Numbers needed to treat or harm and likelihood of being helped versus harmed for fremanezumab in patients who had prior inadequate response to two to four classes of migraine preventive medications: A post hoc analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the number needed to treat (NNT), number needed to harm (NNH), and likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH) in a post hoc analysis of the phase 3b FOCUS trial. BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), has demonstrated efficacy, tolerability, and safety in adults with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM), with documented previous inadequate response to two to four classes of migraine preventive medications. METHODS: In the 12-week double-blind period of the FOCUS study, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, or matched monthly placebo. NNT was based on responder analysis, defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly average number of migraine days at 12 weeks. NNH was based on discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Among patients with CM (n = 509), response rates and discontinuation rates were 27% (45/169) and 0 for quarterly fremanezumab, 29% (50/173) and 2% (3/173) for monthly fremanezumab, and 8% (13/167) and <1% (1/167) for placebo, respectively. These results translated to NNTs of 5.3 and 4.7, NNHs of 1000 and 88, and LHHs of 188 and 19 for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab, respectively. Among patients with EM (n = 328), response rates were 47% (50/107) for quarterly fremanezumab, 43% (47/110) for monthly fremanezumab, and 10% (11/111) for placebo. Discontinuation rates were <1% (n = 1) in all three groups. These results translated to NNTs of 2.7 and 3.0, NNHs of 1000 and 1000, and LHHs of 368 and 328 for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The NNT, NNH, and LHH for quarterly and monthly fremanezumab compare favorably with those for traditional oral preventive medications, including topiramate, valproate, and propranolol.

Real-world effectiveness of fremanezumab for the preventive treatment of migraine: Interim analysis of the pan-European, prospective, observational, phase 4 PEARL study.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing Pan-European Real Life (PEARL) phase 4 study is evaluating fremanezumab effectiveness and safety for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine. This interim analysis reports primary, secondary and exploratory endpoints from when 500 participants completed at least six months of treatment. METHODS: Adults with episodic migraine or chronic migraine maintaining daily headache diaries were enrolled upon initiation of fremanezumab. Primary endpoint: proportion of participants with ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days during the six-month period after fremanezumab initiation. Secondary endpoints: mean change from baseline across months 1-12 in monthly migraine days, acute migraine medication use, and headache-related disability. Exploratory endpoint: mean change in headache severity from baseline across months 1-12. Safety was assessed through adverse events reported. RESULTS: Overall, 897 participants were enrolled and 574 included in the effectiveness analyses (episodic migraine, 25.8%; chronic migraine, 74.2%). Of participants with data available, 175/313 (55.9%) achieved ≥50% monthly migraine days reduction during the six-month period post-initiation. Across months 1-12, there were sustained reductions in mean monthly migraine days, acute medication use, disability scores, and headache severity. Few adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: PEARL interim results support the effectiveness and safety of fremanezumab for migraine prevention in a real-world population across several European countries.Trial registration: encepp.eu: EUPAS35111.

Clinical characteristics and patient-reported outcomes of chronic and episodic migraine patients at a US tertiary headache center: A retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe differences in clinical and demographic characteristics between patients with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) and determine the effect of migraine subtype on patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). BACKGROUND: Prior studies have characterized migraine in the general population. While this provides a basis for our understanding of migraine, we have less insight into the characteristics, comorbidities, and outcomes of migraine patients who present to subspecialty headache clinics. These patients represent a subset of the population that bears the greatest burden of migraine disability and are more representative of migraine patients who seek medical care. Valuable insights can be gained from a better understanding of CM and EM in this population. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of patients with CM or EM seen in the Cleveland Clinic Headache Center between January 2012 and June 2017. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and patient-reported outcome measures (3-Level European Quality of Life 5-Dimension [EQ-5D-3L], Headache Impact Test-6 [HIT-6], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]) were compared between groups. RESULTS: Eleven thousand thirty-seven patients who had 29,032 visits were included. More CM patients reported being on disability 517/3652 (14.2%) than EM patients 249/4881 (5.1%) and had significantly worse mean HIT-6 (67.3 ± 7.4 vs. 63.1 ± 7.4, p < 0.001) and median [interquartile range] EQ-5D-3L (0.77 [0.44-0.82] vs. 0.83 [0.77-1.00], p < 0.001), and PHQ-9 (10 [6-16] vs. 5 [2-10], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There are multiple differences in demographic characteristics and comorbid conditions between patients with CM and EM. After adjustment for these factors, CM patients had higher PHQ-9 scores, lower quality of life scores, greater disability, and greater work restrictions/unemployment.

Adverse Events Reported with Therapies Targeting the CGRP Pathway During the First 6 Months Post-launch: A Retrospective Analysis Using the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System.

