Effect of Atogepant for Preventive Migraine Treatment on Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Randomized, Double-blind, Phase 3 ADVANCE Trial

Atogepant; Preventive treatment; MigraineAtogepant; Tractament preventiu; MigranyaAtogepant; Tratamiento preventivo; MigrañaBackground and Objectives The oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist atogepant is indicated for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. We evaluated changes in patient-reported outcomes with atogepant in adults with migraine. Methods In this phase 3, 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial (ADVANCE), adults with 4–14 migraine days per month received atogepant (10, 30, or 60 mg) once daily or placebo. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MSQ) version 2.1 Role Function–Restrictive (RFR) domain at week 12 and mean monthly Activity Impairment in Migraine–Diary (AIM-D) Performance of Daily Activities (PDA) and Physical Impairment (PI) domains across the 12-week treatment period. Exploratory endpoints included change in MSQ Role Function–Preventive (RFP) and Emotional Function (EF) domains; AIM-D total scores; and change in Headache Impact Test (HIT)–6 scores. Results Of 910 participants randomized, 873 comprised the modified intent-to-treat population (atogepant: 10 mg [n = 214]; 30 mg [n = 223]; and 60 mg [n = 222]; placebo [n = 214]). All atogepant groups demonstrated significantly greater improvements vs placebo in MSQ RFR that exceeded minimum clinically meaningful between-group difference (3.2 points) at week 12 (least-square mean difference [LSMD] vs placebo: 10 mg [9.9]; 30 mg [10.1]; 60 mg [10.8]; all p < 0.0001). LSMDs in monthly AIM-D PDA and PI scores across the 12-week treatment period improved significantly for the atogepant 30 (PDA: −2.54; p = 0.0003; PI: −1.99; and p = 0.0011) and 60 mg groups (PDA: −3.32; p < 0.0001; PI: −2.46; p < 0.0001), but not for the 10 mg group (PDA: −1.19; p = 0.086; PI: −1.08; p = 0.074). In exploratory analyses, atogepant 30 and 60 mg were associated with nominal improvements in MSQ RFP and EF domains, other AIM-D outcomes, and HIT-6 scores at the earliest time point (week 4) and throughout the 12-week treatment period. Results varied for atogepant 10 mg. Discussion Atogepant 30 and 60 mg produced significant improvements in key patient-reported outcomes including MSQ-RFR scores and both AIM-D domains. Nominal improvements also occurred for other MSQ domains and HIT-6, reinforcing the beneficial effects of atogepant as a new treatment for migraine prevention.Allergan, now AbbVie, sponsored the study

Long-Term Safety Evaluation of Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine: Phase 3, Randomized, 52-Week Extension Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine. BACKGROUND: Ubrogepant is an oral, calcitonin gene-related receptor antagonist in development for the acute treatment of migraine. The efficacy of ubrogepant was demonstrated in 2 phase 3 trials in which a significant improvement was observed in migraine headache pain, migraine-associated symptoms, and ability to function. METHODS: This was a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label, 52-week extension trial. Adults with migraine with or without aura entered the trial after completing one of 2 phase 3 lead-in trials and were re-randomized 1:1:1 to usual care, ubrogepant 50 mg, or ubrogepant 100 mg. Randomization to ubrogepant dose was blinded. Those randomized to usual care continued to treat migraine attacks with their own medication. The usual care arm was included in this trial to capture background rates of hepatic laboratory parameters and contextualize hepatic safety assessments. Safety and tolerability were the primary outcome measures. The safety population for the ubrogepant arms included all randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of treatment. All cases of alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevations of ≥3 times the upper limit of normal were adjudicated by an independent panel of liver experts who were blinded to dose. RESULTS: The safety population included 1230 participants (404 in the ubrogepant 50-mg group, 409 in the ubrogepant 100-mg group, and 417 in the usual care group). Participants were on average 42 years of age, 90% (1106/1230) female and 85% (1043/1230) white, with an average BMI of 30 kg/m CONCLUSIONS: Long-term intermittent use of ubrogepant 50 and 100 mg given as 1 or 2 doses per attack for the acute treatment of migraine was safe and well tolerated, as indicated by a low incidence of treatment-related TEAEs and SAEs and discontinuations due to adverse events in this 1-year trial

Safety and Tolerability Results of Atogepant for the Preventive Treatment of Episodic Migraine From a 40-Week, Open-Label Multicenter Extension of the Phase 3 ADVANCE Trial

Background: Atogepant is a United States Food and Drug Administration-approved oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. The study objective was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of atogepant in participants who completed the phase 3 ADVANCE trial (NCT03777059). Methods: This 40-week, open-label extension trial (NCT03939312) monitored safety in participants receiving oral atogepant 60 mg once daily, followed by a four-week safety follow-up period. Results: Of the 685 participants taking at least one dose of atogepant, the treatment period was completed by 74.6% of participants with a mean (standard deviation) treatment duration of 233.6 (89.3) days. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 62.5% of participants, with upper respiratory tract infection (5.5%), urinary tract infection (5.3%), nasopharyngitis (4.8%), sinusitis (3.6%), constipation (3.4%), and nausea (3.4%) occurring at ≥3%. Serious adverse events were observed in 3.4% of participants (none were treatment-related), and there were no deaths. Adverse events leading to discontinuation occurring at \u3e0.1% were nausea (0.4%) and abdominal pain, vomiting, weight decrease, dizziness, and migraine (0.3% each). Conclusion: These results are consistent with atogepant\u27s known safety profile and support long-term use of atogepant 60 mg once daily dosing as safe and well tolerated.ClinicalTrials.gov Registration Number: NCT03939312

