Search

Background and purpose: Anti‐calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) therapies are recent preventive therapies approved for both episodic and chronic migraine. One of the measures of effectiveness is the withdrawal of other preventive treatments. The objective of this study is to quantify the impact of anti‐CGRP drugs in concomitant preventive treatment in patients with migraine. Methods: This was an observational, retrospective, multicenter cohort study with patients from nine national headache units. Patients with migraine undergoing treatment for at least 6 months with anti‐CGRP antibodies, who were initially associated with some preventive treatment (oral and/or onabotulinumtoxinA) were included. Demographic and clinical variables were collected, as well as variables related to headache. Differences according to withdrawal or nonwithdrawal were evaluated. Results: A total of 408 patients were included, 86.52% women, 48.79 (SD = 1.46) years old. Preventive treatment was withdrawn in 43.87% (179/408), 20.83% partially and 23.04% totally. In 27.45% (112/408), it was maintained exclusively due to comorbidity and in 28.6% (117/408) due to partial efficacy. The most frequent time of withdrawal was between 3 and 5 months after the start of treatment. The baseline characteristics associated with nonwithdrawal were comorbidities: insomnia, hypertension and obesity, chronic migraine, and medication overuse. In the multivariate analysis, the absence of high blood pressure, a greater number of preventive treatments at the start, and a lower number of migraine days/month after anti‐CGRP treatment were independently associated with withdrawal of the treatment (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Anti‐CGRP antibodies allow the withdrawal of associated preventive treatment in a significant percentage of patients, which supports its effectiveness in real‐life conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: According to the latest European guidelines, discontinuation of monoclonal antibodies against calcitonin gene‐related peptide (anti‐CGRP MAb) may be considered after 12–18 months of treatment. However, some patients may worsen after discontinuation. In this study, we assessed the response following treatment resumption. Methods: This was a prospective study conducted in 14 Headache Units in Spain. We included patients with response to anti‐CGRP MAb with clinical worsening after withdrawal and resumption of treatment. Numbers of monthly migraine days (MMD) and monthly headache days (MHD) were obtained at four time points: before starting anti‐CGRP MAb (T‐baseline); last month of first treatment period (T‐suspension); month of restart due to worsening (T‐worsening); and 3 months after resumption (T‐reintroduction). The response rate to resumption was calculated. Possible differences among periods were analysed according to MMD and MHD. Results: A total of 360 patients, 82% women, with a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age at migraine onset of 18 (12) years. The median (IQR) MHD at T‐baseline was 20 (13) and MMD was 5 (6); at T‐suspension, the median (IQR) MHD was 5 (6) and MMD was 4 (5); at T‐worsening, the median (IQR) MHD was 16 (13) and MMD was 12 (6); and at T‐reintroduction, the median (IQR) MHD was 8 (8) and MHD was 5 (5). In the second period of treatment, a 50% response rate was achieved by 57.4% of patients in MHD and 65.8% in MMD. Multivariate models showed significant differences in MHD between the third month after reintroduction and last month before suspension of first treatment period (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results suggest that anti‐CGRP MAb therapy is effective after reintroduction. However, 3 months after resumption, one third of the sample reached the same improvement as after the first treatment period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]