Pharmacology of erenumab in human isolated coronary and meningeal arteries:Additional effect of gepants on top of a maximum effect of erenumab

Background and Purpose: Multiple drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor have been developed for migraine treatment. Here, the effect of the monoclonal antibody erenumab on CGRP-induced vasorelaxation was investigated in human isolated blood vessels, as well as the effect of combining erenumab with the small molecule drugs, namely rimegepant, olcegepant, or sumatriptan.Experimental Approach: Concentration–response curves to CGRP, adrenomedullin or pramlintide were constructed in human coronary artery (HCA) and human middle meningeal artery (HMMA) segments, incubated with or without erenumab and/or olcegepant. pA2 or pKb values were calculated to determine the potency of erenumab in both tissues. To study whether acutely acting antimigraine drugs exerted additional CGRP-blocking effects on top of erenumab, HCA segments were incubated with a maximally effective concentration of erenumab (3 μM), precontracted with KCl and exposed to CGRP, followed by rimegepant, olcegepant, or sumatriptan in increasing concentrations. Key Results: Erenumab shifted the concentration-response curve to CGRP in both vascular tissues. However, in HCA, the Schild plot slope was significantly smaller than unity, whereas this was not the case in HMMA, indicating different CGRP receptor mechanisms in these tissues. In HCA, rimegepant, olcegepant and sumatriptan exerted additional effects on CGRP on top of a maximal effect of erenumab. Conclusions and Implications: Gepants have additional effects on top of erenumab for CGRP-induced relaxation and could be effective in treating migraine attacks in patients already using erenumab as prophylaxis.</p

Early use of erenumab vs nonspecific oral migraine preventives: the APPRAISE randomized clinical trial

Importance: Patients with migraine often cycle through multiple nonspecific preventive medications due to poor tolerability and/or inadequate efficacy leading to low adherence and increased disease burden. Objective: To compare the efficacy, tolerability, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction between erenumab and nonspecific oral migraine preventive medications (OMPMs) in patients with episodic migraine (EM) who had previously failed 1 or 2 preventive treatments. Design, Setting, and Participants: The 12-month prospective, interventional, global, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sustained benefit of 2 treatment paradigms (erenumab qm vs oral prophylactics) in adult episodic migraine patients (APPRAISE) trial was a 12-month open-label, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 4 randomized clinical trial conducted from May 15, 2019, to October 1, 2021. This pragmatic trial was conducted at 84 centers across 17 countries. Overall, participants 18 years or older with a 12-month or longer history of migraine, and 4 or more but fewer than 15 monthly migraine days (MMDs) were included. Interventions: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive erenumab or OMPMs. Dose adjustment was permitted (label dependent). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the proportion of patients completing 1 year of the initially assigned treatment and achieving a reduction of 50% or greater from baseline in MMDs at month 12. Secondary end points included the cumulative mean change from baseline in MMDs during the treatment period and the proportion of responders according to the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale at month 12 for patients taking the initially assigned treatment. Results: A total of 866 patients were screened, of whom 245 failed the screening and 621 completed the screening and baseline period. Of the 621 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 41.3 [11.2] years; 545 female [87.8%]; 413 [66.5%] in the erenumab group; 208 [33.5%] in the OMPM group), 523 (84.2%) completed the treatment phase, and 98 (15.8%) discontinued the study. At month 12, significantly more patients assigned to erenumab vs OMPM achieved the primary end point (232 of 413 [56.2%] vs 35 of 208 [16.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% CI, 4.28-9.82; P <.001). Compared with OMPMs, treatment with erenumab showed higher responder rate (314 of 413 [76.0%] vs 39 of 208 [18.8%]; OR, 13.75; 95% CI, 9.08-20.83; P <.001) on the PGIC scale (≥5 at month 12). Significant reduction in cumulative average MMDs was reported with erenumab treatment vs OMPM treatment (-4.32 vs -2.65; treatment difference [SE]: -1.67 [0.35] days; P <.001). Substantially fewer patients in the erenumab arm compared with the OMPM arm switched medication (9 of 413 [2.2%] vs 72 of 208 [34.6%]) and discontinued treatment due to adverse events (12 of 408 [2.9%] vs 48 of 206 [23.3%]). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that earlier use of erenumab in patients with EM who failed 1 or 2 previous preventive treatments provided greater and sustained efficacy, safety, and adherence than continuous OMPM. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03927144.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersi

