Migraine ICYMI

Key clinical point: New daily persistent headache may be relatively common among children presenting to headache clinics.

Major finding: Girls with new daily persistent headache report symptoms such as photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea significantly more frequently than boys do.

Study details: An observational study of 454 pediatric patients with new daily persistent headache.

Disclosures: The study was not supported by funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.

Citation: Pierce E et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 100.

Key clinical point: New daily persistent headache may be relatively common among children presenting to headache clinics.

Major finding: Girls with new daily persistent headache report symptoms such as photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea significantly more frequently than boys do.

Study details: An observational study of 454 pediatric patients with new daily persistent headache.

Disclosures: The study was not supported by funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.

Citation: Pierce E et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 100.

Key clinical point: New daily persistent headache may be relatively common among children presenting to headache clinics.

Major finding: Girls with new daily persistent headache report symptoms such as photophobia, phonophobia, and nausea significantly more frequently than boys do.

Study details: An observational study of 454 pediatric patients with new daily persistent headache.

Disclosures: The study was not supported by funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.

Citation: Pierce E et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 100.

Key clinical point: Ubrogepant, an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP)–receptor antagonist, may relieve patients’ migraine pain and their most bothersome associated symptom, such as photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at 2 hours after acute treatment.

Major finding: At 2 hours, pain freedom was reported by 101 of 464 participants in the ubrogepant 50-mg group (21.8%), 90 of 435 in the ubrogepant 25-mg group (20.7%), and 65 of 456 in the placebo group (14.3%).

Study details: ACHIEVE II was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack clinical trial that included more than 1,300 adults with migraine.

Disclosures: The trial was sponsored by Allergan, the company developing the drug. Several authors are Allergan employees. Dr. Lipton is a consultant, advisory board member, or has received honoraria from Allergan and other companies.

Citation: Lipton RB et al. JAMA. 2019;322(19):1887-98. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.16711.

Key clinical point: Ubrogepant, an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP)–receptor antagonist, may relieve patients’ migraine pain and their most bothersome associated symptom, such as photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at 2 hours after acute treatment.

Major finding: At 2 hours, pain freedom was reported by 101 of 464 participants in the ubrogepant 50-mg group (21.8%), 90 of 435 in the ubrogepant 25-mg group (20.7%), and 65 of 456 in the placebo group (14.3%).

Study details: ACHIEVE II was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack clinical trial that included more than 1,300 adults with migraine.

Disclosures: The trial was sponsored by Allergan, the company developing the drug. Several authors are Allergan employees. Dr. Lipton is a consultant, advisory board member, or has received honoraria from Allergan and other companies.

Citation: Lipton RB et al. JAMA. 2019;322(19):1887-98. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.16711.

Key clinical point: Ubrogepant, an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP)–receptor antagonist, may relieve patients’ migraine pain and their most bothersome associated symptom, such as photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at 2 hours after acute treatment.

Major finding: At 2 hours, pain freedom was reported by 101 of 464 participants in the ubrogepant 50-mg group (21.8%), 90 of 435 in the ubrogepant 25-mg group (20.7%), and 65 of 456 in the placebo group (14.3%).

Study details: ACHIEVE II was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack clinical trial that included more than 1,300 adults with migraine.

Disclosures: The trial was sponsored by Allergan, the company developing the drug. Several authors are Allergan employees. Dr. Lipton is a consultant, advisory board member, or has received honoraria from Allergan and other companies.

Citation: Lipton RB et al. JAMA. 2019;322(19):1887-98. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.16711.

Key clinical point: Headache is a significant concern after pediatric hemispherectomy.

Major finding: Of 22 children who underwent hemispherectomy, 19 (86.4%) had headaches after the surgery.

Study details: A retrospective chart review and follow-up questionnaires that were administered to 22 children with hemispherectomy.

Citation: Pandit I et al. CNS 2019. Abstract 99.

Key clinical point: Headache is a significant concern after pediatric hemispherectomy.

Major finding: Of 22 children who underwent hemispherectomy, 19 (86.4%) had headaches after the surgery.

Study details: A retrospective chart review and follow-up questionnaires that were administered to 22 children with hemispherectomy.

Citation: Pandit I et al. CNS 2019. Abstract 99.

Key clinical point: Headache is a significant concern after pediatric hemispherectomy.

Major finding: Of 22 children who underwent hemispherectomy, 19 (86.4%) had headaches after the surgery.

Study details: A retrospective chart review and follow-up questionnaires that were administered to 22 children with hemispherectomy.

Citation: Pandit I et al. CNS 2019. Abstract 99.

