scholarly journals MAB-MIG: registry of the spanish neurological society of erenumab for migraine prevention

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Belvís ◽  
Pablo Irimia ◽  
Patricia Pozo-Rosich ◽  
Carmen González-Oria ◽  
Antonio Cano ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Erenumab was approved in Europe for migraine prevention in patients with ≥ 4 monthly migraine days (MMDs). In Spain, Novartis started a personalized managed access program, which allowed free access to erenumab before official reimbursement. The Spanish Neurological Society started a prospective registry to evaluate real-world effectiveness and tolerability, and all Spanish headache experts were invited to participate. We present their first results. Methods Patients fulfilled the ICHD-3 criteria for migraine and had ≥ 4 MMDs. Sociodemographic and clinical data were registered as well as MMDs, monthly headache days, MHDs, prior and concomitant preventive treatment, medication overuse headache (MOH), migraine evolution, adverse events, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs): headache impact test (HIT-6), migraine disability assessment questionnaire (MIDAS), and patient global improvement change (PGIC). A > 50% reduction of MMDs after 12 weeks was considered as a response. Results We included 210 patients (female 86.7%, mean age 46.4 years old) from 22 Spanish hospitals from February 2019 to June 2020. Most patients (89.5%) suffered from chronic migraine with a mean evolution of 8.6 years. MOH was present in 70% of patients, and 17.1% had migraine with aura. Patients had failed a mean of 7.8 preventive treatments at baseline (botulinum toxin type A—BoNT/A—had been used by 95.2% of patients). Most patients (67.6%) started with erenumab 70 mg. Sixty-one percent of patients were also simultaneously taking oral preventive drugs and 27.6% were getting simultaneous BoNT/A. Responder rate was 37.1% and the mean reduction of MMDs and MHDs was -6.28 and -8.6, respectively. Changes in PROs were: MIDAS: -35 points, HIT-6: -11.6 points, PIGC: 4.7 points. Predictors of good response were prior HIT-6 score < 80 points (p = 0.01), ≤ 5 prior preventive treatment failures (p = 0.026), absence of MOH (p = 0.039), and simultaneous BoNT/A treatment (p < 0.001). Twenty percent of patients had an adverse event, but only two of them were severe (0.9%), which led to treatment discontinuation. Mild constipation was the most frequent adverse event (8.1%). Conclusions In real-life, in a personalized managed access program, erenumab shows a good effectiveness profile and an excellent tolerability in migraine prevention in our cohort of refractory patients.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Belvís ◽  
Pablo Irimia ◽  
Patricia Pozo-Rosich ◽  
Carmen González-Oria ◽  
Antonio Cano ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Erenumab was approved in Europe for migraine prevention in patients with ≥4 monthly migraine days (MMD). In Spain, Novartis started a personalized managed access program which allowed free access to erenumab before official reimbursement. The Headache Study Group of the Spanish Neurological Society started a registry to monitor real-world safety and efficacy, and all Spanish headache experts were invited to participate. Methods Patients fulfilled ICHD3 criteria for migraine and had ≥ 4MMD. Sociodemographic and clinical data were registered as well as MMD, headache frequency (MHD), prior and concomitant preventive treatment, medication overuse headache (MOH), migraine evolution, adverse events, and PROs: HIT6, MIDAS, and PGIC. A >50% reduction of MMD after 3 months was considered as response. Results We included 210 patients (female 86.7%, mean age 46.4 years old) from 22 hospitals from February 2019 – to – June 2020. Most patients (89.5%) suffered from chronic migraine with a mean evolution of 8.6 years. MOH was present in 70% of patients, and 17.1% had migraine with aura. Average of prior preventive treatment failure was >7 (BoNT/A had been used by 95.2%). Most patients (67,6%) started with erenumab 70mg. 61% of patients were also taking oral preventive drugs or getting simultaneous BoNT/A (27.6%). Responder rate was 37.1% and the mean reduction of MMD was -6.28 and MHD: -8.6. Regarding PROs: MIDAS: -35 p., HIT6: -11.6 p., PIGC: 4.7 p. Predictors of good response were: HIT6 score ( p =0.01), prior preventive treatment failures ( p =0.026), absence of MOH ( p =0.039), and simultaneous BoNT/A treatment ( p <0.001). 20% had adverse event, but only two of them were severe (0.9%) which led to treatment discontinuation. Mild constipation was the most frequent adverse event (8.1%). Conclusion In real-life, in a personalized managed access program, erenumab shows a good profile of efficacy and an excellent safety in migraine prevention in our cohort of refractory patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628642091808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panagiotis Gklinos ◽  
Dimos D. Mitsikostas

