Trial reportHeadache2021
Patient-identified most bothersome symptom in preventive migraine treatment with eptinezumab: A novel patient-centered outcome.
Trial report in Headache, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of eptinezumab in adults with chronic migraine and medication-overuse headache who also received patient education: 24-week results of the randomized RESOLUTION trial.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Trial
- Eptinezumab With Patient Education for Chronic Migraine and Medication-Overuse Headache: The Randomized, Placebo-Controlled RESOLUTION Trial.Neurology · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Long-term tolerability and effectiveness of eptinezumab in Japanese adults with chronic migraine: results of the 60-week open-label SUNSET trial.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Trial
- Impact of eptinezumab on work productivity beyond reductions in monthly migraine days: post hoc analysis of the DELIVER trial.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Trial
- Eptinezumab treatment was associated with longer interictal headache/migraine periods which corresponded to greater improvements in patient-reported quality of life measures.Journal of neurology · 2024Trial
- Efficacy and safety of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine and medication-overuse headache: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.BMC neurology · 2023Trial
- Effects of eptinezumab on self-reported work productivity in adults with migraine and prior preventive treatment failure in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled DELIVER study.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Trial
- Reduction in migraine-associated burden after eptinezumab treatment in patients with chronic migraine.Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache · 2022Trial
- Measuring dose-related efficacy of eptinezumab for migraine prevention: post hoc analysis of PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Trial
- Early response to eptinezumab indicates high likelihood of continued response in patients with chronic migraine.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Trial
- Evaluating associations of migraine-related vertigo.Headache · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Nrf2/Keap1 Pathway in Patients with Migraine.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Observational
- Structural equation modeling for identifying the drivers of health-related quality of life improvement experienced by patients with migraine receiving eptinezumab.The journal of headache and pain · 2024Article
- Eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Improving to Four or Fewer Monthly Headache Days Per Month Provides a Clinically Meaningful Therapeutic Target for Patients with Chronic Migraine.Pain and therapy · 2023Article
- Migraine: from pathophysiology to treatment.Journal of neurology · 2023Review
- Adverse event reporting of four anti-Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: a real-world study based on the FDA adverse event reporting system.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo describe the methodology and implications of the patient-identified most bothersome symptom (PI-MBS) measure used in the phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and parallel-group PROMISE-2 trial and to evaluate the contribution of this measure to the assessment of the preventive migraine benefits of treatment.
backgroundAlthough freedom from MBS is a coprimary endpoint in acute migraine treatment trials, its evaluation in preventive migraine trials is limited. The PROMISE-2 study assessed a unique PI-MBS measure as a secondary endpoint.
methodsThis was a secondary analysis of data from the PROMISE-2 study. Adults with chronic migraine (CM) were randomized to receive intravenous (IV) eptinezumab 100 mg, eptinezumab 300 mg, or placebo, administered on day 0 and every 12 weeks. At the screening visit, patients were asked to verbally describe the MBS associated with their CM; the question format was open ended. At subsequent visits, patients were asked to rate the overall change in severity of their MBS from study inception to that time point, using a 7-point ordinal scale ranging from "very much worse" (-3) to "very much improved" (+3). Patients completed the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) assessment during the same visits, using an identical rating scale and recall period. Endpoints were summarized descriptively; post hoc correlations using the methodologies of Pearson and Spearman were calculated to evaluate relationships between PGIC and PI-MBS and between PGIC and mean monthly migraine days (MMDs; primary efficacy endpoint in PROMISE-2).
resultsAltogether, 1072 patients received treatment (eptinezumab 100 mg, n = 356; eptinezumab 300 mg, n = 350; placebo, n = 366) and were included in the analysis. There were 23 unique MBS identified; those reported by ≥10 patients included light sensitivity (18.7%), nausea/vomiting (15.1%), pain with activity (13.7%), pain (12.4%), headache (11.2%), sound sensitivity (7.3%), throbbing/pulsating pain (4.7%), cognitive disruption (4.1%), fatigue (2.4%), mood changes (1.5%), and sensitivity to smell (0.9%). Four weeks after the first dose (week 4), the rates of much or very much improvement in PI-MBS were higher with eptinezumab 100 mg (45%) and 300 mg (57%) than with placebo (29%). Four weeks after the second dose (week 16), the proportions with much or very much improvement in PI-MBS had increased to 58%, 65%, and 36%, respectively. At each time point, the percentages of patients with PGIC ratings of much or very much improved were similar to those for patient-reported improvement in PI-MBS. Patient ratings of changes in PI-MBS and PGIC correlated strongly across time points (Pearson, r range, 0.83-0.88; Spearman, r range, 0.83-0.89); the absolute value of the correlations was greater than the correlation among changes in MMDs and PGIC (Pearson, r range, -0.49 to -0.52; Spearman, r range, -0.49 to -0.52).
conclusionsAmong patients with CM in the PROMISE-2 study, a broad range of PI-MBS was reported at baseline. Throughout the study, patients treated with eptinezumab reported greater improvement in their PI-MBS severity compared with placebo recipients, and this improvement correlated strongly with PGIC findings. Collectively, these results indicate that PI-MBS is a promising and novel outcome measure for preventive trials of CM and thus may provide a unique patient-centered approach for identifying and measuring the burden of migraine symptoms that matter most to each patient, as well as the benefits of treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.