Optimal Dose of Erenumab for Preventive Treatment of Episodic Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background : Erenumab is a novel monoclonal calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antibody that is used for the preventive treatment of migraine. Objectives : To evaluate overall safety and efficacy and dose-response relationship of erenumab in patients with episodic migraine and patients with prior migraine treatment failures. Methods : We searched randomized clinical trials on PUBMED, EMBASE database, and Cochrane Library database. A pair-wise meta-analysis and Bayesian network analysis were performed. Results : For efficacy outcomes, the network meta-analysis suggests that compared with erenumab 70 mg, participants received erenumab 140 mg reported significantly decreased monthly acute migraine-specific medication days(MSMD) and increased 50% response rate, and erenumab was most likely to be ranked first for monthly migraine days(MMD), MSMD and 50% response rate. For safety outcomes, the network meta-analysis has found no significant difference between the 70 mg group and the 140 mg group measured by adverse events and serious adverse events. For patients with ≥2 treatment failures, 140mg erenumab group, patients with ≥2 treatment failures reported significantly reduced MMD and MSMD, increased 50%, and 75% response rate, compared with placebo. For safety outcomes, no significant difference was found between 140 mg erenumab group and the placebo group. Conclusion : Erenumab was effective in patients with episodic migraine. 140 mg erenumab was associated with better efficacy outcomes without increased risk for developing adverse events compared with 70 mg erenumab, and 140 mg erenumab was effective in patients with prior migraine treatment failures.

Different dosage regimens of erenumab for the treatment of migraine: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the efficacy and safety of randomized controlled trials

“…Our conclusions regarding efficacy and safety were mostly consistent with previous meta‐analyses 30,31 . Although our study had several strengths, we also acknowledge some limitations.…”

“…Our conclusions regarding efficacy and safety were mostly consistent with previous meta-analyses. 30,31 Although our study had several strengths, we also acknowledge some limitations. First, our study only indicated that erenumab offered a considerable promise of both efficacy and safety advantages over a placebo, but additional horizontal comparisons between erenumab and other CGRP mAbs should be conducted in the future.…”

Efficacy and safety of monoclonal antibody against calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor for migraine patients with prior preventive treatment failure: a network meta-analysis

“…Therefore, it remains unclear whether these previous findings could be directly applicable to headache problems in the specific population of patients [ 26 , 27 ]. An additional limitation of previous studies is that most of them used direct method to compare the effectiveness of this medication class with placebo, unable to show the comparative efficacy of different agents in the lack of direct comparison of different types of CGRP related mAbs [ 28 ].…”