Background: Galcanezumab, along with three other monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway, represents the latest disease-specific and mechanism-based treatment for the prophylaxis of migraine. Galcanezumab shares data also for the prophylaxis of cluster headache. Objective: To provide a pooled safety and efficacy analysis of all phase III randomized controlled trials of galcanezumab in the preventive therapy of migraine. Methods: A computer-based literature search was conducted on MEDLINE and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry for phase III randomized controlled trials of galcanezumab in migraine prevention. The primary outcome was the mean change in monthly migraine days (MMDs). The proportions of patients who reported at least one adverse event (AE), at least one serious adverse event (SAE) or withdrew from the study were used as safety outcomes. Results: Two trials were included in the efficacy meta-analysis and three in the safety meta-analysis. Migraine preventive treatment with subcutaneous galcanezumab, at both 120 mg and 240 mg dosages, was associated with a significantly greater reduction in the mean number of MMDs versus placebo (120 mg, MD = –1.98, 95% CI = –2.33 to –1.63; p < 0.0001) or (240 mg, MD = –1.86, 95% CI = –2.20 to –1.53; p < 0.0001). Galcanezumab was found to be more efficacious in all key secondary outcomes as well. Regarding safety, most of the adverse events were mild to moderate, while drop-out rates and serious adverse events were low. Conclusions: Galcanezumab is an efficacious and well-tolerated preventive treatment for migraine. Larger clinical trials with longer follow-up periods need to be conducted in order to provide more safety data of the above-mentioned drug.


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1485.3-1485
Author(s):  
F. Carubbi ◽  
A. Alunno ◽  
P. Cipriani ◽  
V. Pavlych ◽  
C. DI Muzio ◽  
...  

Background:Over the last 2 decades rituximab (RTX) has been widely used, albeit off-label, in primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS). Several studies reported that B-lymphocyte depletion with RTX is effective in this disease not only by reducing disease activity but also by affecting the inflammation and the lymphoid organization that occur in target tissues. With the recent release of several RTX biosimilars (bRTX) on the market, the demonstration of their interchangeability with RTX originator (oRTX) is required.Objectives:To compare efficacy and safety of oRTX and bRTX in pSS patients in a real-life setting.Methods:Clinical records of pSS patients referring to a tertiary rheumatology clinic were retrospectively evaluated. Patients having received at least 2 courses of either oRTX or bRTX (1000 mg IV infusion, repeated after 2 weeks -1 course- and the course repeated after 24 weeks) with complete data at baseline and after 3, 6, 9 and 12 months of treatment were enrolled. Disease activity was assessed with the EULAR SS disease activity index (ESSDAI) and its clinical version without the biological domain (ClinESSDAI). Patient-reported symptoms were assessed with the EULAR SS Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI).Results:Seven patients that received oRTX and 7 patients that received bRTX were enrolled. Baseline clinical features, including ESSDAI and ESSPRI were similar in the 2 treatment groups. Both compounds significantly reduced ESSDAI and ESSPRI as early as 3 months and no difference between the groups was observed at any time point (Figure 1). Of interest, ESSDAI slowly decreased until month 6 when the most pronounced reduction was observed. Conversely, ESSPRI dropped to its lowest values already at month 3. With regard to safety, at 12 months of follow-up no adverse event was observed in any of the treatment groups.Conclusion:At 12 months of follow-up, oRTX and bRTX display similar efficacy and safety profiles. The improvement of patient reported outcomes is faster than the improvement of disease activity with both compounds. Our data support interchangeability of oRTX and bRTX in pSS.References:[1]Carubbi F et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2013;15(5):R172[2]Carubbi F et al. Lupus. 2014;23(13):1337-49Figure 1 ESSDAI and ESSPRI values at every time point in the 2 treatment groups. Asterisks indicate p values <0.05 compared to the other treatment group at the same time pointDisclosure of Interests:Francesco Carubbi Speakers bureau: Francesco Carubbi received speaker honoraria from Abbvie and Celgene outside this work., Alessia Alunno: None declared, Paola Cipriani Grant/research support from: Actelion, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Actelion, Pfizer, Viktoriya Pavlych: None declared, claudia di muzio: None declared, Roberto Gerli: None declared, Roberto Giacomelli Grant/research support from: Actelion, Pfizer, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Roche, Actelion, BMS, MSD, Ely Lilly, SOBI, Pfizer


