Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33179323›Full record

Trial reportHeadache2020

Reversion From Chronic Migraine to Episodic Migraine in Patients Treated With Fremanezumab: Post Hoc Analysis From HALO CM Study.

Richard B Lipton, Joshua M Cohen, Kristen Bibeau, Maja Galic, Michael J Seminerio, Verena Ramirez Campos, Rashmi B Halker Singh, Jessica Ailani

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Headache, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. The first interim analysis of Italian patients enrolled in the real-world, Pan-European, prospective, observational, phase 4 PEARL study of fremanezumab effectiveness.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2024
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Neurobiology of migraine progression.Neurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.)
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Richard B LiptonAlbert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.
Joshua M CohenTeva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Frazer, PA, USA.
Kristen BibeauTeva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Frazer, PA, USA.
Maja GalicTeva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Michael J SeminerioTeva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Frazer, PA, USA.
Verena Ramirez CamposTeva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Frazer, PA, USA.
Rashmi B Halker SinghMayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Jessica AilaniMedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Teva Pharmaceuticals (United States) · USMayo Clinic Hospital · USMedStar Georgetown University Hospital · USMontefiore Medical Center · USTeva Pharmaceuticals (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Petach Tikva, Israel
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMigraine preventive medications are used to reduce headache frequency, severity, and duration. In patients with chronic migraine (CM), reversion to episodic migraine (EM) is an important treatment goal.

objectiveTo evaluate the effect of fremanezumab on the rate of reversion from CM to EM.

methodsThis phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial included a 28-day pretreatment period and a 3-month treatment period. Patients with CM received subcutaneous fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline) or monthly (675 mg at baseline; 225 mg at Weeks 4 and 8), or placebo. Post hoc analyses evaluated the proportion of patients who reverted from CM to EM, defined as either a reduction to an average of <15 headache days per month during the 3-month treatment period or a reduction to <15 headache days per month in all 3 months of the treatment period.

resultsThis analysis included data from 1088 CM patients (quarterly, n = 366; monthly, n = 365; placebo, n = 357). More fremanezumab-treated patients with CM reverted to EM using either the monthly average number of headache days criteria for reversion (quarterly: 50.5% [185/366], P = .108; monthly: 53.7% [196/365], P = .012; vs placebo: 44.5% [159/357]) or the monthly headache day count at Months 1, 2, and 3 criteria for reversion (quarterly: 31.2% [114/366], P = .008; monthly: 33.7% [123/365], P = .001; vs placebo: 22.4% [80/357]). Patients with CM who reported previous topiramate or onabotulinumtoxinA use, concomitant preventive medication use, or medication overuse were less likely to revert to EM.

conclusionsFremanezumab may offer the benefit of reversion from CM to EM, based on a reduction in the number of headache days over 3 months of treatment.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareAdultAntibodies, MonoclonalChronic DiseaseDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMigraine DisordersTime FactorsYoung AdultAntibodies, Monoclonalfremanezumaball headacheall painclinical trials randomized controlledmigraine

Identifiers

PMID33179323
PMCPMC7756262
OpenAlexW3106137481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.