Search

Objective: This study aimed to determine the number needed to treat (NNT), number needed to harm (NNH), and likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH) in a post hoc analysis of the phase 3b FOCUS trial. Background: Fremanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP), has demonstrated efficacy, tolerability, and safety in adults with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM), with documented previous inadequate response to two to four classes of migraine preventive medications. Methods: In the 12‐week double‐blind period of the FOCUS study, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, or matched monthly placebo. NNT was based on responder analysis, defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly average number of migraine days at 12 weeks. NNH was based on discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs). Results: Among patients with CM (n = 509), response rates and discontinuation rates were 27% (45/169) and 0 for quarterly fremanezumab, 29% (50/173) and 2% (3/173) for monthly fremanezumab, and 8% (13/167) and <1% (1/167) for placebo, respectively. These results translated to NNTs of 5.3 and 4.7, NNHs of 1000 and 88, and LHHs of 188 and 19 for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab, respectively. Among patients with EM (n = 328), response rates were 47% (50/107) for quarterly fremanezumab, 43% (47/110) for monthly fremanezumab, and 10% (11/111) for placebo. Discontinuation rates were <1% (n = 1) in all three groups. These results translated to NNTs of 2.7 and 3.0, NNHs of 1000 and 1000, and LHHs of 368 and 328 for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab, respectively. Conclusions: The NNT, NNH, and LHH for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab compare favorably with those for traditional oral preventive medications, including topiramate, valproate, and propranolol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Migraine is associated with depression as well as negative impact on quality of life and work productivity. Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa), selectively targets the calcitonin gene‐related peptide and has proven efficacy for the preventive treatment of migraine. Objective: In this open‐label extension (OLE) of the phase 3b FOCUS study, we assessed patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) over time. Methods: Patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) completing the 12‐week, double‐blind (DB) period of the FOCUS trial entered the 12‐week OLE and received three monthly doses of fremanezumab (225 mg). PROs included the Migraine‐Specific Quality of Life (MSQoL) questionnaire (role function—restrictive [RFR], role function—preventive [RFP], and emotional function [EF] domains), EuroQol‐5‐Dimension‐5‐Level (EQ‐5D‐5L) questionnaire, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) assessment, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire, and 9‐Item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ‐9). Results: A total of 838 patients were randomized in the DB period, 807 entered the OLE at 3 months, and 772 were still enrolled at 6 months. At 6 months, patients in the quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, and placebo DB randomization groups, respectively, reported improvements in RFR (mean [standard deviation] change from baseline: 24.6 [21.9]; 22.9 [21.3]; 20.8 [26.5]), RFP (19.6 [20.0]; 18.3 [19.7]; 16.0 [19.9]), and EF (22.5 [24.2]; 19.1 [23.6]; 17.2 [24.7]) domains of the MSQoL questionnaire, the EQ‐5D‐5L questionnaire (8.0 [19.6]; 7.3 [21.1]; 6.6 [21.0]), all four domains of the WPAI questionnaire, and the PHQ‐9 (−2.4 [5.3]; −1.6 [5.5]; −2.0 [4.9]); 77.1% (209/271), 75.4% (205/272), and 68.8% (181/263) of patients were identified as PGIC responders. Conclusion: Among patients with EM or CM and prior inadequate response to multiple migraine‐preventive medication classes, progressive improvements in MSQoL, depression, and work productivity were achieved during 6 months of fremanezumab treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To describe differences in clinical and demographic characteristics between patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) and determine the effect of migraine subtype on patient‐reported outcome measures (PROM). Background: Prior studies have characterized migraine in the general population. While this provides a basis for our understanding of migraine, we have less insight into the characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes of migraine patients who present to subspecialty headache clinics. These patients represent a subset of the population that bears the greatest burden of migraine disability and are more representative of migraine patients who seek medical care. Valuable insights can be gained from a better understanding of CM and EM in this population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients with CM or EM seen in the Cleveland Clinic Headache Center between January 2012 and June 2017. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and patient‐reported outcome measures (3‐Level European Quality of Life 5‐Dimension [EQ‐5D‐3L], Headache Impact Test‐6 [HIT‐6], Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 [PHQ‐9]) were compared between groups. Results: Eleven thousand thirty‐seven patients who had 29,032 visits were included. More CM patients reported being on disability 517/3652 (14.2%) than EM patients 249/4881 (5.1%) and had significantly worse mean HIT‐6 (67.3 ± 7.4 vs. 63.1 ± 7.4, p < 0.001) and median [interquartile range] EQ‐5D‐3L (0.77 [0.44–0.82] vs. 0.83 [0.77–1.00], p < 0.001), and PHQ‐9 (10 [6–16] vs. 5 [2–10], p < 0.001). Conclusions: There are multiple differences in demographic characteristics and comorbid conditions between patients with CM and EM. After adjustment for these factors, CM patients had higher PHQ‐9 scores, lower quality of life scores, greater disability, and greater work restrictions/unemployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Migraine preventive medications are used to reduce headache frequency, severity, and duration. In patients with chronic migraine (CM), reversion to episodic migraine (EM) is an important treatment goal. Objective: To evaluate the effect of fremanezumab on the rate of reversion from CM to EM. Methods: This phase 3, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group trial included a 28‐day pretreatment period and a 3‐month treatment period. Patients with CM received subcutaneous fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline) or monthly (675 mg at baseline; 225 mg at Weeks 4 and 8), or placebo. Post hoc analyses evaluated the proportion of patients who reverted from CM to EM, defined as either a reduction to an average of <15 headache days per month during the 3‐month treatment period or a reduction to <15 headache days per month in all 3 months of the treatment period. Results: This analysis included data from 1088 CM patients (quarterly, n = 366; monthly, n = 365; placebo, n = 357). More fremanezumab‐treated patients with CM reverted to EM using either the monthly average number of headache days criteria for reversion (quarterly: 50.5% [185/366], P =.108; monthly: 53.7% [196/365], P =.012; vs placebo: 44.5% [159/357]) or the monthly headache day count at Months 1, 2, and 3 criteria for reversion (quarterly: 31.2% [114/366], P =.008; monthly: 33.7% [123/365], P =.001; vs placebo: 22.4% [80/357]). Patients with CM who reported previous topiramate or onabotulinumtoxinA use, concomitant preventive medication use, or medication overuse were less likely to revert to EM. Conclusions: Fremanezumab may offer the benefit of reversion from CM to EM, based on a reduction in the number of headache days over 3 months of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]