Galcanezumab in Patients with Multiple Previous Migraine Preventive Medication Category Failures: Results from the Open-Label Period of the CONQUER Trial

Uwe Reuter, Christian Lucas, David Dolezil, Austin L Hand, Martha D Port, Russell M Nichols, Chad Stroud, Antje Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Holland C Detke, Uwe Reuter, Christian Lucas, David Dolezil, Austin L Hand, Martha D Port, Russell M Nichols, Chad Stroud, Antje Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Holland C Detke

Abstract

Introduction: Results from the open-label extension of the phase 3b CONQUER trial are presented to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide, for up to 6 months in patients with multiple prior migraine preventive treatment failures.

Methods: Patients were 18-75 years old with episodic or chronic migraine and 2-4 standard-of-care migraine preventive medication category failures. After 3 months of randomized treatment with galcanezumab (120 mg/month with 240 mg loading dose; n = 232) or placebo (n = 230), patients entered a 3-month open-label extension (120 mg/month galcanezumab with a blinded 240 mg loading dose for previous-placebo patients). Primary efficacy measure was mean change from double-blind baseline in monthly migraine headache days.

Results: A total of 432/449 patients (96%) who entered open-label treatment completed the study. Mean change in monthly migraine headache days in the total population, which was - 1.3 for placebo and - 4.4 for galcanezumab patients at the end of double-blind treatment (p < 0.001), was - 5.2 and - 5.6, respectively, at the end of open-label treatment with galcanezumab. Among patients with episodic migraine, mean change in monthly migraine headache days had been - 0.6 for placebo and - 2.8 for galcanezumab after double-blind treatment (p < 0.001) and was - 4.5 and - 3.8, respectively, after open-label treatment. Among patients with chronic migraine, mean change in monthly migraine headache days had been - 2.5 for placebo and - 6.6 for galcanezumab after double-blind treatment (p < 0.001) and was - 6.5 and - 8.2, respectively, after open-label treatment. Adverse events were similar to those observed during double-blind placebo treatment. Review of data in elderly patients (65-75 years of age) indicated that galcanezumab was well tolerated in this age group, with no safety issues identified.

Conclusions: Galcanezumab was effective and safe during open-label treatment in patients who had experienced failures of previous migraine preventives.

Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03559257.

Keywords: CGRP; Chronic migraine; Elderly; Episodic migraine; Galcanezumab; Migraine preventive; Monoclonal antibody; Treatment failure.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient disposition: flow chart illustrating the numbers of patients continuing to open-label treatment and the numbers and reasons for patients discontinuing participation during the open-label period
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Mean change from baseline in monthly migraine headache days: Mean changes in monthly migraine headache days for the 3-month double-blind and 3-month open-label periods are shown for all patients (a), patients with episodic migraine (b), and patients with chronic migraine (c). GMB galcanezumab, GMB/GMB galcanezumab treatment in double-blind and open-label periods, LS least squares, PBO/GMB placebo treatment in double-blind and galcanezumab treatment in open-label periods, SE standard error. **p < 0.001, *p < 0.05 compared to PBO/GMB
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Patients with ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% reductions from baseline in monthly migraine headache days at months 3 and 6: Bars show model-estimated rates of patients experiencing ≥ 50%, ≥ 75%, and 100% decreases from baseline in monthly migraine headache days for the total population (a), patients with episodic migraine (b), and patients with chronic migraine (c) at month 3 (end of double-blind period) and month 6 (end of open-label period) for both treatment arms. For the chronic migraine population with 100% decrease, raw rates are shown at 3 months as a result of non-convergence of the model because zero placebo-treated patients met the response threshold for this time point. GMB/GMB galcanezumab treatment in double-blind and open-label periods, PBO/GMB placebo treatment in double-blind and galcanezumab treatment in open-label periods, standard error. ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 compared to PBO/GMB

