Explore the vast range of titles available.

Daily use of atogepant (a small-molecule, calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist) at any of three doses resulted in greater reductions in migraine days per month over a period of 12 weeks than did placebo. Nausea and constipation were side effects in approximately 5% of the participants who received atogepant.

Rimegepant, a small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, has shown efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine using a standard tablet formulation. The objective of this trial was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel orally disintegrating tablet formulation of rimegepant at 75 mg with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine. In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with history of migraine of at least 1 year were recruited to 69 study centres in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned to receive rimegepant (75 mg orally disintegrating tablet) or placebo and instructed to treat a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. The randomisation was stratified by the use of prophylactic medication (yes or no), and was carried out using an interactive web response system that was accessed by each clinical site. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment group assignment. The coprimary endpoints were freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 h postdose. The efficacy analyses used the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who were randomly assigned, had a migraine attack with pain of moderate or severe intensity, took a dose of rimegepant or placebo, and had at least one efficacy assessment after administration of the dose. The safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03461757, and is closed to accrual. Between Feb 27 and Aug 28, 2018, 1811 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility. 1466 participants were randomly assigned to the rimegepant (n=732) or placebo (n=734) groups, of whom 1375 received treatment with rimegepant (n=682) or placebo (n=693), and 1351 were evaluated for efficacy (rimegepant n=669, placebo n=682). At 2 h postdose, rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet was superior to placebo for freedom from pain (21% vs 11%, p<0·0001; risk difference 10, 95% CI 6–14) and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (35% vs 27%, p=0·0009; risk difference 8, 95% CI 3–13). The most common adverse events were nausea (rimegepant n=11 [2%]; placebo n=3 [<1%]) and urinary tract infection (rimegepant n=10 [1%]; placebo n=4 [1%]). One participant in each treatment group had a transaminase concentration of more than 3 × the upper limit of normal; neither was related to study medication, and no elevations in bilirubin greater than 2 × the upper limit of normal were reported. Treated participants reported no serious adverse events. In the acute treatment of migraine, a single 75 mg dose of rimegepant in an orally disintegrating tablet formulation was more effective than placebo. Tolerability was similar to placebo, with no safety concerns. Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Treatment with the oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist rimegepant resulted in freedom from migraine pain 2 hours after the dose in 20% of patients; 12% of the patients who received placebo were pain-free. Freedom from the most bothersome migraine symptom aside from pain 2 hours after the dose was reported in 38% of patients who received rimegepant and 25% who received placebo.

A higher percentage of participants who received the calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist ubrogepant had freedom from migraine pain and absence of the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours than participants who received placebo.

In two phase 3 trials in patients with Alzheimer's disease, bapineuzumab, a humanized anti–amyloid-beta monoclonal antibody, did not improve clinical outcomes. Amyloid-related edema was more likely to develop in patients treated with bapineuzumab. Alzheimer's disease, a neurodegenerative disease resulting in progressive dementia, is characterized by neuropathological changes that include intraneuronal neurofibrillary tangles and extracellular neuritic plaques. The predominant component of plaques is the amyloid-beta (Aβ) peptide. Multiple lines of evidence indicate that aberrant Aβ production or clearance is an early component in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. 1 – 3 Bapineuzumab is a humanized N-terminal–specific anti-Aβ monoclonal antibody in clinical development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. In preclinical studies, the murine form of the antibody (3D6) was shown to bind to fibrillar, oligomeric, and monomeric forms of Aβ, reduce the amount of Aβ in . . .

Migraine is one of the most prevalent and disabling diseases worldwide, but until recently, few migraine-specific therapies had been developed. Extensive basic and clinical scientific investigation has provided strong evidence that the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) has a key role in migraine. This evidence led to the development of small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists and monoclonal antibodies targeting either CGRP or its receptor. Clinical trials investigating these therapies have consistently shown statistically significant efficacy for either the acute or preventive treatment of migraine. No serious safety or tolerability issues have been identified in the trials of the monoclonal antibody therapies. Although the appropriate place of these new migraine-specific therapies relative to other available acute and preventive treatments remains to be determined, a growing body of evidence shows that therapeutic approaches targeting CGRP have the potential to transform the clinical management of migraine.

Rimegepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that has shown efficacy and safety in the acute treatment of migraine. We aimed to compare the efficacy of rimegepant with placebo for preventive treatment of migraine. We did a multicentre, phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 92 sites in the USA. Adults with at least a 1-year history of migraine were recruited. After a 4-week observation period, eligible participants were randomised using an interactive web response system to oral rimegepant 75 mg or matching placebo every other day for 12 weeks (double-blind treatment phase). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from the 4-week observation period in the mean number of migraine days per month in the last 4 weeks of the double-blind treatment phase (weeks 9–12). Participants who received at least one dose of their assigned study medication and who had 14 days or more of data in the observation period and 14 days or more of data for at least one 4-week interval during the double-blind treatment phase were analysed for efficacy. Those who received at least one dose of study medication were analysed for safety. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03732638. Between Nov 14, 2018, and Aug 30, 2019, 1591 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility, of whom 747 were randomly allocated either rimegepant (n=373) or placebo (n=374). 695 participants were included in the analysis for efficacy, of whom 348 were assigned rimegepant and 347 were allocated placebo. Rimegepant was superior to placebo on the primary endpoint of change in the mean number of migraine days per month during weeks 9–12. The change from the observation period in mean number of migraine days per month during weeks 9–12 was −4·3 days (95% CI –4·8 to –3·9) with rimegepant and −3·5 days (–4·0 to –3·0) with placebo (least squares mean difference −0·8 days, 95% CI −1·46 to −0·20; p=0·0099). 741 participants received study medication and were included in the safety analysis. 133 (36%) of 370 patients who received rimegepant reported an adverse event, compared with 133 (36%) of 371 who received placebo. Seven (2%) participants who received rimegepant and four (1%) who received placebo discontinued the study due to an adverse event; no patients died. Taken every other day, rimegepant was effective for preventive treatment of migraine. Tolerability was similar to that of placebo, and no unexpected or serious safety issues were noted. Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Background and purpose HER‐MES was the first head‐to‐head study of erenumab against topiramate (standard of care). This post hoc analysis of the HER‐MES study evaluated the effect of erenumab versus topiramate on patient‐reported outcomes at week 24. Methods Adult patients with episodic or chronic migraine (n = 777) were randomized (1:1) to monthly subcutaneous erenumab (n = 389) or daily oral topiramate (n = 388). Migraine‐related disability, as measured by the Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT‐6) and Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF‐36v2), was analysed in the entire study cohort and true completers. Results In the erenumab group (vs. topiramate), significant improvements were reported in Headache Impact Test 6 total scores (composite populations, −10.88 vs. −7.72; true completers, −11.92 vs. −10.61) and a higher proportion of patients achieved a ≥5‐point reduction from baseline with erenumab (composite populations, 72.2% vs. 53.9%; true completers, 79.64% vs. 71.43%). The adjusted mean change from baseline in the SF‐36v2 score was greater with erenumab for both physical component summary (composite population, 5.48 vs. 3.63; true completers, 5.95 vs. 5.23) and mental component summary (composite populations, 1.00 vs. −1.18; true completers, 1.74 vs. −0.33). A higher proportion of patients on erenumab versus topiramate had a ≥5‐point improvement in SF‐36v2 for the physical component summary (composite populations, 47.7% vs. 37.4%; true completers, 52.1% vs. 48.9%) and mental component summary (composite populations, 25.3% vs. 16.8%; true completers, 27.3% vs. 17.7%). Conclusions This post hoc analysis demonstrated that patients treated with erenumab had significant improvements in headache impact and quality of life as measured by patient‐reported outcomes versus patients treated with topiramate.