Key Points:

• The “Migraine and Neck Pain Study” analyzed data from nearly 500 adult participants in an effort to uncover an association between migraine-related episodic vertigo and the phases of migraine.
• The study participants included men and women aged 18 to 65, who had episodic migraine with aura and/or without aura.
• Migraines were divided into 3 time segments for evaluation: (1) Onset of headache, (2) less than 2 hours before the onset of headache, and (3) 2 to 48 hours before the onset of headache.
• 30% of participants reported episodic vertigo at any point during their migraine attack, while 16% reported it at the start of headache, 10% reported it within 2 hours before their headache, and just 3% reported symptoms between 2 and 24 hours beforehand.
• The study concluded that episodic vertigo could be considered more of a “headache phase phenomenon” rather than a prodromal symptom.

Alan M. Rapoport, MD:

Vertigo in a migraineur has long created confusion as to diagnosis and treatment. I myself always wondered how much I had to work up vertigo or even dizziness if a patient had migraine. I also did not know what to do when a patient with migraine had attacks of vertigo without headache. Were they manifestations of migraine and should they be treated that way?

This study examined a 500 adult patient population who had migraine with or without aura. Christian Lampl was interested in seeing how many had headache, and the timing of when vertigo occurred. It was carefully measured to determine if it usually occurred during or before the headache phase. Migraines were divided into 3 time segments for evaluation: (1) Onset of headache, (2) less than 2 hours before the onset of headache, and (3) 2 to 48 hours before the onset of headache, when prodrome occurs.

• The study determined that 30 % of the patients reported vertigo at some point during their migraine attack; 16% reported it at the start of headache, 10% reported it within 2 hours before their headache, and just 3% reported symptoms between 2 and 24 hours beforehand., which would have been in the prodromal phase.  
• The study concluded that episodic vertigo could be considered more of a “headache phase phenomenon” rather than a prodromal symptom. This was interesting but it left unanswered one of my questions which is, how many had vertigo unrelated to headache and what is that and how do we treat it.
• Although not addressed in this study, there is consensus that if there is enough vertigo in a migraineur, they should be placed on a migraine preventive therapy. It will be interesting to see what the new monoclonal antibodies to CGRP do to vertigo in a treated migraineur. Some headache specialists will even treat an attack of vertigo without headache with a triptan.

Key Points:

• The “Migraine and Neck Pain Study” analyzed data from nearly 500 adult participants in an effort to uncover an association between migraine-related episodic vertigo and the phases of migraine.
• The study participants included men and women aged 18 to 65, who had episodic migraine with aura and/or without aura.
• Migraines were divided into 3 time segments for evaluation: (1) Onset of headache, (2) less than 2 hours before the onset of headache, and (3) 2 to 48 hours before the onset of headache.
• 30% of participants reported episodic vertigo at any point during their migraine attack, while 16% reported it at the start of headache, 10% reported it within 2 hours before their headache, and just 3% reported symptoms between 2 and 24 hours beforehand.
• The study concluded that episodic vertigo could be considered more of a “headache phase phenomenon” rather than a prodromal symptom.

Alan M. Rapoport, MD:

Vertigo in a migraineur has long created confusion as to diagnosis and treatment. I myself always wondered how much I had to work up vertigo or even dizziness if a patient had migraine. I also did not know what to do when a patient with migraine had attacks of vertigo without headache. Were they manifestations of migraine and should they be treated that way?

This study examined a 500 adult patient population who had migraine with or without aura. Christian Lampl was interested in seeing how many had headache, and the timing of when vertigo occurred. It was carefully measured to determine if it usually occurred during or before the headache phase. Migraines were divided into 3 time segments for evaluation: (1) Onset of headache, (2) less than 2 hours before the onset of headache, and (3) 2 to 48 hours before the onset of headache, when prodrome occurs.

• The study determined that 30 % of the patients reported vertigo at some point during their migraine attack; 16% reported it at the start of headache, 10% reported it within 2 hours before their headache, and just 3% reported symptoms between 2 and 24 hours beforehand., which would have been in the prodromal phase.  
• The study concluded that episodic vertigo could be considered more of a “headache phase phenomenon” rather than a prodromal symptom. This was interesting but it left unanswered one of my questions which is, how many had vertigo unrelated to headache and what is that and how do we treat it.
• Although not addressed in this study, there is consensus that if there is enough vertigo in a migraineur, they should be placed on a migraine preventive therapy. It will be interesting to see what the new monoclonal antibodies to CGRP do to vertigo in a treated migraineur. Some headache specialists will even treat an attack of vertigo without headache with a triptan.

Key Points:

• The “Migraine and Neck Pain Study” analyzed data from nearly 500 adult participants in an effort to uncover an association between migraine-related episodic vertigo and the phases of migraine.
• The study participants included men and women aged 18 to 65, who had episodic migraine with aura and/or without aura.
• Migraines were divided into 3 time segments for evaluation: (1) Onset of headache, (2) less than 2 hours before the onset of headache, and (3) 2 to 48 hours before the onset of headache.
• 30% of participants reported episodic vertigo at any point during their migraine attack, while 16% reported it at the start of headache, 10% reported it within 2 hours before their headache, and just 3% reported symptoms between 2 and 24 hours beforehand.
• The study concluded that episodic vertigo could be considered more of a “headache phase phenomenon” rather than a prodromal symptom.

