Switching between anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prophylaxis.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Michail Vikelis, Dimitrios Rikos, Andreas A Argyriou, Emmanouil V Dermitzakis, Anna P Andreou, Antonio Russo
{"title":"Switching between anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prophylaxis.","authors":"Michail Vikelis, Dimitrios Rikos, Andreas A Argyriou, Emmanouil V Dermitzakis, Anna P Andreou, Antonio Russo","doi":"10.1080/14737175.2025.2461766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>When a first anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody (anti-CGRP mAb) fails, switching to a different anti-CGRP mAb is an option often considered, despite the fact that this approach is not yet systemically studied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We present the findings of a systematic review conducted according to the PRISMA recommendations on published studies - of any design - investigating the clinical outcomes after switching for any reason to different anti-CGRP mAbs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature search retrieved 76 records, while 19 papers were eventually reviewed. Most studies were retrospective and/or had a small sample size. A significant proportion of participants experienced an improved treatment response after switching between different anti-CGRP mAbs. Specifically, according to prospective studies' results, the median MMDs were reduced by 12.8 days after 6 months of switching, while up to 48% of episodic and 36% of the chronic migraine patients achieved a >50% response rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Switching between different anti-CGRP mAbs may be beneficial, at least for some patients, and should be considered when therapy with a first anti-CGRP mAb fails for any reason. Larger prospective studies, employing standardized protocols for switching or comparative effectiveness trials between mAbs, are anticipated to elucidate this issue further.</p>","PeriodicalId":12190,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737175.2025.2461766","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: When a first anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody (anti-CGRP mAb) fails, switching to a different anti-CGRP mAb is an option often considered, despite the fact that this approach is not yet systemically studied.

Methods: We present the findings of a systematic review conducted according to the PRISMA recommendations on published studies - of any design - investigating the clinical outcomes after switching for any reason to different anti-CGRP mAbs.

Results: The literature search retrieved 76 records, while 19 papers were eventually reviewed. Most studies were retrospective and/or had a small sample size. A significant proportion of participants experienced an improved treatment response after switching between different anti-CGRP mAbs. Specifically, according to prospective studies' results, the median MMDs were reduced by 12.8 days after 6 months of switching, while up to 48% of episodic and 36% of the chronic migraine patients achieved a >50% response rate.

Conclusions: Switching between different anti-CGRP mAbs may be beneficial, at least for some patients, and should be considered when therapy with a first anti-CGRP mAb fails for any reason. Larger prospective studies, employing standardized protocols for switching or comparative effectiveness trials between mAbs, are anticipated to elucidate this issue further.

抗cgrp单克隆抗体在偏头痛预防中的转换。
当第一种抗cgrp单克隆抗体(抗cgrp mAb)失败时,切换到另一种抗cgrp mAb是一种经常考虑的选择,尽管这种方法尚未系统研究。方法:我们根据PRISMA对已发表的研究(任何设计)的建议进行了系统评价,调查了因任何原因切换到不同抗cgrp单克隆抗体后的临床结果。结果:检索到文献76条,最终综述19篇。大多数研究是回顾性的和/或样本量小。在不同的抗cgrp单克隆抗体之间切换后,显著比例的参与者经历了改善的治疗反应。具体来说,根据前瞻性研究的结果,在6个月的转换后,中位MMDs减少了12.8天,而高达48%的发作性偏头痛患者和36%的慢性偏头痛患者达到了50%的缓解率。结论:至少对一些患者来说,在不同的抗cgrp单抗之间切换可能是有益的,当首次使用抗cgrp单抗治疗因任何原因失败时,应考虑切换。更大规模的前瞻性研究,采用标准化方案进行单克隆抗体之间的转换或比较有效性试验,预计将进一步阐明这一问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
2.30%
发文量
61
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics (ISSN 1473-7175) provides expert reviews on the use of drugs and medicines in clinical neurology and neuropsychiatry. Coverage includes disease management, new medicines and drugs in neurology, therapeutic indications, diagnostics, medical treatment guidelines and neurological diseases such as stroke, epilepsy, Alzheimer''s and Parkinson''s. Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Review format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion - a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信