Cargando…

Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm

INTRODUCTION: Subcutaneous galcanezumab was an effective, well-tolerated preventive treatment for adults with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) in 4 phase 3 randomized controlled trials: EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, REGAIN, and CONQUER. Number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) are metrics of effec...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Citrome, Leslie, Sánchez del Rio, Margarita, Dong, Yan, Nichols, Russell M., Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Antje, Foster, Shonda A., Stauffer, Virginia L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342379/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34264500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01848-x
_version_ 1783734056146436096
author Citrome, Leslie
Sánchez del Rio, Margarita
Dong, Yan
Nichols, Russell M.
Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Antje
Foster, Shonda A.
Stauffer, Virginia L.
author_facet Citrome, Leslie
Sánchez del Rio, Margarita
Dong, Yan
Nichols, Russell M.
Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Antje
Foster, Shonda A.
Stauffer, Virginia L.
author_sort Citrome, Leslie
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Subcutaneous galcanezumab was an effective, well-tolerated preventive treatment for adults with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) in 4 phase 3 randomized controlled trials: EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, REGAIN, and CONQUER. Number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) are metrics of effect size used to evaluate benefit–risk profiles. This study evaluated NNT, NNH, and benefit–risk profiles (measured as likelihood to be helped or harmed, LHH) of galcanezumab 120 mg versus placebo in patients with EM or CM. METHODS: Primary efficacy outcomes were responses defined as ≥ 30%, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 75% reductions from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days in patients with EM (EVOLVE-1; EVOLVE-2; CONQUER) and CM (REGAIN; CONQUER); corresponding NNTs to achieve respective responses; and corresponding NNHs for discontinuations due to adverse events (DCAEs) among the safety population. Secondary efficacy outcomes were responses for patients with ≥ 2 failed prior preventive treatments due to lack of efficacy and/or for tolerability reasons. All LHHs were based on ≥ 50% response and DCAEs. RESULTS: During double-blind treatment periods with galcanezumab 120 mg, NNT to achieve ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% responses ranged from 4 to 10 and NNT to achieve ≥ 75% responses ranged from 5 to 23 in individual trials. NNH ranged from 93 to 1000, while LHH ranged from 18.6 to 104.6. NNTs were generally more robust among patients with EM than with CM; however, in patients with failure of ≥ 2 prior preventive treatments, NNTs to achieve ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% responses were similar between patients with CM and EM. NNHs were imputed as 1000 for both migraine types. Resulting LHHs were 178.8 (EM) and 127 (CM). CONCLUSION: Across 4 trials, galcanezumab 120 mg demonstrated a favorable benefit–risk profile versus placebo, based on low NNTs to achieve response and high NNHs associated with DCAEs. LHH values consistently far exceeded 1. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EVOLVE-1: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614183; EVOLVE-2: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614196; REGAIN: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614261; CONQUER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03559257. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01848-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8342379
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83423792021-08-20 Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm Citrome, Leslie Sánchez del Rio, Margarita Dong, Yan Nichols, Russell M. Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Antje Foster, Shonda A. Stauffer, Virginia L. Adv Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: Subcutaneous galcanezumab was an effective, well-tolerated preventive treatment for adults with episodic (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) in 4 phase 3 randomized controlled trials: EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2, REGAIN, and CONQUER. Number needed to treat (NNT) and to harm (NNH) are metrics of effect size used to evaluate benefit–risk profiles. This study evaluated NNT, NNH, and benefit–risk profiles (measured as likelihood to be helped or harmed, LHH) of galcanezumab 120 mg versus placebo in patients with EM or CM. METHODS: Primary efficacy outcomes were responses defined as ≥ 30%, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 75% reductions from baseline in number of monthly migraine headache days in patients with EM (EVOLVE-1; EVOLVE-2; CONQUER) and CM (REGAIN; CONQUER); corresponding NNTs to achieve respective responses; and corresponding NNHs for discontinuations due to adverse events (DCAEs) among the safety population. Secondary efficacy outcomes were responses for patients with ≥ 2 failed prior preventive treatments due to lack of efficacy and/or for tolerability reasons. All LHHs were based on ≥ 50% response and DCAEs. RESULTS: During double-blind treatment periods with galcanezumab 120 mg, NNT to achieve ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% responses ranged from 4 to 10 and NNT to achieve ≥ 75% responses ranged from 5 to 23 in individual trials. NNH ranged from 93 to 1000, while LHH ranged from 18.6 to 104.6. NNTs were generally more robust among patients with EM than with CM; however, in patients with failure of ≥ 2 prior preventive treatments, NNTs to achieve ≥ 30% and ≥ 50% responses were similar between patients with CM and EM. NNHs were imputed as 1000 for both migraine types. Resulting LHHs were 178.8 (EM) and 127 (CM). CONCLUSION: Across 4 trials, galcanezumab 120 mg demonstrated a favorable benefit–risk profile versus placebo, based on low NNTs to achieve response and high NNHs associated with DCAEs. LHH values consistently far exceeded 1. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: EVOLVE-1: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614183; EVOLVE-2: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614196; REGAIN: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02614261; CONQUER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03559257. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01848-x. Springer Healthcare 2021-07-15 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8342379/ /pubmed/34264500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01848-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Citrome, Leslie
Sánchez del Rio, Margarita
Dong, Yan
Nichols, Russell M.
Tockhorn-Heidenreich, Antje
Foster, Shonda A.
Stauffer, Virginia L.
Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm
title Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm
title_full Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm
title_fullStr Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm
title_full_unstemmed Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm
title_short Benefit–Risk Assessment of Galcanezumab Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Using the Metrics of Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm
title_sort benefit–risk assessment of galcanezumab versus placebo for the treatment of episodic and chronic migraine using the metrics of number needed to treat and number needed to harm
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342379/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34264500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-021-01848-x
work_keys_str_mv AT citromeleslie benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm
AT sanchezdelriomargarita benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm
AT dongyan benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm
AT nicholsrussellm benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm
AT tockhornheidenreichantje benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm
AT fostershondaa benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm
AT stauffervirginial benefitriskassessmentofgalcanezumabversusplaceboforthetreatmentofepisodicandchronicmigraineusingthemetricsofnumberneededtotreatandnumberneededtoharm