Alan M. Rapoport, MD:

Vertigo in a migraineur has long created confusion as to diagnosis and treatment. I myself always wondered how much I had to work up vertigo or even dizziness if a patient had migraine. I also did not know what to do when a patient with migraine had attacks of vertigo without headache. Were they manifestations of migraine and should they be treated that way?

This study examined a 500 adult patient population who had migraine with or without aura. Christian Lampl was interested in seeing how many had headache, and the timing of when vertigo occurred. It was carefully measured to determine if it usually occurred during or before the headache phase. Migraines were divided into 3 time segments for evaluation: (1) Onset of headache, (2) less than 2 hours before the onset of headache, and (3) 2 to 48 hours before the onset of headache, when prodrome occurs.

• The study determined that 30 % of the patients reported vertigo at some point during their migraine attack; 16% reported it at the start of headache, 10% reported it within 2 hours before their headache, and just 3% reported symptoms between 2 and 24 hours beforehand., which would have been in the prodromal phase.  
• The study concluded that episodic vertigo could be considered more of a “headache phase phenomenon” rather than a prodromal symptom. This was interesting but it left unanswered one of my questions which is, how many had vertigo unrelated to headache and what is that and how do we treat it.
• Although not addressed in this study, there is consensus that if there is enough vertigo in a migraineur, they should be placed on a migraine preventive therapy. It will be interesting to see what the new monoclonal antibodies to CGRP do to vertigo in a treated migraineur. Some headache specialists will even treat an attack of vertigo without headache with a triptan.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved ubrogepant (Ubrelvy, Allergan) for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

Ubrogepant is the first drug in the class of oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonists approved for the acute treatment of migraine. It is approved in two dose strengths (50 mg and 100 mg).

The drug is not indicated, however, for the preventive treatment of migraine.

“Migraine is an often disabling condition that affects an estimated 37 million people in the U.S.,” Billy Dunn, MD, acting director of the office of neuroscience in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in an FDA news release.

Ubrogepant represents “an important new option for the acute treatment of migraine in adults, as it is the first drug in its class approved for this indication. The FDA is pleased to approve a novel treatment for patients suffering from migraine and will continue to work with stakeholders to promote the development of new safe and effective migraine therapies,” added Dr. Dunn.

The safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine was demonstrated in two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II). In total, 1,439 adults with a history of migraine, with and without aura, received ubrogepant to treat an ongoing migraine.

“Both 50-mg and 100-mg dose strengths demonstrated significantly greater rates of pain freedom and freedom from the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours, compared with placebo,” Allergan said in a news release announcing approval.

The most common side effects reported by patients in the clinical trials were nausea, tiredness, and dry mouth. Ubrogepant is contraindicated for coadministration with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors.

The company expects to have ubrogepant available in the first quarter of 2020.

A version of this story originally appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved ubrogepant (Ubrelvy, Allergan) for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

Ubrogepant is the first drug in the class of oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonists approved for the acute treatment of migraine. It is approved in two dose strengths (50 mg and 100 mg).

The drug is not indicated, however, for the preventive treatment of migraine.

“Migraine is an often disabling condition that affects an estimated 37 million people in the U.S.,” Billy Dunn, MD, acting director of the office of neuroscience in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in an FDA news release.

Ubrogepant represents “an important new option for the acute treatment of migraine in adults, as it is the first drug in its class approved for this indication. The FDA is pleased to approve a novel treatment for patients suffering from migraine and will continue to work with stakeholders to promote the development of new safe and effective migraine therapies,” added Dr. Dunn.

The safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine was demonstrated in two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II). In total, 1,439 adults with a history of migraine, with and without aura, received ubrogepant to treat an ongoing migraine.

“Both 50-mg and 100-mg dose strengths demonstrated significantly greater rates of pain freedom and freedom from the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours, compared with placebo,” Allergan said in a news release announcing approval.

The most common side effects reported by patients in the clinical trials were nausea, tiredness, and dry mouth. Ubrogepant is contraindicated for coadministration with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors.

The company expects to have ubrogepant available in the first quarter of 2020.

A version of this story originally appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved ubrogepant (Ubrelvy, Allergan) for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults.

Olivier Le Moal/Getty Images

Ubrogepant is the first drug in the class of oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonists approved for the acute treatment of migraine. It is approved in two dose strengths (50 mg and 100 mg).

The drug is not indicated, however, for the preventive treatment of migraine.

“Migraine is an often disabling condition that affects an estimated 37 million people in the U.S.,” Billy Dunn, MD, acting director of the office of neuroscience in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in an FDA news release.