INTRODUCTION: Through 2018, three calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway-targeted monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAbs) had received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for migraine prevention: erenumab, fremanezumab, and galcanezumab. METHODS: This retrospective analysis evaluated adverse events (AEs) spontaneously reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) safety surveillance database during the first 6 months post-approval of erenumab (May 2018 to November 2018), fremanezumab (September 2018 to March 2019), and galcanezumab (September 2018 to March 2019). Reporting rates (RR) per 1000 exposed patients were calculated from number of reported events (when product classified as "primary suspect") in each AE category and estimated number of treated patients based on de-identified prescription data (IQVIA database) and were ranked on the basis of frequency for each product. RESULTS: RR per 1000 exposed patients for "migraine" (erenumab, 4.89; fremanezumab, 1.01; galcanezumab, 2.99), "headache" (3.32, 1.27, 3.07), and "drug ineffective" (3.68, 1.14, 1.69) were commonly reported for all three products, as were migraine-associated symptoms ("nausea": 2.94, 0.91, 1.09) and "injection-site" reactions ("pain": 2.94, 0.8, 4.9; "swelling": 0.56, 0.53, 1.25; "pruritus": 0.26, 0.63, 1.14; "erythema": 0.58, 0.71, 1.58). "Constipation" ranked second for erenumab (4.90) but did not make the top ten events for fremanezumab (0.46) or galcanezumab (0.76); cardiovascular events did not rank in the top ten AEs for any product. The frequency of serious outcomes was low, with ≤ 2% of AEs categorized as serious across the CGRP mAbs. CONCLUSION: These results aid in supporting the safety profile of CGRP mAbs in the real-world setting and may provide clinicians and patients with additional insight when considering migraine preventive treatments.

Efficacy and quality-of-life improvements with fremanezumab treatment in patients with difficult-to-treat migraine with associated neurological dysfunction.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) that selectively targets calcitonin-gene-related peptide, has demonstrated efficacy as a preventive treatment for adults with episodic migraine or chronic migraine and inadequate response to two to four prior preventive treatment classes in the phase 3b FOCUS study. In this post hoc analysis, efficacy and effects on quality-of-life outcomes for fremanezumab were evaluated in subgroups of patients with and without aura or similar neurological symptoms, here referred to as migraine with or without associated neurological dysfunction. METHODS: In the FOCUS study, 838 patients were randomized (1:1:1) to quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab or matched placebo for 12 weeks of double-blind treatment. For this post hoc analysis, subgroups of patients with migraine with and without associated neurological dysfunction at baseline were identified based on patient response to questions about symptoms. RESULTS: In patients with migraine with associated neurological dysfunction at baseline, fremanezumab significantly reduced monthly average days with neurological symptoms (quarterly, -1.7 days; monthly, -1.8 days) compared to placebo (-0.5 days; both p ≤ 0.01). In comparison with placebo, both dosing regimens of fremanezumab yielded greater reductions in monthly migraine days over 12 weeks (p < 0.0001) and improvements in Headache Impact Test 6 and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life scores over the last 4 weeks (p < 0.05), regardless of neurological dysfunction at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab reduced days with neurological symptoms, effectively prevented migraine, and improved quality of life in patients with migraine with associated neurological dysfunction, including those with previous inadequate response to two to four migraine preventive medication classes.

Comment on: Gao B, Lu Q, Wan R, Wang Z, Yang Y, Chen Z, Wang Z. "Monthly versus quarterly fremanezumab for the prevention of migraine: a systemic review and meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials". Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2021 Apr;394(4):819-828. Epublished November 2020.

Recently, Gao et al. published an article titled "Monthly versus quarterly fremanezumab for the prevention of migraine: a systemic review and meta-analysis from randomized controlled trials" which concluded that monthly administration of fremanezumab led to significant reduction in monthly migraine days (MMD) when compared to quarterly fremanezumab. We have noted a critical flaw in Gao et al. meta-analysis wherein the authors have mistakenly utilized standard error values in place of standard deviation values in performing their pooled analyses. This error directly impacts the study results and conclusions. In this brief communication, we present revised analysis using correct methods. Using the correct SD values, our pooled analysis showed no significant difference in mean change from baseline in MMD between the two fremanezumab dosing regimens (P = 0.17). Furthermore, in the corrected subgroup analyses by type of migraine, there were no significant differences in mean change from baseline in MMD between monthly fremanezumab and quarterly fremanezumab (chronic migraine, P = 0.50; episodic migraine, P = 0.69). Overall, results from our corrected meta-analyses show that there is no significant difference in migraine prevention efficacy between monthly and quarterly fremanezumab dosing.

