-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial
P. Pozo-Rosich, D. Dolezil, K. Paemeleire, A. Stepien, P. Stude, J. Snellman, M. Arkuszewski, T. Stites, S. Ritter, C. Lopez Lopez, J. Maca, M. Ferraris, R. Gil-Gouveia
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem, randomizované kontrolované studie, multicentrická studie, klinické zkoušky, fáze IV
- MeSH
- adherence k farmakoterapii MeSH
- antagonisté CGRP receptorů aplikace a dávkování terapeutické užití MeSH
- aplikace orální MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- humanizované monoklonální protilátky * terapeutické užití aplikace a dávkování MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- migréna * farmakoterapie prevence a kontrola MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- spokojenost pacientů MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- klinické zkoušky, fáze IV MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
IMPORTANCE: Patients with migraine often cycle through multiple nonspecific preventive medications due to poor tolerability and/or inadequate efficacy leading to low adherence and increased disease burden. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, tolerability, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction between erenumab and nonspecific oral migraine preventive medications (OMPMs) in patients with episodic migraine (EM) who had previously failed 1 or 2 preventive treatments. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The 12-month prospective, interventional, global, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sustained benefit of 2 treatment paradigms (erenumab qm vs oral prophylactics) in adult episodic migraine patients (APPRAISE) trial was a 12-month open-label, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 4 randomized clinical trial conducted from May 15, 2019, to October 1, 2021. This pragmatic trial was conducted at 84 centers across 17 countries. Overall, participants 18 years or older with a 12-month or longer history of migraine, and 4 or more but fewer than 15 monthly migraine days (MMDs) were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive erenumab or OMPMs. Dose adjustment was permitted (label dependent). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was the proportion of patients completing 1 year of the initially assigned treatment and achieving a reduction of 50% or greater from baseline in MMDs at month 12. Secondary end points included the cumulative mean change from baseline in MMDs during the treatment period and the proportion of responders according to the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale at month 12 for patients taking the initially assigned treatment. RESULTS: A total of 866 patients were screened, of whom 245 failed the screening and 621 completed the screening and baseline period. Of the 621 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 41.3 [11.2] years; 545 female [87.8%]; 413 [66.5%] in the erenumab group; 208 [33.5%] in the OMPM group), 523 (84.2%) completed the treatment phase, and 98 (15.8%) discontinued the study. At month 12, significantly more patients assigned to erenumab vs OMPM achieved the primary end point (232 of 413 [56.2%] vs 35 of 208 [16.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% CI, 4.28-9.82; P <.001). Compared with OMPMs, treatment with erenumab showed higher responder rate (314 of 413 [76.0%] vs 39 of 208 [18.8%]; OR, 13.75; 95% CI, 9.08-20.83; P <.001) on the PGIC scale (≥5 at month 12). Significant reduction in cumulative average MMDs was reported with erenumab treatment vs OMPM treatment (-4.32 vs -2.65; treatment difference [SE]: -1.67 [0.35] days; P < .001). Substantially fewer patients in the erenumab arm compared with the OMPM arm switched medication (9 of 413 [2.2%] vs 72 of 208 [34.6%]) and discontinued treatment due to adverse events (12 of 408 [2.9%] vs 48 of 206 [23.3%]). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that earlier use of erenumab in patients with EM who failed 1 or 2 previous preventive treatments provided greater and sustained efficacy, safety, and adherence than continuous OMPM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03927144.
Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Health Universidade Católica Portuguesa Lisboa Portugal
Department of Neurology Ghent University Hospital Ghent Belgium
Department of Neurology Military Institute of Medicine National Research Institute Warsaw Poland
Former employee of Novartis Pharma AG Basel Switzerland
Headache Center Dado Medical sro Prague Czech Republic
Headache Unit Neurology Department Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Spain
Hospital da Luz Headache Center Neurology Department Hospital da Luz Lisboa Portugal
Neurological Practice Dr Stude Bochum Germany
Novartis Pharma AG Basel Switzerland
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation East Hanover New Jersey
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24014104
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20240905134147.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 240725s2024 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.0368 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)38526461
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Pozo-Rosich, Patricia $u Headache and Neurological Pain Research Group, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Research (VHIR), Department of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain $u Headache Unit, Neurology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
- 245 10
- $a Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial / $c P. Pozo-Rosich, D. Dolezil, K. Paemeleire, A. Stepien, P. Stude, J. Snellman, M. Arkuszewski, T. Stites, S. Ritter, C. Lopez Lopez, J. Maca, M. Ferraris, R. Gil-Gouveia
- 520 9_
- $a IMPORTANCE: Patients with migraine often cycle through multiple nonspecific preventive medications due to poor tolerability and/or inadequate efficacy leading to low adherence and increased disease burden. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, tolerability, patient adherence, and patient satisfaction between erenumab and nonspecific oral migraine preventive medications (OMPMs) in patients with episodic migraine (EM) who had previously failed 1 or 2 preventive treatments. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The 12-month prospective, interventional, global, multicenter, active-controlled, randomized clinical trial comparing sustained benefit of 2 treatment paradigms (erenumab qm vs oral prophylactics) in adult episodic migraine patients (APPRAISE) trial was a 12-month open-label, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 4 randomized clinical trial conducted from May 15, 2019, to October 1, 2021. This pragmatic trial was conducted at 84 centers across 17 countries. Overall, participants 18 years or older with a 12-month or longer history of migraine, and 4 or more but fewer than 15 monthly migraine days (MMDs) were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive erenumab or OMPMs. Dose adjustment was permitted (label dependent). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was the proportion of patients completing 1 year of the initially assigned treatment and achieving a reduction of 50% or greater from baseline in MMDs at month 12. Secondary end points included the cumulative mean change from baseline in MMDs during the treatment period and the proportion of responders according to the Patients' Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale at month 12 for patients taking the initially assigned treatment. RESULTS: A total of 866 patients were screened, of whom 245 failed the screening and 621 completed the screening and baseline period. Of the 621 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 41.3 [11.2] years; 545 female [87.8%]; 413 [66.5%] in the erenumab group; 208 [33.5%] in the OMPM group), 523 (84.2%) completed the treatment phase, and 98 (15.8%) discontinued the study. At month 12, significantly more patients assigned to erenumab vs OMPM achieved the primary end point (232 of 413 [56.2%] vs 35 of 208 [16.8%]; odds ratio [OR], 6.48; 95% CI, 4.28-9.82; P <.001). Compared with OMPMs, treatment with erenumab showed higher responder rate (314 of 413 [76.0%] vs 39 of 208 [18.8%]; OR, 13.75; 95% CI, 9.08-20.83; P <.001) on the PGIC scale (≥5 at month 12). Significant reduction in cumulative average MMDs was reported with erenumab treatment vs OMPM treatment (-4.32 vs -2.65; treatment difference [SE]: -1.67 [0.35] days; P < .001). Substantially fewer patients in the erenumab arm compared with the OMPM arm switched medication (9 of 413 [2.2%] vs 72 of 208 [34.6%]) and discontinued treatment due to adverse events (12 of 408 [2.9%] vs 48 of 206 [23.3%]). No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Results of this randomized clinical trial demonstrated that earlier use of erenumab in patients with EM who failed 1 or 2 previous preventive treatments provided greater and sustained efficacy, safety, and adherence than continuous OMPM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03927144.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a migréna $x farmakoterapie $x prevence a kontrola $7 D008881
- 650 12
- $a humanizované monoklonální protilátky $x terapeutické užití $x aplikace a dávkování $7 D061067
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a aplikace orální $7 D000284
- 650 _2
- $a antagonisté CGRP receptorů $x aplikace a dávkování $x terapeutické užití $7 D000077221
- 650 _2
- $a spokojenost pacientů $7 D017060
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 650 _2
- $a adherence k farmakoterapii $7 D055118
- 650 _2
- $a prospektivní studie $7 D011446
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 655 _2
- $a randomizované kontrolované studie $7 D016449
- 655 _2
- $a multicentrická studie $7 D016448
- 655 _2
- $a klinické zkoušky, fáze IV $7 D017429
- 700 1_
- $a Dolezil, David $u Headache Center, Dado Medical sro, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Paemeleire, Koen $u Department of Neurology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
- 700 1_
- $a Stepien, Adam $u Department of Neurology, Military Institute of Medicine-National Research Institute, Warsaw, Poland
- 700 1_
- $a Stude, Philipp $u Neurological Practice Dr Stude, Bochum, Germany
- 700 1_
- $a Snellman, Josefin $u Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
- 700 1_
- $a Arkuszewski, Michal $u Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
- 700 1_
- $a Stites, Tracy $u Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey
- 700 1_
- $a Ritter, Shannon $u Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey
- 700 1_
- $a Lopez Lopez, Cristina $u Former employee of Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
- 700 1_
- $a Maca, Jeff $u Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey
- 700 1_
- $a Ferraris, Matias $u Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland
- 700 1_
- $a Gil-Gouveia, Raquel $u Hospital da Luz Headache Center, Neurology Department, Hospital da Luz, Lisboa, Portugal $u Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Health, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisboa, Portugal
- 773 0_
- $w MED00180402 $t JAMA neurology $x 2168-6157 $g Roč. 81, č. 5 (2024), s. 461-470
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38526461 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20240725 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20240905134140 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2143714 $s 1225970
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 81 $c 5 $d 461-470 $e 20240501 $i 2168-6157 $m JAMA neurology $n JAMA Neurol $x MED00180402
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20240725