al. Early and sustained efficacy of fremanezumab over 24‐weeks in migraine patients with multiple preventive treatment failures: the multicenter, prospective, real‐life FRIEND2 study. J Headache Pain. 2023;24(1):30.
Suzuki S, Suzuki K, Shiina T, Haruyama Y, Hirata K. Real‐world experience with monthly and quarterly dosing of fremanezumab for the treatment of patients with migraine in Japan. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1220285. Published 2023 Jul 6.
Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) The International Classification of Headache Disorders. Cephalalgia. 2018;38:1‐211.
Aicher B, Peil H, Peil B, Diener HC. Pain measurement: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) in clinical trials with OTC analgesics in headache. Cephalalgia. 2012;32(3):185‐197.
Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Dowson AJ, Sawyer J. Development and testing of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire to assess headache‐related disability. Neurology. 2001;56(6 Suppl 1):S20‐S28.
Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, Bjorner JB, et al. A six‐item short‐form survey for measuring headache impact: the HIT‐6. Qual Life Res. 2003;12(8):963‐974.
Haghdoost F, Puledda F, Garcia‐Azorin D, Huessler EM, Messina R, Pozo‐Rosich P. Evaluating the efficacy of CGRP mAbs and gepants for the preventive treatment of migraine: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis of phase 3 randomised controlled trials. Cephalalgia. 2023;43(4):3331024231159366.
Fiedler‐Kelly JB, Cohen‐Barak O, Morris DN, et al. Population pharmacokinetic modelling and simulation of fremanezumab in healthy subjects and patients with migraine. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85(12):2721‐2733.
Blumenfeld AM, Stevanovic DM, Ortega M, et al. No “wearing‐off effect” seen in quarterly or monthly dosing of fremanezumab: subanalysis of a randomized long‐term study. Headache. 2020;60(10):2431‐2443.
Suzuki S, Suzuki K, Shiina T, Haruyama Y, Hirata K. Evaluating the wearing‐off effects of fremanezumab in high‐frequency episodic migraine and chronic migraine: a real‐world observational study in Japan. Cephalalgia. 2023;6:6.
Messina R, Huessler EM, Puledda F, Haghdoost F, Lebedeva ER, Diener HC. Safety and tolerability of monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway and gepants in migraine prevention: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis. Cephalalgia. 2023;43(3):3331024231152169.
Curone M, Tullo V, Didier HA, Bussone G. Overview on effectiveness of erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab in reducing medication overuse headache in chronic migraine patients. Neurol Sci. 2022;43(9):5759‐5761.