Effect of Atogepant for Preventive Migraine Treatment on Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Randomized, Double-blind, Phase 3 ADVANCE Trial

The oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist atogepant is indicated for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine. We evaluated changes in patient-reported outcomes with atogepant in adults with migraine. In this phase 3, 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial (ADVANCE), adults with 4-14 migraine days per month received atogepant (10, 30, or 60 mg) once daily or placebo. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (MSQ) version 2.1 Role Function-Restrictive (RFR) domain at week 12 and mean monthly Activity Impairment in Migraine-Diary (AIM-D) Performance of Daily Activities (PDA) and Physical Impairment (PI) domains across the 12-week treatment period. Exploratory endpoints included change in MSQ Role Function-Preventive (RFP) and Emotional Function (EF) domains; AIM-D total scores; and change in Headache Impact Test (HIT)-6 scores. Of 910 participants randomized, 873 comprised the modified intent-to-treat population (atogepant: 10 mg [n = 214]; 30 mg [n = 223]; and 60 mg [n = 222]; placebo [n = 214]). All atogepant groups demonstrated significantly greater improvements vs placebo in MSQ RFR that exceeded minimum clinically meaningful between-group difference (3.2 points) at week 12 (least-square mean difference [LSMD] vs placebo: 10 mg [9.9]; 30 mg [10.1]; 60 mg [10.8]; all p < 0.0001). LSMDs in monthly AIM-D PDA and PI scores across the 12-week treatment period improved significantly for the atogepant 30 (PDA: −2.54; p = 0.0003; PI: −1.99; and p = 0.0011) and 60 mg groups (PDA: −3.32; p < 0.0001; PI: −2.46; p < 0.0001), but not for the 10 mg group (PDA: −1.19; p = 0.086; PI: −1.08; p = 0.074). In exploratory analyses, atogepant 30 and 60 mg were associated with nominal improvements in MSQ RFP and EF domains, other AIM-D outcomes, and HIT-6 scores at the earliest time point (week 4) and throughout the 12-week treatment period. Results varied for atogepant 10 mg. Atogepant 30 and 60 mg produced significant improvements in key patient-reported outcomes including MSQ-RFR scores and both AIM-D domains. Nominal improvements also occurred for other MSQ domains and HIT-6, reinforcing the beneficial effects of atogepant as a new treatment for migraine prevention. NCT03777059. Submitted: December 13, 2018; First patient enrolled: December 14, 2018. This study provides Class II evidence that daily atogepant is associated with improvements in health-related quality-of-life measures in patients with 4-14 migraine days per mont

An evaluation of the intention of college students to utilize calorie labeling in fast food and full-service restaurants: application of the Theory of Planned Behavior

The Restaurant Nutrition Menu Labeling Requirement of the Affordable Care Act will require chain restaurants to provide calorie information on menus. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) includes attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control constructs, and explains attributes that lead to behavior intention and use of menu labeling in meal selection. Studies on characteristics of college students who use menu labeling in restaurants are limited. The purposes of this study were to determine predictors of intention to use calorie information, whether students changed meal choices after viewing calorie information, and describe groups of students most likely to change meal selections in fast food and full-service restaurants. Two hundred undergraduate students, 19 years or older, participated in this quasi-experimental study. Students participated in the full-service (n=100) or fast food (n=100) portion of the study. Participants selected a meal from a menu without calories, selected a meal from the same menu with calorie information, and completed a survey that addressed TPB constructs, intention, and potential barriers. Backward elimination was used to determine significant predictors of intention to use labels and changes in calories of meals ordered. Students ordered significantly fewer calories with posted calorie information on both fast food (909 versus 838 calories, p=0.02) and full-service (1370 versus 1203 calories, p<0.01) menus. Subjective norms (p<0.01) and perceived behavioral control (p=0.03) were predictive of greater intention to use calorie information on fast food menus but not of a change in caloric intake. Barriers such as cost (p=0.07) and perceived ease of label use (p=0.01) were associated with fewer calories ordered while lack of time (p=0.05) and hunger (p=0.02) were associated with an increase in calories ordered with posted information on fast food menus. Attitudes (p=0.04), subjective norms (p<0.01), and perceived behavioral control (p<0.01) predicted greater intention to use calorie information on full-service menus. Lack of time (p=0.08), frequent Nutrition Facts panel use (p=0.05), and positive attitudes (p<0.01) towards menu labeling predicted decreases in calories ordered with posted information on full-service menus. Menu labeling could provide information that college students need to select lower calorie items at both fast food and full-service restaurants. (Published By University of Alabama Libraries