Ubrogepant represents “an important new option for the acute treatment of migraine in adults, as it is the first drug in its class approved for this indication. The FDA is pleased to approve a novel treatment for patients suffering from migraine and will continue to work with stakeholders to promote the development of new safe and effective migraine therapies,” added Dr. Dunn.

The safety and efficacy of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine was demonstrated in two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II). In total, 1,439 adults with a history of migraine, with and without aura, received ubrogepant to treat an ongoing migraine.

“Both 50-mg and 100-mg dose strengths demonstrated significantly greater rates of pain freedom and freedom from the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours, compared with placebo,” Allergan said in a news release announcing approval.

The most common side effects reported by patients in the clinical trials were nausea, tiredness, and dry mouth. Ubrogepant is contraindicated for coadministration with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors.

The company expects to have ubrogepant available in the first quarter of 2020.

A version of this story originally appeared on Medscape.com.

About 20% of patients who receive tablets containing 50 mg or 100 mg of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine are pain free 2 hours later, compared with 12% of patients who receive placebo, according to phase 3 trial results published Dec. 4 in the New England Journal of Medicine. In addition, about 38% of patients who receive ubrogepant no longer have their most bothersome migraine-associated symptom, such as photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at 2 hours, compared with 28% of patients who receive placebo, said David W. Dodick, MD, and colleagues.

Dr. Dodick, professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, and his coauthors described efficacy and safety results from the ACHIEVE I trial. Another phase 3 study of ubrogepant, ACHIEVE II, was published in JAMA in November. That trial evaluated 25- and 50-mg doses of ubrogepant versus placebo and found rates of pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome symptom in the placebo and active treatment arms that were similar to those in ACHIEVE I.

Assessing a gepant for acute migraine treatment

Ubrogepant is an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist. Allergan, the company developing the drug, has said it expects the Food and Drug Administration to decide in December whether to approve the drug.

To compare ubrogepant 50 mg, ubrogepant 100 mg, and placebo for the acute treatment of migraine, investigators conducted the randomized ACHIEVE I trial. Researchers enrolled 1,672 adults with migraine with or without aura. They excluded patients with clinically significant cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease. During the trial, patients treated a single migraine attack, and they had the option to take a second dose. In all, 1,436 participants took an initial dose. Patients had an average age of 40.5 years, about 88% were women, and 82% were white.

In ACHIEVE I, the most common adverse events within 48 hours of treatment were nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth, and these events occurred more frequently in the 100-mg–dose group, Dr. Dodick and colleagues reported. Among patients who received ubrogepant, serious adverse events more than 48 hours after treatment but within 30 days of treatment included appendicitis, spontaneous abortion, pericardial effusion, and seizure. No serious adverse events occurred in the placebo group.

The authors noted that, “there was no active comparator and no evaluation of consistency of effect across multiple migraine attacks; therefore it is not possible to determine whether the drug is more or less effective than standard therapies or consistently effective with repeated use.” In addition, “safety and side-effect data from this trial were based on evaluation of a single attack, and therefore safety after repeated use cannot be inferred; an extension trial has assessed the long-term safety of ubrogepant,” they said.

The present trial was performed well, commented Alan M. Rapoport, MD. “The coprimary endpoints of pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom, both at 2 hours after dosing, were statistically superior for both doses of ubrogepant versus placebo,” he said. “Some of the secondary endpoints, such as pain relief at 2 hours post dose and sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours, were statistically better than placebo.”

“Based on this data, I suspect that the FDA would approve this gepant after appropriate safety data,” said Dr. Rapoport, clinical professor of neurology at the University of California, Los Angeles and editor-in-chief of Neurology Reviews. “Many more patients need to take this drug before we can be sure it is safe and effective.”

The CGRP therapeutic landscape

“Other gepants have been shown to be effective, although some have caused a degree of liver toxicity,” said Dr. Rapoport. “Blocking the effect of CGRP on the migraine peripheral nervous system, in this case by preventing the ligand from docking at its receptor by administering an oral CGRP receptor blocker, appears to be effective.” Researchers are studying another oral gepant for similar approval, he added.

Ubrogepant stands to join other treatments targeting CGRP.

“There are currently three, and soon to be four, injectable monoclonal antibodies against CGRP functionality, which are preventive, not acute-care drugs,” Dr. Rapoport said. “The first released was a subcutaneous injection of a CGRP receptor blocker, and the other two are subcutaneous injections of CGRP ligand blockers. The last drug will be an intravenous infusion of a ligand blocker. These recently approved migraine treatments have greatly improved the lives of many of our patients, even when other preventives have failed. I expect ubrogepant and other gepants will do the same for the acute care of migraine.”

Allergan funded the trials of ubrogepant, and some of the authors are Allergan employees and stockholders. Dr. Dodick reported consulting fees and advisory board fees from Allergan and various pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Dodick DW et al. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(23):2230-41. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1813049.