References

    1. Blumenfeld AM, Bloudek LM, Becker WJ, et al. Patterns of use and reasons for discontinuation of prophylactic medications for episodic migraine and chronic migraine: results from the second international burden of migraine study (IBMS-II) Headache. 2013;53(4):644–655. doi: 10.1111/head.12055.
    1. Ford JH, Jackson J, Milligan G, Cotton S, Ahl J, Aurora SK. A real-world analysis of migraine: a cross-sectional study of disease burden and treatment patterns. Headache. 2017;57(10):1532–1544. doi: 10.1111/head.13202.
    1. Hepp Z, Dodick DW, Varon SF, et al. Persistence and switching patterns of oral migraine prophylactic medications among patients with chronic migraine: a retrospective claims analysis. Cephalalgia. 2017;37(5):470–485. doi: 10.1177/0333102416678382.
    1. Woolley JM, Bonafede MM, Maiese BA, Lenz RA. Migraine prophylaxis and acute treatment patterns among commercially insured patients in the United States. Headache. 2017;57(9):1399–1408. doi: 10.1111/head.13157.
    1. Meyers JL, Davis KL, Lenz RA, Sakai F, Xue F. Treatment patterns and characteristics of patients with migraine in Japan: a retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data. Cephalalgia. 2019;39(12):1518–1534. doi: 10.1177/0333102419851855.
    1. Berger A, Bloudek LM, Varon SF, Oster G. Adherence with migraine prophylaxis in clinical practice. Pain Pract. 2012;12(7):541–549. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2012.00530.x.
    1. Raffaelli B, Neeb L, Reuter U. Monoclonal antibodies for the prevention of migraine. Expert Opin Biol Ther. 2019;19(12):1307–1317. doi: 10.1080/14712598.2019.1671350.
    1. Stauffer VL, Dodick DW, Zhang Q, Carter JN, Ailani J, Conley RR. Evaluation of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: the EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(9):1080–1088. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.1212.
    1. Skljarevski V, Matharu M, Millen BA, Ossipov MH, Kim BK, Yang JY. Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: results of the EVOLVE-2 phase 3 randomized controlled clinical trial. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(8):1442–1454. doi: 10.1177/0333102418779543.
    1. Detke HC, Goadsby PJ, Wang S, Friedman DI, Selzler KJ, Aurora SK. Galcanezumab in chronic migraine: the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled REGAIN study. Neurology. 2018;91(24):e2211–e2221. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006640.
    1. Mulleners WM, Kim BK, Lainez MJA, et al. Safety and efficacy of galcanezumab in patients for whom previous migraine preventive medication from two to four categories had failed (CONQUER): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial. Lancet Neurol. 2020;19(10):814–825. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(20)30279-9.
    1. Camporeale A, Kudrow D, Sides R, et al. A phase 3, long-term, open-label safety study of galcanezumab in patients with migraine. BMC Neurol. 2018;18(1):188. doi: 10.1186/s12883-018-1193-2.
    1. American Headache Society The American Headache Society position statement on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice. Headache. 2019;59(1):1–18.
    1. 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(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s10194-018-0955-y.
    1. Ruff DD, Ford JH, Tockhorn-Heidenreich A, et al. Efficacy of galcanezumab in patients with chronic migraine and a history of preventive treatment failure. Cephalalgia. 2019;39(8):931–944. doi: 10.1177/0333102419847957.
    1. Ruff DD, Ford JH, Tockhorn-Heidenreich A, et al. Efficacy of galcanezumab in patients with episodic migraine and a history of preventive treatment failure: results from two global randomized clinical trials. Eur J Neurol. 2020;27(4):609–618. doi: 10.1111/ene.14114.
    1. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS). The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(1):1–211.
    1. Blumenfeld AM, Varon SF, Wilcox TK, et al. Disability, HRQoL and resource use among chronic and episodic migraineurs: results from the International Burden of Migraine Study (IBMS) Cephalalgia. 2011;31(3):301–315. doi: 10.1177/0333102410381145.
    1. Jhingran P, Davis SM, LaVange LM, Miller DW, Helms RW. MSQ: Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Questionnaire. Further investigation of the factor structure. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998;13(6):707–717. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199813060-00007.
    1. Bagley CL, Rendas-Baum R, Maglinte GA, et al. Validating Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 in episodic and chronic migraine. Headache. 2012;52(3):409–421. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.01997.x.
    1. Guy W. ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Rockville: National Institute of Mental Health, Psychopharmacology Research Branch. 1976. p. 217–22. .
    1. Silberstein S, Tfelt-Hansen P, Dodick DW, et al. Guidelines for controlled trials of prophylactic treatment of chronic migraine in adults. Cephalalgia. 2008;28(5):484–495. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2008.01555.x.
    1. Reuter U, Goadsby PJ, Lanteri-Minet M, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of erenumab in patients with episodic migraine in whom two-to-four previous preventive treatments were unsuccessful: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b study. Lancet. 2018;392(10161):2280–2287. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32534-0.
    1. 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. 2019;394(10203):1030–1040. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31946-4.
    1. Ashina M, Cohen J, Galic M, et al. Efficacy and safety of fremanezumab in patients with episodic and chronic migraine and documented inadequate response to 2–4 classes of migraine preventive medications during the open-label period of the phase 3b FOCUS study (4379) Neurology. 2020;94(15 Supplement):4379.
    1. Goadsby PJ, Reuter U, Lanteri-Minet M, et al. Long-term efficacy and safety of erenumab: results from 64 weeks of the LIBERTY study. Neurology. 2021;96(22):e2724–e2735.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다