Assessment of Erenumab Safety and Efficacy in Patients with Migraine with and without Aura: A Secondary Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Messoud Ashina, Peter J. Goadsby, David W. Dodick, Stewart J. Tepper, Fei Xue, Feng Zhang, Francis Brennan, Gabriel Paiva Da Silva Lima

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Importance: Migraine with aura may respond differently to therapies than migraine without aura. Individuals with migraine with aura have an elevated vascular risk, necessitating a safety assessment of migraine preventive treatments in this patient subgroup. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety profiles of erenumab in patients with migraine with aura. Design, Setting, and Participants: This post hoc secondary analysis evaluated 4 double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials that were conducted in treatment centers in North America, Europe, Russia, and Turkey between August 6, 2013, and November 12, 2019. Participants were adults aged 18 to 65 years with episodic migraine or chronic migraine and were randomized to receive either erenumab or placebo. Interventions: One or more dose of erenumab (70 mg or 140 mg once per month) or placebo was administered by subcutaneous injection in the double-blind treatment phase and open-label or dose-blinded active treatment, and erenumab, 70 mg or 140 mg, was administered once per month by subcutaneous injection during extension phases. Main Outcomes and Measures: Efficacy assessments included change from baseline monthly migraine days (MMDs) and monthly acute migraine-specific medication (AMSM) days. Safety end points included patient incidences of adverse events. Subgroups of patients were categorized according to their history of aura. Results: Of the 2682 patients who were randomized in the 4 trials, 1400 (52.2%) received 1 or more dose of erenumab, 70 mg or 140 mg, and 1043 (38.9%) received placebo. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 41.7 (11.2) years and were predominantly women (n = 2055 [84.1%]). Reductions from baseline MMDs and AMSM days were greater in the erenumab than placebo groups in patients with and without a history of aura during the double-blind treatment phase, and these reductions were maintained throughout the extension phases. In patients with episodic migraine and a history of aura, least-squares mean differences in change from baseline MMDs at week 12 were -1.1 (95% CI, -1.7 to -0.6) in those who received erenumab, 70 mg, and -0.9 (95% CI, -1.6 to -0.2) in those who received erenumab, 140 mg, compared with placebo. In patients with chronic migraine with a history of aura, the least-squares mean differences from placebo treatment were -2.1 (95% CI, -3.8 to -0.5) in those who received erenumab, 70 mg, and -3.1 (95% CI, -4.8 to -1.4) in those who received erenumab, 140 mg. Overall safety profiles were similar across treatment groups regardless of aura history and were comparable to that of placebo over 12 weeks, with no increased emergence of adverse events over time. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this secondary analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials showed reduced migraine frequency and AMSM days with erenumab treatment in patients with migraine with and without a history of aura. The findings support the efficacy and safety of using erenumab in this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01952574, NCT02456740, NCT02483585, NTCT02066415, and NCT02174861.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJAMA neurology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2021

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessment of Erenumab Safety and Efficacy in Patients with Migraine with and without Aura: A Secondary Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this