Long-term reductions in disease impact in patients with chronic migraine following preventive treatment with eptinezumab

Andrew Blumenfeld, Anders Ettrup, Joe Hirman, Bjarke Ebert, Roger Cady, Andrew Blumenfeld, Anders Ettrup, Joe Hirman, Bjarke Ebert, Roger Cady

Abstract

Background: Eptinezumab is an anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide humanized monoclonal antibody approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The PREVAIL study demonstrated a favorable safety profile with sustained reductions in overall migraine-related burden in patients with chronic migraine (CM). This post hoc analysis aimed to examine item-level changes in the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire over 2 years in participants with CM on eptinezumab treatment.

Methods: PREVAIL was an open-label, phase 3 trial that included 96 weeks of treatment where 128 adults received intravenous eptinezumab administered over 30 min every 12 weeks (wks) for up to 8 doses of 300 mg. MIDAS was administered at baseline, Wk12, and every 12wks thereafter. Two supplementary MIDAS items not included in the total score calculation assessed number of headache days in the past 3 months (MIDAS headache) and average headache pain severity (from 0 [none] to 10 [worst]). MIDAS total scores were summed from 5 items, each quantifying the number of days in the past 3 months with migraine-related disability. Items 1, 3, and 5 assessed absenteeism, namely how many days the patient missed work/school (Q1), household work (Q3), or family/social/leisure activities (Q5). Items 2 and 4 were measures of presenteeism, namely how many days the patient had reduced productivity in work/school (Q2) or household work (Q4).

Results: Mean MIDAS headache days decreased from 47.4 (baseline) to 17.1 (Wk12) and 16.3 (Wk104). The average headache pain severity score (0‒10) decreased from a mean of 7.3 (baseline) to 5.5 (Wk12) to 4.5 (Wk104). Mean MIDAS scores measuring absenteeism (Q1, 3, 5) changed from 9.7 days at baseline to 3.2 days (Wk12) and to 3.9 days (Wk104). Mean MIDAS scores measuring presenteeism (Q2, 4) at Wk12 decreased from 14.2 days at baseline to 5.2 days (Wk12, 104). Patients categorized with very severe MIDAS disability had a mean total MIDAS score of 84.8, with an average reduction of 56.7 days (Wk12), which was maintained at 32 days at Wk104.

Conclusions: Long-term treatment with eptinezumab in patients with CM suggested sustained reductions in MIDAS-quantified disability, consistent with the sustained reductions in headache frequency and pain severity.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02985398 .

Keywords: CGRP monoclonal antibody; Chronic migraine; Eptinezumab; Patient-reported outcomes.

Conflict of interest statement

AB has served on advisory boards for AbbVie, Aeon, Alder, Amgen, Biohaven, Eaglet, Eli Lilly, Impel, Lundbeck, Novartis, Promius, Revance, Supernus, and Teva; and has received funding for speaking from AbbVie, Amgen, Avanir, Biohaven, Depomed, Eli Lilly, Impel, Lundbeck, Pernix, Promius, Supernus, and Teva. AE and BE are employees of H. Lundbeck A/S. JH is an employee of Pacific Northwest Statistical Consulting, Inc., a contracted service provider of biostatistical resources for H. Lundbeck A/S. RC was an employee of Lundbeck at the time of manuscript development.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
MIDAS headache days* across 2 years: A mean headache days ± standard error, and B mean change ± standard error in headache days. MIDAS, Migraine Disability Assessment. *Number of headache days occurring over 3-month (12-week) periods over the course of the trial
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
MIDAS pain severity* over 2 years: A mean pain severity score ± standard error, and B mean change in pain severity score ± standard error. MIDAS, Migraine Disability Assessment. *Pain severity graded on 0‒10 scale
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Change from baseline in MIDAS item scores measuring absenteeism* and presenteeism† over 2 years. MIDAS, Migraine Disability Assessment. *Absenteeism comprises the average of Items 1, 3, and 5. Item 1: missed work/school; Item 3: no household work; Item 5: missed family/social/leisure activities. The average at baseline was 9.7 †Presenteeism comprises the average of Items 2 and 4. Item 2: work/school productivity ≤ half; Item 4: household productivity ≤ half. The average at baseline was 14.2
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
MIDAS total score ± standard error at baseline, Week 12, Week 84, and Week 104: A total safety population and subgroup with very severe MIDAS disability*, and B patients with < 50%, 50‒74%, or ≥ 75% HRR at Week 12. HRR, headache responder rate assessed by MIDAS; MIDAS, Migraine Disability Assessment. *Level of disability based on MIDAS total score: little or no disability (0–5), mild disability (6–10), moderate disability (11–20), severe disability (21–40), very severe disability (41–270)

