Literature DB >> 32073660

Ubrogepant, an Acute Treatment for Migraine, Improved Patient-Reported Functional Disability and Satisfaction in 2 Single-Attack Phase 3 Randomized Trials, ACHIEVE I and II.

David W Dodick1, Richard B Lipton2, Jessica Ailani3, Rashmi B Halker Singh1, Anand R Shewale4, Sihui Zhao5, Joel M Trugman5, Sung Yun Yu5, Hema N Viswanathan4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of ubrogepant on patient-reported functional disability, satisfaction with study medication, and global impression of change.
BACKGROUND: Ubrogepant is a small-molecule, oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute treatment of migraine. In 2 phase 3 trials (ACHIEVE I and II), ubrogepant demonstrated efficacy vs placebo on the 2 co-primary endpoints of headache pain freedom and absence of the most bothersome migraine-associated symptom at 2 hours post dose for the 50 and 100 mg doses. Patient-reported outcomes, such as functional disability, satisfaction, and patient global impression of change, can provide additional evidence of the efficacy of an acute treatment for migraine on clinically meaningful and patient-relevant outcomes.
METHODS: ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II were multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-attack trials in adults (18-75 years) with migraine. In ACHIEVE I, participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant 50 or 100 mg; in ACHIEVE II, participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo or ubrogepant 25 or 50 mg to treat a migraine attack with moderate or severe headache pain. Participants rated ability to perform daily activities on the Functional Disability Scale, before dosing and at 1, 2, 4, and 8 hours after the initial dose; satisfaction with study medication at 2 and 24 hours; and impression of overall change in migraine on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale at 2 hours. In prespecified analyses for each trial, each outcome was compared between each ubrogepant dose group and the relevant placebo group. Data were pooled from the ubrogepant 50 mg and placebo groups of the 2 trials in a post hoc analysis.
RESULTS: In ACHIEVE I, 559 participants were randomized to placebo, 556 to ubrogepant 50 mg, and 557 to ubrogepant 100 mg; in ACHIEVE II, 563 were randomized to placebo, 561 to ubrogepant 25 mg, and 562 to ubrogepant 50 mg. At 2 hours post dose, significantly higher proportions of ubrogepant-treated participants vs placebo-treated participants reported being able to function normally (ACHIEVE I: ubrogepant 50 mg, 40.6% [171/421], P = .0012 vs placebo; ubrogepant 100 mg, 42.9% [192/448], P < .0001 vs placebo; placebo, 29.8% [136/456]; ACHIEVE II: ubrogepant 25 mg, 42.6% [185/434], P = .0015 vs placebo; ubrogepant 50 mg, 40.5% [188/464], P = .0118 vs placebo; placebo, 34.2% [156/456]; pooled 50 mg, 40.6% [359/885], vs pooled placebo, 32.0% [292/912]; P < .0001), were satisfied/extremely satisfied with study medication (ACHIEVE I: 50 mg, 36.3% [147/405], P < .0001 vs placebo; 100 mg, 35.8% [149/416], P = .0002 vs placebo; placebo, 24.1% [104/432]; ACHIEVE II: 25 mg, 35.1% [141/402], P = .0018 vs placebo; 50 mg, 37.8% [163/431], P < .0001 vs placebo; placebo, 24.8% [106/427]; pooled ubrogepant 50 mg, 37.1% [310/836], vs pooled placebo, 24.5% [210/859]; P < .0001), and indicated that their migraine was much/very much better on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale (ACHIEVE I: 50 mg, 34.4% [103/299], P = .0006 vs placebo; 100 mg, 34.3% [102/297], P = .0009 vs placebo; placebo, 22.0% [69/313]; ACHIEVE II: 25 mg, 34.1% [124/364], P < .0001 vs placebo; 50 mg, 33.4% [131/392], P = .0002 vs placebo; placebo, 20.7% [78/376]; pooled 50 mg, 33.9% [234/691], vs pooled placebo, 21.3% [147/689]; P < .0001).
CONCLUSIONS: A significantly higher proportion of participants treated with ubrogepant were able to function normally, were satisfied with the study medication, and reported clinically meaningful improvement compared with those receiving placebo. The results reinforce the potential benefits of ubrogepant on patient-centered outcomes in the acute treatment of migraine.
© 2020 The Authors. Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Headache Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  calcitonin gene-related peptide; functional disability; headache; migraine; patient-reported outcomes; quality of life

Year:  2020        PMID: 32073660     DOI: 10.1111/head.13766

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Headache        ISSN: 0017-8748            Impact factor:   5.887


  13 in total

Review 1.  Noninvasive Neuromodulation in Migraine.

Authors:  Benzion Blech; Amaal J Starling
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2020-12-16

Review 2.  Migraine with Brainstem Aura Accompanied by Disorders of Consciousness.

Authors:  Sui-Yi Xu; Hui-Juan Li; Jing Huang; Xiu-Ping Li; Chang-Xin Li
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 3.133

Review 3.  CGRP-Targeted Therapy for Episodic and Chronic Cluster Headache.

Authors:  Shu-Ting Chen; Jr-Wei Wu
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2022-07-26

4.  Ubrogepant for the Acute Treatment of Migraine: Pooled Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability From the ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II Phase 3 Randomized Trials.

Authors:  Susan Hutchinson; David W Dodick; Christina Treppendahl; Nathan L Bennett; Sung Yun Yu; Hua Guo; Joel M Trugman
Journal:  Neurol Ther       Date:  2021-02-20

Review 5.  Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP)-Targeted Monoclonal Antibodies and Antagonists in Migraine: Current Evidence and Rationale.

Authors:  Fred Cohen; Hsiangkuo Yuan; Stephen D Silberstein
Journal:  BioDrugs       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 7.744

6.  Remote Electrical Neuromodulation for the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Patients with Chronic Migraine: An Open-Label Pilot Study.

Authors:  Hida Nierenburg; Julio R Vieira; Nirit Lev; Tamar Lin; Dagan Harris; Maya Vizel; Alon Ironi; Bryan Lewis; Paul Wright
Journal:  Pain Ther       Date:  2020-07-09

Review 7.  Targeting Adrenomedullin in Oncology: A Feasible Strategy With Potential as Much More Than an Alternative Anti-Angiogenic Therapy.

Authors:  Ramiro Vázquez; Maria E Riveiro; Caroline Berenguer-Daizé; Anthony O'Kane; Julie Gormley; Olivier Touzelet; Keyvan Rezai; Mohamed Bekradda; L'Houcine Ouafik
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Functionality, satisfaction, and global impression of change with ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine in triptan insufficient responders: a post hoc analysis of the ACHIEVE I and ACHIEVE II randomized trials.

Authors:  Sihui Zhao; Jordan E Lateiner; Richard B Lipton; Rashmi B Halker Singh; Dennis A Revicki; Anand R Shewale; David W Dodick
Journal:  J Headache Pain       Date:  2022-04-25       Impact factor: 8.588

9.  A novel, injury-free rodent model of vulnerability for assessment of acute and preventive therapies reveals temporal contributions of CGRP-receptor activation in migraine-like pain.

Authors:  Caroline M Kopruszinski; Edita Navratilova; Juliana Swiokla; David W Dodick; Iain P Chessell; Frank Porreca
Journal:  Cephalalgia       Date:  2020-09-26       Impact factor: 6.292

10.  Combined onabotulinumtoxinA/atogepant treatment blocks activation/sensitization of high-threshold and wide-dynamic range neurons.

Authors:  Agustin Melo-Carrillo; Andrew M Strassman; Aaron J Schain; Aubrey Manack Adams; Mitchell F Brin; Rami Burstein
Journal:  Cephalalgia       Date:  2020-11-17       Impact factor: 6.292

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.