Improvements in quality of life and work productivity with up to 6 months of fremanezumab treatment in patients with episodic and chronic migraine and documented inadequate response to 2 to 4 classes of migraine-preventive medications in the phase 3b FOCUS study.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is associated with depression as well as negative impact on quality of life and work productivity. Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa), selectively targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide and has proven efficacy for the preventive treatment of migraine. OBJECTIVE: In this open-label extension (OLE) of the phase 3b FOCUS study, we assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) over time. METHODS: Patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) completing the 12-week, double-blind (DB) period of the FOCUS trial entered the 12-week OLE and received three monthly doses of fremanezumab (225 mg). PROs included the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life (MSQoL) questionnaire (role function-restrictive [RFR], role function-preventive [RFP], and emotional function [EF] domains), EuroQol-5-Dimension-5-Level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) assessment, Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire, and 9-Item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: A total of 838 patients were randomized in the DB period, 807 entered the OLE at 3 months, and 772 were still enrolled at 6 months. At 6 months, patients in the quarterly fremanezumab, monthly fremanezumab, and placebo DB randomization groups, respectively, reported improvements in RFR (mean [standard deviation] change from baseline: 24.6 [21.9]; 22.9 [21.3]; 20.8 [26.5]), RFP (19.6 [20.0]; 18.3 [19.7]; 16.0 [19.9]), and EF (22.5 [24.2]; 19.1 [23.6]; 17.2 [24.7]) domains of the MSQoL questionnaire, the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire (8.0 [19.6]; 7.3 [21.1]; 6.6 [21.0]), all four domains of the WPAI questionnaire, and the PHQ-9 (-2.4 [5.3]; -1.6 [5.5]; -2.0 [4.9]); 77.1% (209/271), 75.4% (205/272), and 68.8% (181/263) of patients were identified as PGIC responders. CONCLUSION: Among patients with EM or CM and prior inadequate response to multiple migraine-preventive medication classes, progressive improvements in MSQoL, depression, and work productivity were achieved during 6 months of fremanezumab treatment.

Reversion From Chronic Migraine to Episodic Migraine in Patients Treated With Fremanezumab: Post Hoc Analysis From HALO CM Study.

BACKGROUND: Migraine preventive medications are used to reduce headache frequency, severity, and duration. In patients with chronic migraine (CM), reversion to episodic migraine (EM) is an important treatment goal. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of fremanezumab on the rate of reversion from CM to EM. METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial included a 28-day pretreatment period and a 3-month treatment period. Patients with CM received subcutaneous fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline) or monthly (675 mg at baseline; 225 mg at Weeks 4 and 8), or placebo. Post hoc analyses evaluated the proportion of patients who reverted from CM to EM, defined as either a reduction to an average of <15 headache days per month during the 3-month treatment period or a reduction to <15 headache days per month in all 3 months of the treatment period. RESULTS: This analysis included data from 1088 CM patients (quarterly, n = 366; monthly, n = 365; placebo, n = 357). More fremanezumab-treated patients with CM reverted to EM using either the monthly average number of headache days criteria for reversion (quarterly: 50.5% [185/366], P = .108; monthly: 53.7% [196/365], P = .012; vs placebo: 44.5% [159/357]) or the monthly headache day count at Months 1, 2, and 3 criteria for reversion (quarterly: 31.2% [114/366], P = .008; monthly: 33.7% [123/365], P = .001; vs placebo: 22.4% [80/357]). Patients with CM who reported previous topiramate or onabotulinumtoxinA use, concomitant preventive medication use, or medication overuse were less likely to revert to EM. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab may offer the benefit of reversion from CM to EM, based on a reduction in the number of headache days over 3 months of treatment.

Improvements across a range of patient-reported domains with fremanezumab treatment: results from a patient survey study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term safety and efficacy of fremanezumab were evaluated in a 52-week extension study (NCT02638103). Patient satisfaction with fremanezumab, dosing preferences, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed in a subpopulation who completed the extension study and consented to a follow-up questionnaire. METHODS: In the extension study (N = 1842), adults with migraine were randomized to quarterly or monthly fremanezumab. After completing active treatment, patients answered a survey evaluating patient satisfaction, treatment and dosing preferences, and changes in patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 557 patients who could have been contacted upon completing the extension study, 302 consented and 253 completed the survey. The mean (standard deviation) satisfaction rating for fremanezumab was 6.1 (1.4; 1 = "extremely dissatisfied" to 7 = "extremely satisfied"). Most patients (175 [69.2%]) preferred quarterly over monthly fremanezumab dosing. Among patients taking antiepileptics (most common class of prior preventive medication; n = 130), 91.5% preferred fremanezumab. Patients reported improvements in anxiety (74 [67.9%]), sleep quality (143 [56.5%]), and quality of time spent with others (210 [83.0%]) with fremanezumab. CONCLUSION: In this study, treatment satisfaction with fremanezumab was high, most patients preferred quarterly fremanezumab dosing, and fremanezumab was generally preferred to prior preventive medications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02638103 (HALO LTS), registered December 22, 2015.