About 20% of patients who receive tablets containing 50 mg or 100 mg of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine are pain free 2 hours later, compared with 12% of patients who receive placebo, according to phase 3 trial results published Dec. 4 in the New England Journal of Medicine. In addition, about 38% of patients who receive ubrogepant no longer have their most bothersome migraine-associated symptom, such as photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at 2 hours, compared with 28% of patients who receive placebo, said David W. Dodick, MD, and colleagues.

Dr. Dodick, professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, and his coauthors described efficacy and safety results from the ACHIEVE I trial. Another phase 3 study of ubrogepant, ACHIEVE II, was published in JAMA in November. That trial evaluated 25- and 50-mg doses of ubrogepant versus placebo and found rates of pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome symptom in the placebo and active treatment arms that were similar to those in ACHIEVE I.

Assessing a gepant for acute migraine treatment

Ubrogepant is an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist. Allergan, the company developing the drug, has said it expects the Food and Drug Administration to decide in December whether to approve the drug.

To compare ubrogepant 50 mg, ubrogepant 100 mg, and placebo for the acute treatment of migraine, investigators conducted the randomized ACHIEVE I trial. Researchers enrolled 1,672 adults with migraine with or without aura. They excluded patients with clinically significant cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease. During the trial, patients treated a single migraine attack, and they had the option to take a second dose. In all, 1,436 participants took an initial dose. Patients had an average age of 40.5 years, about 88% were women, and 82% were white.

In ACHIEVE I, the most common adverse events within 48 hours of treatment were nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth, and these events occurred more frequently in the 100-mg–dose group, Dr. Dodick and colleagues reported. Among patients who received ubrogepant, serious adverse events more than 48 hours after treatment but within 30 days of treatment included appendicitis, spontaneous abortion, pericardial effusion, and seizure. No serious adverse events occurred in the placebo group.

The authors noted that, “there was no active comparator and no evaluation of consistency of effect across multiple migraine attacks; therefore it is not possible to determine whether the drug is more or less effective than standard therapies or consistently effective with repeated use.” In addition, “safety and side-effect data from this trial were based on evaluation of a single attack, and therefore safety after repeated use cannot be inferred; an extension trial has assessed the long-term safety of ubrogepant,” they said.

The present trial was performed well, commented Alan M. Rapoport, MD. “The coprimary endpoints of pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom, both at 2 hours after dosing, were statistically superior for both doses of ubrogepant versus placebo,” he said. “Some of the secondary endpoints, such as pain relief at 2 hours post dose and sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours, were statistically better than placebo.”

“Based on this data, I suspect that the FDA would approve this gepant after appropriate safety data,” said Dr. Rapoport, clinical professor of neurology at the University of California, Los Angeles and editor-in-chief of Neurology Reviews. “Many more patients need to take this drug before we can be sure it is safe and effective.”

The CGRP therapeutic landscape

“Other gepants have been shown to be effective, although some have caused a degree of liver toxicity,” said Dr. Rapoport. “Blocking the effect of CGRP on the migraine peripheral nervous system, in this case by preventing the ligand from docking at its receptor by administering an oral CGRP receptor blocker, appears to be effective.” Researchers are studying another oral gepant for similar approval, he added.

Ubrogepant stands to join other treatments targeting CGRP.

“There are currently three, and soon to be four, injectable monoclonal antibodies against CGRP functionality, which are preventive, not acute-care drugs,” Dr. Rapoport said. “The first released was a subcutaneous injection of a CGRP receptor blocker, and the other two are subcutaneous injections of CGRP ligand blockers. The last drug will be an intravenous infusion of a ligand blocker. These recently approved migraine treatments have greatly improved the lives of many of our patients, even when other preventives have failed. I expect ubrogepant and other gepants will do the same for the acute care of migraine.”

Allergan funded the trials of ubrogepant, and some of the authors are Allergan employees and stockholders. Dr. Dodick reported consulting fees and advisory board fees from Allergan and various pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Dodick DW et al. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(23):2230-41. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1813049.

About 20% of patients who receive tablets containing 50 mg or 100 mg of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine are pain free 2 hours later, compared with 12% of patients who receive placebo, according to phase 3 trial results published Dec. 4 in the New England Journal of Medicine. In addition, about 38% of patients who receive ubrogepant no longer have their most bothersome migraine-associated symptom, such as photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea, at 2 hours, compared with 28% of patients who receive placebo, said David W. Dodick, MD, and colleagues.

Dr. Dodick, professor of neurology at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, and his coauthors described efficacy and safety results from the ACHIEVE I trial. Another phase 3 study of ubrogepant, ACHIEVE II, was published in JAMA in November. That trial evaluated 25- and 50-mg doses of ubrogepant versus placebo and found rates of pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome symptom in the placebo and active treatment arms that were similar to those in ACHIEVE I.