A substantial proportion of patients with migraine does not respond to, or cannot tolerate, oral preventive treatments. Erenumab is a novel CGRP-receptor antibody with preventive efficacy in migraine. We assessed its efficacy and tolerability in patients with episodic migraine in whom previous treatment with two-to-four migraine preventives had been unsuccessful. LIBERTY was a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised study at 59 sites in 16 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18–65 years and had a history of episodic migraine with or without aura for at least 12 months, had migraine for an average of 4–14 days per month during the 3 months before screening, and had been treated unsuccessfully (in terms of either efficacy or tolerability, or both) with between two and four preventive treatments. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either erenumab 140 mg (via two 70 mg injections) or placebo every 4 weeks subcutaneously for 12 weeks. Randomisation was by interactive response technology and was stratified by monthly frequency of migraine headache (4–7 vs 8–14 migraine days per month) during the baseline phase. Cenduit generated the randomisation list and assigned participants to groups. Participants, investigators, people doing various assessments, and the study sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a 50% or greater reduction in the mean number of monthly migraine days during weeks 9–12. Efficacy was measured in the full analysis set, which included all randomly assigned patients who started their assigned treatment and completed at least one post-baseline monthly migraine day measurement. Safety and tolerability were assessed by recording adverse events and by physical examination, assessment of vital signs, clinical laboratory assessments, and electrocardiography. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03096834. The trial is closed to new participants, but the open-label extension phase is ongoing. Between March 20, 2017, and Oct 27, 2017, 246 participants were randomly assigned, 121 to the erenumab group and 125 to the placebo group. 95 of 246 (39%) participants had previously unsuccessfully tried two preventive drugs, 93 (38%) had tried three, and 56 (23%) had tried four. At week 12, 36 (30%) patients in the erenumab had a 50% or greater reduction from baseline in the mean number of monthly migraine days, compared with 17 (14%) in the placebo group (odds ratio 2·7 [95% CI 1·4–5·2]; p=0·002). The tolerability and safety profiles of erenumab and placebo were similar. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event was injection site pain, which occurred in seven (6%) participants in both groups. Compared with placebo, erenumab was efficacious in patients with episodic migraine who previously did not respond to or tolerate between two and four previous migraine preventive treatments. Erenumab might be an option for patients with difficult-to-treat migraine who have high unmet needs and few treatment options. Novartis Pharma.

Background Atogepant is an oral calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. These analyses evaluated the proportions of clinical trial participants who experienced sustained responses to atogepant over 12 or 52 weeks of treatment. Methods These were post hoc analyses of ADVANCE, a 12-week, double-blind, randomized trial of atogepant 10, 30, and 60 mg once daily vs. placebo for the preventive treatment of episodic migraine, and a separate open-label long-term safety (LTS) trial of atogepant 60 mg once daily over 52 weeks. The 60 mg dose of atogepant was used to detect safety issues. An initial response was defined as ≥50%, ≥75%, or 100% reduction from baseline in MMDs in month 1 for ADVANCE or quarter 1 for the LTS trial. The proportions of participants who continued to experience a response above each response-defining threshold through each subsequent month (for ADVANCE) or each quarter (for LTS) were calculated. Results In ADVANCE, sustained response rates during months 2 and 3 varied with dose and were as follows: 70.8–81.1% following an initial ≥50% response, 47.3–61.9% following an initial ≥75% response, and 34.8–41.7% following an initial 100% response. Of those who experienced an initial ≥75% or 100% response during month 1, more than 79% continued to experience at least a 50% response during both months 2 and 3. During the LTS trial, sustained response rates through quarters 2, 3, and 4 were 84.7% following an initial ≥50% response, 72.6% following an initial ≥75% response, and 37.8% following an initial 100% response. Of those who experienced an initial ≥75% or 100% response during quarter 1, more than 90% continued to experience at least a 50% response through quarters 2, 3, and 4. Conclusion Over 70% of participants who experienced an initial response with atogepant treatment had a sustained response with continued treatment. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03777059 (submitted: December 13, 2018); NCT03700320 (submitted: September 25, 2018).