Erenumab (AMG 334), a monoclonal antagonist antibody against the canonical CGRP receptor, does not impair vasodilatory or contractile responses to other vasoactive agents in human isolated cranial arteries

Background: Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a neuronal transmitter present in intracranial sensory nerves, where it is involved in migraine pathophysiology as well as other biological functions. Recently, the fully human monoclonal antibody erenumab (AMG 334), which targets the canonical calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, showed significant prophylactic efficacy and favourable safety in phase II and III clinical trials for episodic and chronic migraine and is now approved for migraine prevention in several countries. Objective: Given that calcitonin gene-related peptide can mediate vasodilation, we investigated the effect of erenumab on vasoactive responses in the presence or absence of various vasodilatory and vasocontractile mediators in a model using isolated human cerebral and meningeal arteries. Methods: Ring segments of human isolated cerebral and meningeal arteries were mounted in a sensitive myograph. On arterial segments pre-contracted with 30 mM potassium chloride, vasoactive responses to calcitonin gene-related peptide were studied in the presence of different concentrations of erenumab. At the maximal tested inhibitory concentration of erenumab (100 nM), functional arterial relaxation in response to nicardipine or substance P, and the contractile responses to sumatriptan and dihydroergotamine were examined. Results: 30 mM potassium chloride produced a stable contraction of the vessel segments and calcitonin gene-related peptide induced a concentration-dependent relaxation. We observed that (i) erenumab had no direct contractile or relaxant effects per se (by itself), (ii) pre-treatment with erenumab antagonized the calcitonin gene-related peptide-induced relaxation in a competitive manner, (iii) the relaxant responses to nicardipine or substance P were unaffected in the presence of erenumab and (iv) the contraction induced by sumatriptan or dihydroergotamine was not modified by erenumab. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that erenumab, while not associated with vasoactive properties per se, specifically inhibits calcitonin gene-related peptide-induced relaxation of cranial arteries without impacting vasodilatory responses or contractile responses of endogenous or pharmacological vasoactive compounds

Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial

Erenumab; Oral preventives; MigraineErenumab; Preventius orals; MigranyaErenumab; Preventivos orales; MigrañaImportance Patients with migraine often cycle through multiple nonspecific preventive medications due to poor tolerability and/or inadequate efficacy leading to low adherence and increased disease burden. Objective To compare the efficacy, tolerability, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction between erenumab and nonspecific oral migraine preventive medications (OMPMs) in patients with episodic migraine (EM) who had previously failed 1 or 2 preventive treatments. Design, Setting, and Participants The 12-month prospective, interventional, global, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sustained benefit of 2 treatment paradigms (erenumab qm vs oral prophylactics) in adult episodic migraine patients (APPRAISE) trial was a 12-month open-label, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 4 randomized clinical trial conducted from May 15, 2019, to October 1, 2021. This pragmatic trial was conducted at 84 centers across 17 countries. Overall, participants 18 years or older with a 12-month or longer history of migraine, and 4 or more but fewer than 15 monthly migraine days (MMDs) were included. Interventions Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive erenumab or OMPMs. Dose adjustment was permitted (label dependent). Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the proportion of patients completing 1 year of the initially assigned treatment and achieving a reduction of 50% or greater from baseline in MMDs at month 12. Secondary end points included the cumulative mean change from baseline in MMDs during the treatment period and the proportion of responders according to the Patients’ Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale at month 12 for patients taking the initially assigned treatment. Results A total of 866 patients were screened, of whom 245 failed the screening and 621 completed the screening and baseline period. Of the 621 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 41.3 [11.2] years; 545 female [87.8%]; 413 [66.5%] in the erenumab group; 208 [33.5%] in the OMPM group), 523 (84.2%) completed the treatment phase, and 98 (15.8%) discontinued the study. At month 12, significantly more patients assigned to erenumab vs OMPM achieved the primary end point (232 of 413 [56.2%] vs 35 of 208 [16.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% CI, 4.28-9.82; P <.001). Compared with OMPMs, treatment with erenumab showed higher responder rate (314 of 413 [76.0%] vs 39 of 208 [18.8%]; OR, 13.75; 95% CI, 9.08-20.83; P <.001) on the PGIC scale (≥5 at month 12). Significant reduction in cumulative average MMDs was reported with erenumab treatment vs OMPM treatment (−4.32 vs −2.65; treatment difference [SE]: −1.67 [0.35] days; P < .001). Substantially fewer patients in the erenumab arm compared with the OMPM arm switched medication (9 of 413 [2.2%] vs 72 of 208 [34.6%]) and discontinued treatment due to adverse events (12 of 408 [2.9%] vs 48 of 206 [23.3%]). No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions and Relevance Results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that earlier use of erenumab in patients with EM who failed 1 or 2 previous preventive treatments provided greater and sustained efficacy, safety, and adherence than continuous OMPM.This study was funded by Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland

Pharmacology of erenumab in human isolated coronary and meningeal arteries: Additional effect of gepants on top of a maximum effect of erenumab

Background and Purpose: Multiple drugs targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor have been developed for migraine treatment. Here, the effect of the monoclonal antibody erenumab on CGRP-induced vasorelaxation was investigated in human isolated blood vessels, as well as the effect of combining erenumab with the small molecule drugs, namely rimegepant, olcegepant, or sumatriptan. Experimental Approach: Concentration–response curves to CGRP, adrenomedullin or pramlintide were constructed in human coronary artery (HCA) and human middle meningeal artery (HMMA) segments, incubated with or without erenumab and/or olcegepant. pA 2 or pK b values were calculated to determine the potency of erenumab in both tissues. To study whether acutely acting antimigraine drugs exerted additional CGRP-blocking effects on top of erenumab, HCA segments were incubated with a maximally effective concentration of erenumab (3 μM), precontracted with KCl and exposed to CGRP, followed by rimegepant, olcegepant, or sumatriptan in increasing concentrations. Key Results: Erenumab shifted the concentration-response curve to CGRP in both vascular tissues. However, in HCA, the Schild plot slope was significantly smaller than unity, whereas this was not the case in HMMA, indicating different CGRP receptor mechanisms in these tissues. In HCA, rimegepant, olcegepant and sumatriptan exerted additional effects on CGRP on top of a maximal effect of erenumab. Conclusions and Implications: Gepants have additional effects on top of erenumab for CGRP-induced relaxation and could be effective in treating migraine attacks in patients already using erenumab as prophylaxis.</p

Burden of migraine in patients attending Belgian headache specialists : real-world evidence from the BECOME study

IntroductionMigraine is a primary headache disorder, which imposes a major burden on the sufferers. The BECOME study (Burden of migrainE in specialist headache Centers treating patients with prOphylactic treatMent failurE) attempted to characterize and assess the prevalence, burden and healthcare resource utilization of migraine patients presenting in specialized headache centers in Europe and Israel. In this paper, we will describe the patient characteristics of the Belgian headache centers.MethodsThe BECOME study was a prospective, non-interventional, cross-sectional study consisting of two parts. In the first part of the study, data were collected from subjects with a diagnosis of migraine. Subsequently, patients with >= 4 monthly migraine days (MMD) and >= 1 prior preventive treatment failure (PPTF) filled out validated questionnaires to assess the burden of disease.ResultsIn part 1 of the Belgian study population (N = 806), 45% of patients reported >= 8 MMD and 25% had failed >= 4 preventive treatments. In part 2 (N = 90), more than 90% of patients reported having severe impact of headache on daily life and having severe migraine-related disability. The impact was the highest for patients with >= 15 MMD, however, even within the patient population with < 8 MMD, the burden was significant. Almost 40% of the study population suffered from anxiety.ConclusionsThese findings in the Belgian sample of the BECOME study demonstrate the substantial burden and unmet need for the management of difficult-to-treat migraine