2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1463.2-1464
Author(s):  
S. Bayat ◽  
K. Tascilar ◽  
V. Kaufmann ◽  
A. Kleyer ◽  
D. Simon ◽  
...  

Background:Recent developments of targeted treatments such as targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) increase the chances of a sustained low disease activity (LDA) or remission state for patients suffering rheumatoid arthritis (RA). tsDMARDs such as baricitinib, an oral inhibitor of the Janus Kinases (JAK1/JAK2) was recently approved for the treatment of RA with an inadequate response to conventional (cDMARD) and biological (bDMARD) therapy. (1, 2).Objectives:Aim of this study is to analyze the effect of baricitinb on disease activity (DAS28, LDA) in patients with RA in real life, to analyze drug persistance and associate these effects with various baseline characteristics.Methods:All RA patients were seen in our outpatient clinic. If a patient was switched to a baricitinib due to medical reasons, these patients were included in our prospective, observational study which started in April 2017. Clinical scores (SJC/TJC 76/78), composite scores (DAS28), PROs (HAQ-DI; RAID; FACIT), safety parameters (not reported in this abstract) as well as laboratory biomarkers were collected at each visit every three months. Linear mixed effects models for repeated measurements were used to analyze the time course of disease activity, patient reported outcomes and laboratory results. We estimated the probabilities of continued baricitinib treatment and the probabilities of LDA and remission by DAS-28 as well as Boolean remission up to one year using survival analysis and explored their association with disease characteristics using multivariable Cox regression. All patients gave informed consent. The study is approved by the local ethics.Results:95 patients were included and 85 analyzed with available follow-up data until November 2019. Demographics are shown in table 1. Mean follow-up duration after starting baricitinib was 49.3 (28.9) weeks. 51 patients (60%) were on monotherapy. Baricitinib survival (95%CI) was 82% (73% to 91%) at one year. Cumulative number (%probability, 95%CI) of patients that attained DAS-28 LDA at least once up to one year was 67 (92%, 80% to 97%) and the number of patients attaining DAS-28 and Boolean remission were 31 (50%, 34% to 61%) and 12(20%, 9% to 30%) respectively. Median time to DAS-28 LDA was 16 weeks (Figure 1). Cox regression analyses did not show any sufficiently precise association of remission or LDA with age, gender, seropositivity, disease duration, concomitant DMARD use and number of previous bDMARDs. Increasing number of previous bDMARDs was associated with poor baricitinib survival (HR=1.5, 95%CI 1.1 to 2.2) while this association was not robust to adjustment for baseline disease activity. Favorable changes were observed in tender and swollen joint counts, pain-VAS, patient and physician disease assessment scores, RAID, FACIT and the acute phase response.Conclusion:In this prospective observational study, we observed high rates of LDA and DAS-28 remission and significant improvements in disease activity and patient reported outcome measurements over time.References:[1]Keystone EC, Taylor PC, Drescher E, Schlichting DE, Beattie SD, Berclaz PY, et al. Safety and efficacy of baricitinib at 24 weeks in patients with rheumatoid arthritis who have had an inadequate response to methotrexate. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2015 Feb;74(2):333-40.[2]Genovese MC, Kremer J, Zamani O, Ludivico C, Krogulec M, Xie L, et al. Baricitinib in Patients with Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis. The New England journal of medicine. 2016 Mar 31;374(13):1243-52.Figure 1.Cumulative probability of low disease activity or remission under treatment with baricitinib.Disclosure of Interests:Sara Bayat Speakers bureau: Novartis, Koray Tascilar: None declared, Veronica Kaufmann: None declared, Arnd Kleyer Consultant of: Lilly, Gilead, Novartis,Abbvie, Speakers bureau: Novartis, Lilly, David Simon Grant/research support from: Else Kröner-Memorial Scholarship, Novartis, Consultant of: Novartis, Lilly, Johannes Knitza Grant/research support from: Research Grant: Novartis, Fabian Hartmann: None declared, Susanne Adam: None declared, Axel Hueber Grant/research support from: Novartis, Lilly, Pfizer, EIT Health, EU-IMI, DFG, Universität Erlangen (EFI), Consultant of: Abbvie, BMS, Celgene, Gilead, GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Speakers bureau: GSK, Lilly, Novartis, Georg Schett Speakers bureau: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Roche and UCB


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175883592098055 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaj Frost ◽  
Petros Christopoulos ◽  
Diego Kauffmann-Guerrero ◽  
Jan Stratmann ◽  
Richard Riedel ◽  
...  

Introduction: We report on the results of the German early access program (EAP) with the third-generation ALK- and ROS1-inhibitor lorlatinib. Patients and Methods: Patients with documented treatment failure of all approved ALK/ROS1-specific therapies or with resistance mutations not covered by approved inhibitors or leptomeningeal carcinomatosis were enrolled and analyzed. Results: In total, 52 patients were included [median age 57 years (range 32–81), 54% female, 62% never smokers, 98% adenocarcinoma]; 71% and 29% were ALK- and ROS1-positive, respectively. G1202R and G2032R resistance mutations prior to treatment with lorlatinib were observed in 10 of 26 evaluable patients (39%), 11 of 39 patients showed TP53 mutations (28%). Thirty-six patients (69%) had active brain metastases (BM) and nine (17%) leptomeningeal carcinomatosis when entering the EAP. Median number of prior specific TKIs was 3 (range 1–4). Median duration of treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), response rate and time to treatment failure were 10.4 months, 8.0 months, 54% and 13.0 months. Calculated 12-, 18- and 24-months survival rates were 65, 54 and 47%, overall survival since primary diagnosis (OS2) reached 79.6 months. TP53 mutations were associated with a substantially reduced PFS (3.7 versus 10.8 month, HR 3.3, p = 0.003) and were also identified as a strong prognostic biomarker (HR for OS2 3.0 p = 0.02). Neither prior treatments with second-generation TKIs nor BM had a significant influence on PFS and OS. Conclusions: Our data from real-life practice demonstrate the efficacy of lorlatinib in mostly heavily pretreated patients, providing a clinically meaningful option for patients with resistance mutations not covered by other targeted therapies and those with BM or leptomeningeal carcinomatosis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 1852
Author(s):  
Gry Assam Taarnhøj ◽  
Henriette Lindberg ◽  
Christoffer Johansen ◽  
Helle Pappot

Patients with urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) often have comorbidities, which cause trouble for the completion of oncological treatment, and little is known about their quality of life (QoL). The aim of the present study was to obtain and describe patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and QoL data from UCC patients in the treatment for locally advanced muscle-invasive or metastatic UCC. A total of 79 patients with UCC completed four questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-BLM30, HADS, and select PRO-CTCAE™ questions) once weekly during their treatment. From those, 26 patients (33%) underwent neoadjuvant treatment for local disease while 53 patients (67%) were treated for metastatic disease. Of all patients, 54% did not complete the planned treatment due to progression, nephrotoxicity, death, or intolerable symptoms during treatment. The five most prevalent PRO-CTCAE grade ≥ 2 symptoms were frequent urination (37%), fatigue (35%), pain (31%), dry mouth (23%), and swelling of the arms or legs (23%). The baseline mean overall QoL was 61 (±SD 24) for all patients (neoadjuvant (73, ±SD 19) and metastatic (54, ±SD 24)) and remained stable over the course of treatment for both groups. A stable overall QoL was observed for the patients in this study. More than half of the patients did not, however, complete the planned treatment. Further supportive care is warranted for bladder cancer patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document