A review of antibody-based therapeutics targeting G protein-coupled receptors: an update

ABSTRACT

Introduction

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) play key roles in many biological functions and are linked to many diseases across all therapeutic areas. As such, GPCRs represent a significant opportunity for antibody-based therapeutics.     

Reduction in acute migraine-specific and non-specific medication use in patients treated with erenumab: post-hoc analyses of episodic and chronic migraine clinical trials

BackgroundIn patients with migraine, overuse of acute medication, including migraine-specific medication (MSM) such as triptans and ergots, can lead to adverse health outcomes, including development of medication overuse headache. Here, we examined the effect of erenumab on reducing acute medication use, in particular MSM, in patients with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM).MethodsThe current post-hoc analyses were based on data from the double-blind treatment phase (DBTP) of two erenumab studies, a pivotal EM (N = 955) and a pivotal CM (N = 667) trial, and their respective extensions. Patients were administered subcutaneous placebo or erenumab (70 or 140 mg) once monthly. Daily acute headache medication use (including MSM and non-MSM) was recorded using an electronic diary during a 4-week pretreatment baseline period until the end of the treatment period. Outcome measures included change in monthly acute headache medication days (HMD) in acute headache medication users at baseline, and changes in monthly MSM days (MSMD) in MSM users at baseline and non-MSMD in non-MSM users at baseline.ResultsIn total, 60 and 78 % of patients (all acute headache medication users) with EM and CM used MSM at baseline, respectively. For acute headache medication users, the change in mean monthly acute HMD over Months 4, 5 and 6 compared with the pre-DBTP was 1.5, 2.5, and 3.0 for placebo, erenumab 70 mg and 140 mg, respectively for the EM study. The respective change in monthly MSMD in MSM users was 0.5, 2.1 and 2.8, and in monthly non-MSMD in non-MSM users was 2.3, 2.6, and 2.7. In the acute headache medication users at baseline, the change in monthly acute HMD at Month 3 compared with pre-DBTP was 3.4, 5.5, and 6.5 for placebo, erenumab 70 mg and 140 mg, respectively for the CM study. The respective change in monthly MSMD in MSM users was 2.1, 4.5, and 5.4, and in monthly non-MSMD in non-MSM users was 5.9, 6.4, and 6.6. Reductions in MSMD versus placebo were sustained in the extension periods of both studies. Erenumab was also associated with a higher proportion of MSM users achieving ≥ 50 %, ≥ 75 and 100 % reduction from baseline in monthly MSMD versus placebo in both EM and CM.ConclusionsIn both EM and CM, treatment with erenumab is associated with a significant and sustained reduction in the use of acute headache medication, in particular MSM.Trial registrations{"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02456740","term_id":"NCT02456740"}}NCT02456740; {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02066415","term_id":"NCT02066415"}}NCT02066415; {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02174861","term_id":"NCT02174861"}}NCT02174861.     

Assessment and characteristics of Erenumab therapy on migraine management

BackgroundMigraine is one of the neurological diseases that have a negative impact on subjects’ productivity and daily activity of patients. Introducing monoclonal antibodies as a valuable option for resolving the persistent problem of migraine is still under investigation. The current study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile related to Erenumab.MethodsA prospective study for clinical data collection and analysis from recruited therapy-refractory migraine subjects were carried through 6 months for each subject. All subjects received Erenumab 70 mg monthly. Each patient provided the clinical data monthly starting from 0 months and for the next 6 months. Migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire was used for evaluation of the Erenumab efficacy every 3 months. In addition, data regarding adverse effects, migraine triggers, and the impact of previous COVID-19 on migraine severity were collected and analyzed.ResultsNinety subjects were recruited in the study. Erenumab injections resulted in a significant (p < 0.001) reduction in MIDAS score in the 3rd month compared with baseline, also this significance was continuous in the 6th month. In contrast, there was no significant difference in the 6th month compared with the 3rd. Previously infected COVID-19 subjects showed a higher severity of migraine attacks compared with non-infected subjects. Skin redness and local pain were the most common adverse effects 63.3%, 47.77% respectively associated with Erenumab.ConclusionUsing Erenumab therapy showed a great beneficial impact regarding the reduction of migraine-related disabilities. COVID-19 was related to the increased severity of migraine attacks.     

Efficacy of erenumab and factors predicting response after 3 months in treatment resistant chronic migraine: a clinical service evaluation

BackgroundCalcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) inhibitors have been developed as options for treatment of chronic and episodic migraine. We present our experience of the use of erenumab in a tertiary headache centre.MethodsThis was a prospective clinical audit of all patients commenced on erenumab following a locally agreed pathway and criteria over a consecutive period. Patients received monthly erenumab 140 mg for 3 months. Data were collected prospectively at baseline and 3 months follow up.ResultsOne hundred three patients were commenced on erenumab during the study period. Patients had tried a median of 7 previous prophylactics, including onabotulinum toxin A in 94%. At 3 months there was a reduction in median total (28 to 20, 29% reduction, p < 0.0001) and severe (15 to 5, 67% reduction, p < 0.0001) headache days. 39.8% of patients achieved at least a 30% reduction in total headache days; 61.8% of patients achieved at least a 50% reduction in severe headache days. Meeting either of these thresholds was considered a positive response, 68% of patients achieved this. Presence of daily headache pattern was negatively associated with response, (56% response vs. 90% without daily headache, p = 0.0003). There was no association between age, gender, presence of medication overuse or number of previously tried prophylactic treatments and response to erenumab. 43% of patients reported at least one adverse effect, most commonly constipation (26%); treatment was discontinued in 3 patients due to adverse effects.ConclusionsErenumab was an effective treatment for chronic migraine in this treatment resistant population over 3 months of follow up. Presence of daily headache predicted poorer response but there was still a significant positive response rate in this group.     

Real-world evidence data on the monoclonal antibody erenumab in migraine prevention: perspectives of treating physicians in Germany

BackgroundErenumab, the first-in-class fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, was shown to be efficacious and safe for the prophylactic treatment of migraine in adults in randomized clinical trials. Large-scale, real-world evidence in multi-centre settings is still needed to confirm these results. Erenumab patient profiles outside clinical trials and physicians’ treatment patterns, as well as data from patients treated in Germany, a severely impacted population, are not published yet.MethodsTELESCOPE was a multi-centre survey gathering real-world data from 45 German headache centres between July 2019 and December 2019. The project consisted of two parts. In the first part, treating physicians shared their experiences on current erenumab treatment with regard to patient profiles, treatment patterns and treatment responses. In the second part, a retrospective chart review was conducted of 542 migraine patients treated with erenumab for at least three months. Treatment responses focused on various aspects of patients’ quality of life.ResultsThe analysis of 542 patients’ charts revealed that three-month treatment with erenumab significantly reduced monthly headaches, migraine and acute medication days. Furthermore, headache intensity and frequency were reduced in over 75 % and accompanying aura in 35 % of patients. The clinical global impression scale revealed a general improvement in 91 % of patients. According to the treating physicians’ professional judgement, 83 % of patients responded to erenumab and 80 % were satisfied with the treatment. Physicians evaluated restricted quality of life, the number of monthly migraine days and previous, prophylactic treatments as the main components of the current patient profile for monoclonal antibody recipients. Based on the assessment of physicians, erenumab reduced migraine symptoms in 65 % and increased quality of life in more than 75 % of their patients.ConclusionsTELESCOPE confirms positive treatment responses with erenumab shown in clinical trials in a real-world multi-centre setting. The results show consistently positive experiences of physicians utilizing erenumab in clinical practice and underline that therapy with this monoclonal antibody is effective in migraine patients, particular in those, who have failed several prophylactic therapies.     

Comparing the relative and absolute effect of erenumab: is a 50% response enough? Results from the ESTEEMen study

BackgroundMonoclonal antibodies acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor have changed migraine preventive treatment. Those treatments have led to reconsidering the outcomes of migraine prevention. Available data mostly considered benefits in terms of relative efficacy (percent or absolute decrease in monthly migraine days [MMDs] or headache days compared with baseline). However, not enough attention has been paid to residual MMDs and/or migraine-related disability in treated patients. In the present study, we aimed at comparing the relative and absolute efficacy of erenumab.MethodsESTEEMen was a collaborative project among 16 European headache centers which already performed real-life data collections on patients treated with erenumab for at least 12 weeks. For the present study, we performed a subgroup analysis on patients with complete data on MMDs at baseline and at weeks 9-12 of treatment. Starting from efficacy thresholds proposed by previous literature, we classified patients into 0-29%, 30-49%, 50-74%, and ≥75% responders according to MMD decrease from baseline to weeks 9-12 of treatment. For each response category, we reported the median MMDs and Headache Impact test-6 (HIT-6) scores at baseline and at weeks 9-12. We categorized the number of residual MMDs at weeks 9-12 as follows: 0-3, 4-7, 8-14, ≥15. We classified HIT-6 score into four categories: ≤49, 50-55, 56-59, and ≥60. To keep in line with the original scope of the ESTEEMen study, calculations were performed in men and women.ResultsOut of 1215 patients, at weeks 9-12, 381 (31.4%) had a 0-29% response, 186 (15.3%) a 30-49% response, 396 (32.6%) a 50-74% response, and 252 (20.7%) a ≥75% response; 246 patients (20.2%) had 0-3 residual MMDs, 443 (36.5%) had 4-7 MMDs, 299 (24.6%) had 8-14 MMDs, and 227 (18.7%) had ≥15 MMDs. Among patients with 50-74% response, 246 (62.1%) had 4-7 and 94 (23.7%) 8-14 residual MMDs, while among patients with ≥75% response 187 (74.2%) had 0-3 and 65 (25.8%) had 4-7 residual MMDs.ConclusionsThe present study shows that even patients with good relative response to erenumab may have a clinically non-negligible residual migraine burden. Relative measures of efficacy cannot be enough to thoroughly consider the efficacy of migraine prevention.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01408-w.     

Association between response to triptans and response to erenumab: real-life data

BackgroundTriptans and erenumab are both migraine-specific agents acting on the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway. Therefore, response to triptans might be associated with response to erenumab.Main bodyIn our study, consecutive patients referring to the Headache Centers of the Abruzzo region from January 2019 to March 2020 and treated with erenumab were interviewed about past use and efficacy of triptans. Triptan users were classified as ‘triptan responders’ if they were headache-free 2 h after treating ≥3 migraine attacks with ≥1 triptan. We considered patients as ‘erenumab responders’, if they had a ≥ 50% mean reduction in monthly migraine days between the 4th and the 6th month from treatment start compared with baseline. Of 91 triptan users, 73 (80.2%) were triptan responders and 58 (63.7%) were erenumab responders. The odds ratio of being erenumab responder was 3.64 (95% CI, 1.25–10.64) for triptan users as compared to non-users. (P = 0.014). Besides, starting erenumab improved triptan response in both erenumab responders and non-responders.ConclusionsOur data of an association between response to triptans and response to erenumab can be useful for patient advice and to improve the understanding of migraine pathophysiology and treatment.     

Improvements in pain,medication use and quality of life in onabotulinumtoxinA-resistant chronic migraine patients following erenumab treatment – real world outcomes

BackgroundThe CGRP antagonists offer a novel therapeutic approach in migraine. Their utility in patients with severe forms of chronic migraine is a subject of particular interest. We present outcomes of 9 months of erenumab treatment in a cohort of patients with difficult-to-control chronic migraine, all of whom had prior unsatisfactory response to onabotulinumtoxinA.MethodsWe offered erenumab to 98 patients with a prior unsatisfactory response to onabotulinumtoxinA. Eighty of 98 had trialled greater occipital nerve injections (82%), 32/98 peripheral neurostimulation (33%) and 18/98 intravenous dihydroergotamine (18%). Thirty eight of 98 (39%) met the definition of triptan overuse and 43/98 (44%) analgesic overuse. All patients met the EHF criteria for ‘resistant migraine’. Outcome measures (recorded monthly) included days with headache limiting activities of daily living (“red”), not limiting (“amber”), headache free (“green”), and requiring triptans or other analgesics. Quality of life scores - headache impact test 6 (HIT-6), patient health questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) and pain disability index (PDI) - were also measured.ResultsMean number of red days improved by − 6.4 days (SE 0.67, 95%CI − 7.7 to − 5.1, p=0.001) at 3 months; − 6.8 days (SE 0.96, 95%CI − 8.80 to − 4.9, p=0.001) at 6 months and − 6.5 days (SE 0.86, 95%CI − 8.3 to − 4.8, p=0.001) at 9 months. Repeated measures ANOVA confirmed improvements in the number of red (p=0.001), green (p=0.001), triptan (p=0.001) and painkiller days (p=0.001) as well as scores of the HIT-6 (p=0.001), PHQ-9 (p=0.001), and PDI (p=0.001) across the duration of study.ConclusionWe observed improvements in pain, medication use and quality of life in onabotulinumtoxinA-resistant chronic migraine patients following erenumab treatment.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-020-01214-2.     

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

BackgroundErenumab 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsWe 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%).ConclusionsIn 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.