Abstract: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 &lt;.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 &lt;.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 &lt; .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

Effect of switching to erenumab in non-responders to a CGRP ligand antibody treatment in migraine: A real-world cohort study

Efficacy of eptinezumab in non-responders to subcutaneous monoclonal antibodies against CGRP and the CGRP receptor: A retrospective cohort study

Anti‑CGRP monoclonal antibodies in resistant migraine: preliminary real-world effectiveness and clinical predictors of response at two years

CGRP antibody therapy in patients with drug resistant migraine and chronic daily headache: a real-world experience

Persistence, effectiveness, and tolerability of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies in patients with chronic migraine

Switching from ligand to receptor anti‐calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) antibodies or vice versa in non‐responders: A controlled cohort study

Changes in use of acute and preventive medications for migraine after erenumab initiation over 12 months: A United States retrospective cohort study

Real-world effectiveness and safety of erenumab for the treatment of migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Impact of a reimbursement policy change on treatment with erenumab in migraine – a real-world experience from Germany

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

Medium-term real-world data for erenumab in 177 treatment resistant or difficult to treat chronic migraine patients: persistence and patient reported outcome measures after 17-30 months

Analysis to retreatment with monoclonal antibodies in chronic/episodic migraine: Real world data

Treatment Outcome After Switching From Galcanezumab to Fremanezumab in Patients With Migraine

Hypersensitivity to CGRP as a predictive biomarker of migraine prevention with erenumab

Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives

Real-world treatment satisfaction with erenumab in migraine: analysis of the US National Health and Wellness Survey

Erenumab and Possible CGRP Effect on Chronotype in Chronic Migraine: A Real-Life Study of 12 Months Treatment

Long-Term Effectiveness of Three Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Resistant Chronic Migraine Patients Based on the MIDAS score

Longitudinal changes in functional connectivity and pain-induced brain activations in patients with migraine: a functional MRI study pre- and post- treatment with Erenumab

Real-World Treatment Profiles, Clinical Outcomes, and Healthcare Resource Utilization of Patients with Migraine Prescribed Erenumab: A Multicenter Chart-Review Study of US Headache Centers.

Two-year, real-world erenumab persistence and quality of life data in 82 pooled patients with abrupt onset, unremitting, treatment refractory headache and a migraine phenotype: New daily persistent headache or persistent post-traumatic headache in the majority of cases