Assessing a gepant for acute migraine treatment

Ubrogepant is an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist. Allergan, the company developing the drug, has said it expects the Food and Drug Administration to decide in December whether to approve the drug.

To compare ubrogepant 50 mg, ubrogepant 100 mg, and placebo for the acute treatment of migraine, investigators conducted the randomized ACHIEVE I trial. Researchers enrolled 1,672 adults with migraine with or without aura. They excluded patients with clinically significant cardiovascular or cerebrovascular disease. During the trial, patients treated a single migraine attack, and they had the option to take a second dose. In all, 1,436 participants took an initial dose. Patients had an average age of 40.5 years, about 88% were women, and 82% were white.

In ACHIEVE I, the most common adverse events within 48 hours of treatment were nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth, and these events occurred more frequently in the 100-mg–dose group, Dr. Dodick and colleagues reported. Among patients who received ubrogepant, serious adverse events more than 48 hours after treatment but within 30 days of treatment included appendicitis, spontaneous abortion, pericardial effusion, and seizure. No serious adverse events occurred in the placebo group.

The authors noted that, “there was no active comparator and no evaluation of consistency of effect across multiple migraine attacks; therefore it is not possible to determine whether the drug is more or less effective than standard therapies or consistently effective with repeated use.” In addition, “safety and side-effect data from this trial were based on evaluation of a single attack, and therefore safety after repeated use cannot be inferred; an extension trial has assessed the long-term safety of ubrogepant,” they said.

The present trial was performed well, commented Alan M. Rapoport, MD. “The coprimary endpoints of pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom, both at 2 hours after dosing, were statistically superior for both doses of ubrogepant versus placebo,” he said. “Some of the secondary endpoints, such as pain relief at 2 hours post dose and sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours, were statistically better than placebo.”

“Based on this data, I suspect that the FDA would approve this gepant after appropriate safety data,” said Dr. Rapoport, clinical professor of neurology at the University of California, Los Angeles and editor-in-chief of Neurology Reviews. “Many more patients need to take this drug before we can be sure it is safe and effective.”

The CGRP therapeutic landscape

“Other gepants have been shown to be effective, although some have caused a degree of liver toxicity,” said Dr. Rapoport. “Blocking the effect of CGRP on the migraine peripheral nervous system, in this case by preventing the ligand from docking at its receptor by administering an oral CGRP receptor blocker, appears to be effective.” Researchers are studying another oral gepant for similar approval, he added.

Ubrogepant stands to join other treatments targeting CGRP.

“There are currently three, and soon to be four, injectable monoclonal antibodies against CGRP functionality, which are preventive, not acute-care drugs,” Dr. Rapoport said. “The first released was a subcutaneous injection of a CGRP receptor blocker, and the other two are subcutaneous injections of CGRP ligand blockers. The last drug will be an intravenous infusion of a ligand blocker. These recently approved migraine treatments have greatly improved the lives of many of our patients, even when other preventives have failed. I expect ubrogepant and other gepants will do the same for the acute care of migraine.”

Allergan funded the trials of ubrogepant, and some of the authors are Allergan employees and stockholders. Dr. Dodick reported consulting fees and advisory board fees from Allergan and various pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Dodick DW et al. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(23):2230-41. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1813049.

Key clinical point: The 12-week injection cycle of Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) may need to be reconsidered.

Major finding: The study of 98 patients and 471 treatment cycles found that 43 patients experienced one or more wearing-off-effect (WOE) events (worsening headaches and neck pain). Of those patients, 24 reported 1 WOE event and 19 patients reported 2 or more WOEs. Almost 32% of patients used abortive therapy to manage their WOEs.

Study details: This was a retrospective review of patients with worsening headache variables and neck pain who received OnabotA for their chronic migraine in treatment cycles.

Disclosures: Dr. Khan received honorarium for Depomed, Inc. and Promius Pharma while conducting the study.

Citation: Khan FA, et al. Headache. 2019 Nov 22. doi: 10.1111/head.13713. [Epub ahead of print].

Key clinical point: The 12-week injection cycle of Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) may need to be reconsidered.

Major finding: The study of 98 patients and 471 treatment cycles found that 43 patients experienced one or more wearing-off-effect (WOE) events (worsening headaches and neck pain). Of those patients, 24 reported 1 WOE event and 19 patients reported 2 or more WOEs. Almost 32% of patients used abortive therapy to manage their WOEs.

Study details: This was a retrospective review of patients with worsening headache variables and neck pain who received OnabotA for their chronic migraine in treatment cycles.

Disclosures: Dr. Khan received honorarium for Depomed, Inc. and Promius Pharma while conducting the study.

Citation: Khan FA, et al. Headache. 2019 Nov 22. doi: 10.1111/head.13713. [Epub ahead of print].

Key clinical point: The 12-week injection cycle of Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) may need to be reconsidered.

Major finding: The study of 98 patients and 471 treatment cycles found that 43 patients experienced one or more wearing-off-effect (WOE) events (worsening headaches and neck pain). Of those patients, 24 reported 1 WOE event and 19 patients reported 2 or more WOEs. Almost 32% of patients used abortive therapy to manage their WOEs.

Study details: This was a retrospective review of patients with worsening headache variables and neck pain who received OnabotA for their chronic migraine in treatment cycles.

Disclosures: Dr. Khan received honorarium for Depomed, Inc. and Promius Pharma while conducting the study.

Citation: Khan FA, et al. Headache. 2019 Nov 22. doi: 10.1111/head.13713. [Epub ahead of print].

Key clinical point: Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) may decrease migraine days by 50% or more.

Major finding: Of 112 patients with chronic migraine (100 female), 96 responded positively to OnabotA, resulting in decreased migraine days by at least 50%. Having a dependent personality trait was linked to treatment nonresponse.

Study details: This was a case-control observational study of chronic migraine patients that received two or more treatment cycles of OnabotA.

Disclosures: None.

Citation: Gonzalez-Martinez A, et al. Headache. 2019 Nov 6. doi: 10.1111/head.13693. [Epub ahead of print].

Key clinical point: Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) may decrease migraine days by 50% or more.

Major finding: Of 112 patients with chronic migraine (100 female), 96 responded positively to OnabotA, resulting in decreased migraine days by at least 50%. Having a dependent personality trait was linked to treatment nonresponse.

Study details: This was a case-control observational study of chronic migraine patients that received two or more treatment cycles of OnabotA.

Disclosures: None.

Citation: Gonzalez-Martinez A, et al. Headache. 2019 Nov 6. doi: 10.1111/head.13693. [Epub ahead of print].

Key clinical point: Onabotulinumtoxin A (OnabotA) may decrease migraine days by 50% or more.

Major finding: Of 112 patients with chronic migraine (100 female), 96 responded positively to OnabotA, resulting in decreased migraine days by at least 50%. Having a dependent personality trait was linked to treatment nonresponse.

Study details: This was a case-control observational study of chronic migraine patients that received two or more treatment cycles of OnabotA.

Disclosures: None.

Citation: Gonzalez-Martinez A, et al. Headache. 2019 Nov 6. doi: 10.1111/head.13693. [Epub ahead of print].

Key clinical point: Vitamin D supplementation may decrease the frequency, severity, and duration of migraines.

Major finding: Significantly lower 25 (OH)-vitamin D levels were found in patients with migraine, compared with healthy controls. Migraine patients with low vitamin D levels had a higher incidence of aura, phonophobia/photophobia, autonomic manifestations, allodynia, and medication resistance.

Study details: This was a case-control study of 40 patients with migraine, compared with 40 healthy control patients. Patient history was taken including headache characteristics, MIGSEV, and HIT-6 scores. Each patient’s serum 25 (OH)-vitamin D level was measured.

Disclosures: None.

Citation: Hussein M, et al. J Pain Res. 2019 Aug 20;12:2529-36. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S216314. eCollection 2019.

Key clinical point: Vitamin D supplementation may decrease the frequency, severity, and duration of migraines.

Major finding: Significantly lower 25 (OH)-vitamin D levels were found in patients with migraine, compared with healthy controls. Migraine patients with low vitamin D levels had a higher incidence of aura, phonophobia/photophobia, autonomic manifestations, allodynia, and medication resistance.

Study details: This was a case-control study of 40 patients with migraine, compared with 40 healthy control patients. Patient history was taken including headache characteristics, MIGSEV, and HIT-6 scores. Each patient’s serum 25 (OH)-vitamin D level was measured.

Disclosures: None.

Citation: Hussein M, et al. J Pain Res. 2019 Aug 20;12:2529-36. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S216314. eCollection 2019.

Key clinical point: Vitamin D supplementation may decrease the frequency, severity, and duration of migraines.

Major finding: Significantly lower 25 (OH)-vitamin D levels were found in patients with migraine, compared with healthy controls. Migraine patients with low vitamin D levels had a higher incidence of aura, phonophobia/photophobia, autonomic manifestations, allodynia, and medication resistance.

Study details: This was a case-control study of 40 patients with migraine, compared with 40 healthy control patients. Patient history was taken including headache characteristics, MIGSEV, and HIT-6 scores. Each patient’s serum 25 (OH)-vitamin D level was measured.

Disclosures: None.

Citation: Hussein M, et al. J Pain Res. 2019 Aug 20;12:2529-36. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S216314. eCollection 2019.

Episodic visual snow was tied to migraine attacks in a case series of three adults who denied any visual snow outside of the migraines, based on data collected at an outpatient headache center.

Visual snow, a condition in which patients experience visual distortion of tiny, flickering dots resembling analog television static, is often a comorbid condition in migraine patients with and without aura. However, “to our knowledge, this is the first report of patients with an episodic form of visual snow strictly occurring with migraine attacks,” wrote Julius Hodak, MD, of the University of Bern (Switzerland) and colleagues.

In a research letter published in JAMA Neurology, the investigators described 3 adults with histories of migraine but no aura who presented to a tertiary headache center between January 2016 and December 2017, in addition to 1,934 adults with migraine but no visual snow. The three patients initially presented with headaches, and neurologic and MRI results were normal.

Two patients experienced black and white episodic visual snow and one experienced black and yellow visual snow. In one patient, visual snow occurred for less than 2 minutes before and during a migraine attack. The other two patients experienced visual snow during the entire migraine attack.

Based on these patients, the researchers proposed distinguishing episodic visual snow from the distinct disorder of visual snow syndrome, in which patients experience continuous visual snow and other visual symptoms.

In addition, the cases were notable because of the lack of aura in the patients, the researchers wrote.

“In clinical practice, a detailed history in patients reporting visual flickering is therefore necessary to differentiate aura from [episodic visual snow],” they added, because an aura diagnosis would affect patient guidance on contraception use or the timing of triptans.

Dr. Hodak had no financial conflicts to disclose. The study was supported by Deutsche Migräne-und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft, Eye on Vision Foundation, and Baasch-Medicus Foundation.

SOURCE: Hodak J et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Nov 25. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4050.

Episodic visual snow was tied to migraine attacks in a case series of three adults who denied any visual snow outside of the migraines, based on data collected at an outpatient headache center.

Visual snow, a condition in which patients experience visual distortion of tiny, flickering dots resembling analog television static, is often a comorbid condition in migraine patients with and without aura. However, “to our knowledge, this is the first report of patients with an episodic form of visual snow strictly occurring with migraine attacks,” wrote Julius Hodak, MD, of the University of Bern (Switzerland) and colleagues.

In a research letter published in JAMA Neurology, the investigators described 3 adults with histories of migraine but no aura who presented to a tertiary headache center between January 2016 and December 2017, in addition to 1,934 adults with migraine but no visual snow. The three patients initially presented with headaches, and neurologic and MRI results were normal.

Two patients experienced black and white episodic visual snow and one experienced black and yellow visual snow. In one patient, visual snow occurred for less than 2 minutes before and during a migraine attack. The other two patients experienced visual snow during the entire migraine attack.

Based on these patients, the researchers proposed distinguishing episodic visual snow from the distinct disorder of visual snow syndrome, in which patients experience continuous visual snow and other visual symptoms.

In addition, the cases were notable because of the lack of aura in the patients, the researchers wrote.

“In clinical practice, a detailed history in patients reporting visual flickering is therefore necessary to differentiate aura from [episodic visual snow],” they added, because an aura diagnosis would affect patient guidance on contraception use or the timing of triptans.

Dr. Hodak had no financial conflicts to disclose. The study was supported by Deutsche Migräne-und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft, Eye on Vision Foundation, and Baasch-Medicus Foundation.

SOURCE: Hodak J et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Nov 25. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4050.

Episodic visual snow was tied to migraine attacks in a case series of three adults who denied any visual snow outside of the migraines, based on data collected at an outpatient headache center.

Visual snow, a condition in which patients experience visual distortion of tiny, flickering dots resembling analog television static, is often a comorbid condition in migraine patients with and without aura. However, “to our knowledge, this is the first report of patients with an episodic form of visual snow strictly occurring with migraine attacks,” wrote Julius Hodak, MD, of the University of Bern (Switzerland) and colleagues.

In a research letter published in JAMA Neurology, the investigators described 3 adults with histories of migraine but no aura who presented to a tertiary headache center between January 2016 and December 2017, in addition to 1,934 adults with migraine but no visual snow. The three patients initially presented with headaches, and neurologic and MRI results were normal.

Two patients experienced black and white episodic visual snow and one experienced black and yellow visual snow. In one patient, visual snow occurred for less than 2 minutes before and during a migraine attack. The other two patients experienced visual snow during the entire migraine attack.

Based on these patients, the researchers proposed distinguishing episodic visual snow from the distinct disorder of visual snow syndrome, in which patients experience continuous visual snow and other visual symptoms.

In addition, the cases were notable because of the lack of aura in the patients, the researchers wrote.

“In clinical practice, a detailed history in patients reporting visual flickering is therefore necessary to differentiate aura from [episodic visual snow],” they added, because an aura diagnosis would affect patient guidance on contraception use or the timing of triptans.

Dr. Hodak had no financial conflicts to disclose. The study was supported by Deutsche Migräne-und Kopfschmerzgesellschaft, Eye on Vision Foundation, and Baasch-Medicus Foundation.

SOURCE: Hodak J et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Nov 25. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4050.