References

    1. GBD 2016 Neurology Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neur. 2019;18:459–80. 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30403-4.
    1. GBD 2019 Diseases and Injuries Collaborators Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020;396(10258):1204–22. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9.
    1. Ford JH, Jackson J, Milligan G, et al. A real-world analysis of migraine: a cross-sectional study of disease burden and treatment patterns. Headache. 2017;57:1532–44. 10.1111/head.13202.
    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;53:644–55. 10.1111/head.12055.
    1. Hepp Z, Dodick DW, Varon SF, Chia J, Matthew N, Gillard P, et al. Persistence and switching patterns of oral migraine prophylactic medications among patients with chronic migraine: A retrospective claims analysis. Cephalalgia. 2017;37(5):470–85. doi: 10.1177/0333102416678382.
    1. Garcia-Martinez LF, Raport CJ, Ojala EW, et al. Pharmacologic characterization of ALD403, a potent neutralizing humanized monoclonal antibody against the calcitonin gene-related peptide. J Pharmacol Exp Ther [Internet]. 2020;374:93–103. 10.1124/jpet.119.264671.
    1. Ho TW, Edvinsson L, Goadsby PJ. CGRP and its receptors provide new insights into migraine pathophysiology. Nat Rev Neurol. 2010 6:10 6:573–82. 10.1038/nrneurol.2010.127.
    1. Edvinsson L, Haanes KA, Warfvinge K, Krause DiN. CGRP as the target of new migraine therapies — successful translation from bench to clinic. Nat Rev Neurol. 2018;14:338–50. 10.1038/s41582-018-0003-1.
    1. VYEPTI [package insert] [Internet]. Bothell, WA; 2022. Available from: Lundbeck Seattle BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.
    1. Ashina M, Saper J, Cady R, et al. Eptinezumab in episodic migraine: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (PROMISE-1). Cephalalgia. 2020;40:241–54. 10.1177/0333102420905132.
    1. Lipton RB, Goadsby PJ, Smith J, et al. Efficacy and safety of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine. Neurology. 2020;94:e1365–77. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009169.
    1. Kudrow D, Cady RK, Allan B, et al. Long-term safety and tolerability of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine: a 2-year, open-label, phase 3 trial. BMC Neurol. 2021;21:1–12. 10.1186/s12883-021-02123-w.
    1. Smith TR, Spierings ELH, Cady R, Hirman J, Ettrup A, Shen V. Cardiovascular outcomes in adults with migraine treated with eptinezumab for migraine prevention: pooled data from four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. J Headache Pain. 2021;22(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s10194-021-01360-1.
    1. Smith TR, Spierings ELH, Cady R, Hirman J, Schaeffler B, Shen V, et al. Safety and tolerability of eptinezumab in patients with migraine: a pooled analysis of 5 clinical trials. J Headache Pain. 2021;22(16):1–11.
    1. The International Classification of Headache Disorders - ICHD-3 [Internet]. [cited 2022 Jan 3]. Available from: .
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Dowson AJ, Sawyer J. Development and testing of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire to assess headache-related disability. Neurology. 2001;56:S20–8. 10.1212/WNL.56.SUPPL_1.S20.
    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;31:301–15. 10.1177/0333102410381145.
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Whyte J, et al. An international study to assess reliability of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score. Neurology. 1999;53:988–988. 10.1212/WNL.53.5.988.
    1. Ailani J, Burch RC, Robbins MS. The American Headache Society Consensus Statement: Update on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice. Headache. 2021;61:1021–39. 10.1111/head.14153.
    1. Houts CR, Wirth RJ, McGinley JS, et al. Determining thresholds for meaningful change for the headache impact test (HIT-6) total and item-specific scores in chronic migraine. Headache. 2020;60:2003–13. 10.1111/head.13946.
    1. Buse DC, Winner PK, Charleston L, et al. Early response to eptinezumab indicates high likelihood of continued response in patients with chronic migraine. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:1–12. 10.1186/s10194-022-01387-y.
    1. McAllister P, Winner PK, Ailani J, Buse DC, Lipton RB, Chakhava G, et al. Eptinezumab treatment initiated during a migraine attack is associated with meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcome measures: secondary results from the randomized controlled RELIEF study. J Headache Pain. 2022;23(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s10194-021-01376-7.
    1. Silberstein S, Diamond M, Hindiyeh NA, et al. Eptinezumab for the prevention of chronic migraine: Efficacy and safety through 24 weeks of treatment in the phase 3 PROMISE-2 (Prevention of migraine via intravenous ALD403 safety and efficacy-2) study. J Headache Pain. 2020;21:1–12. 10.1186/s10194-020-01186-3.
    1. Tassorelli C, Diener HC, Dodick DW, et al. Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine in adults. Cephalalgia. 2018;38:815–32. 10.1177/0333102418758283.
    1. Vo P, Paris N, Bilitou A, et al. Burden of Migraine in Europe Using Self-Reported Digital Diary Data from the Migraine Buddy© Application. Neurol Ther. 2018;7:321. 10.1007/S40120-018-0113-0.
    1. Adams AM, Serrano D, Buse DC, et al. The impact of chronic migraine: The Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study methods and baseline results. Cephalalgia. 2015;35:563–78. 10.1177/0333102414552532.
    1. Stokes M, Becker WJ, Lipton RB, et al. Cost of Health Care Among Patients With Chronic and Episodic Migraine in Canada and the USA: Results From the International Burden of Migraine Study (IBMS). Headache. 2011;51:1058–77. 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.01945.x.
    1. Feigin VL, Nichols E, Alam T, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of neurological disorders, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:459–80. 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30499-X.
    1. Buse DC, Rupnow MFT, Lipton RB. Assessing and Managing All Aspects of Migraine: Migraine Attacks, Migraine-Related Functional Impairment, Common Comorbidities, and Quality of Life. Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84(5):422. doi: 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)60561-2.

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera