Nonspecific oral medications versus anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

被引:7
作者
Robblee, Jennifer [1 ]
Hakim, Sameh M. [2 ]
Reynolds, John M. [3 ]
Monteith, Teshamae S. [4 ]
Zhang, Niushen [5 ]
Barad, Meredith [6 ]
机构
[1] St Josephs Hosp, Barrow Neurol Inst, Dept Neurol, 350 W Thomas Rd, Phoenix, AZ 85013 USA
[2] Ain Shams Univ, Dept Anesthesiol Intens Care & Pain Management, Fac Med, Cairo, Egypt
[3] Univ Miami, Miller Sch Med, Louis Calder Mem Lib, Miami, FL USA
[4] Univ Miami, Dept Neurol, Div Headache, Miller Sch Med, Miami, FL USA
[5] Stanford Hlth Care, Dept Neurol & Neurol Sci, Stanford, CA USA
[6] Stanford Hlth Care, Dept Anesthesiol Perioperat & Pain Med, Stanford, CA USA
来源
HEADACHE | 2024年 / 64卷 / 05期
关键词
calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonist; calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies; insurance; migraine; preventive treatment; LONG-ACTING PROPRANOLOL; LOW-DOSE TOPIRAMATE; DOUBLE-BLIND; PROPHYLACTIC TREATMENT; SODIUM VALPROATE; DIVALPROEX SODIUM; EPISODIC MIGRAINE; COMMON MIGRAINE; PLACEBO; PREVENTION;
D O I
10.1111/head.14693
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
ObjectiveTo compare calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) versus nonspecific oral migraine preventives (NOEPs).BackgroundInsurers mandate step therapy with NOEPs before approving CGRP mAbs.MethodsDatabases were searched for class I or II randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CGRP mAbs or NOEPs versus placebo for migraine prevention in adults. The primary outcome measure was monthly migraine days (MMD) or moderate to severe headache days.ResultsTwelve RCTs for CGRP mAbs, 5 RCTs for topiramate, and 3 RCTs for divalproex were included in the meta-analysis. There was high certainty that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo, with weighted mean difference (WMD; 95% confidence interval) of -1.64 (-1.99 to -1.28) MMD, which is compatible with small effect size (Cohen's d -0.25 [-0.34 to -0.16]). Certainty of evidence that topiramate or divalproex is more effective than placebo was very low and low, respectively (WMD -1.45 [-1.52 to -1.38] and -1.65 [-2.30 to -1.00], respectively; Cohen's d -1.25 [-2.47 to -0.03] and -0.48 [-0.67 to -0.29], respectively). Trial sequential analysis showed that information size was adequate and that CGRP mAbs had clear benefit versus placebo. Network meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between CGRP mAbs and topiramate (WMD -0.19 [-0.56 to 0.17]) or divalproex (0.01 [-0.73 to 0.75]). No significant difference was seen between topiramate or divalproex (0.21 [-0.45 to 0.86]).ConclusionsThere is high certainty that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo, but the effect size is small. When feasible, CGRP mAbs may be prescribed as first-line preventives; topiramate or divalproex could be as effective but are less well tolerated. The findings of this study support the recently published 2024 position of the American Headache Society on the use of CGRP mAbs as the first-line treatment. Insurance companies often do not approve calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) for the treatment of migraine until patients have tried other medicines first. We reviewed and summarized data from studies that reported how well different migraine medications worked, including CGRP mAbs, and found evidence that CGRP mAbs are more effective than placebo and just as effective as other migraine drugs. This suggests that CGRP mAbs should be offered as a first-line preventive therapy at the discretion of the clinician and the individual patient.Answer questions and earn CME credit:
引用
收藏
页码:547 / 572
页数:26
相关论文
共 129 条
[1]   A Comparative Study of the Effects of Low-Dose Topiramate Versus Sodium Valproate in Migraine Prophylaxis [J].
Afshari, Dariush ;
Rafizadeh, Shabnam ;
Rezaei, Mansour .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE, 2012, 122 (02) :60-68
[2]  
AHUJA GK, 1985, INDIAN J MED RES, V82, P263
[3]   The American Headache Society Consensus Statement: Update on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice [J].
Ailani, Jessica ;
Burch, Rebecca C. ;
Robbins, Matthew S. .
HEADACHE, 2021, 61 (07) :1021-1039
[4]   COMPARISON OF PROPRANOLOL LA 80 MG AND PROPRANOLOL LA 160 MG IN MIGRAINE PROPHYLAXIS - A PLACEBO-CONTROLLED STUDY [J].
ALQASSAB, HK ;
FINDLEY, LJ .
CEPHALALGIA, 1993, 13 (02) :128-131
[5]  
Ambrosini A, 2022, J MANAG CARE SPEC PH, V28, P645, DOI 10.18553/jmcp.2022.21375
[6]   PROPHYLACTIC TREATMENT OF CLASSICAL AND NON-CLASSICAL MIGRAINE WITH METOPROLOL - A COMPARISON WITH PLACEBO [J].
ANDERSSON, PG ;
DAHL, S ;
HANSEN, JH ;
HANSEN, PE ;
HEDMAN, C ;
KRISTENSEN, TN ;
OLIVARIUS, BD .
CEPHALALGIA, 1983, 3 (04) :207-212
[7]  
[Anonymous], 1962, ARCH NEUROL-CHICAGO, V6, P173, DOI DOI 10.1001/ARCHNEUR.1962.00450210001001
[8]  
[Anonymous], Study design search filters
[9]  
[Anonymous], 2019, LILLY ANNOUNCES LAUN
[10]   Eptinezumab in episodic migraine: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (PROMISE-1) [J].
Ashina, Messoud ;
Saper, Joel ;
Cady, Roger ;
Schaeffler, Barbara A. ;
Biondi, David M. ;
Hirman, Joe ;
Pederson, Susan ;
Allan, Brent ;
Smith, Jeff .
CEPHALALGIA, 2020, 40 (03) :241-254