Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35093013›Full record

SynthesisThe journal of headache and pain2022

The efficacy and safety of atogepant for the prophylactic treatment of migraine: evidence from randomized controlled trials.

Xinyu Tao, Zeya Yan, Jiahao Meng, Wei Wang, Qiling Dai, Qiufeng Zhou, Zhifeng Wang, Zhong Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The journal of headache and pain, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Involvement of the cerebellum in migraine.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2022
    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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xinyu Tao *Department of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu Province, China.
Zeya Yan *Department of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu Province, China.
Jiahao MengDepartment of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu Province, China.
Wei WangDepartment of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu Province, China.
Qiling DaiDepartment of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu Province, China.
Qiufeng ZhouDepartment of Neurosurgery, Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital, Suzhou, China.
Zhifeng WangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The First People's Hospital of Nantong City, Nantong, Jiangsu Province, China. maisui1976@163.com.
Zhong WangDepartment of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, 215006, Jiangsu Province, China. wangzhong761@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7342-0845
Soochow University · CNNantong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMigraine is a common neurovascular disorder that has a severe impact on the individual daily life. Atogepant (AGN-241689) is an orally ingested, small-molecule drugs belonging to calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, which has been initiated for the prophylactic treatment of migraine. However, there is no comprehensive literature to study the efficacy and safety of atogepant for the treatment of migraine. In this article, we present a meta-analysis of the available studies.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched before October 20, 2021 for any relevant literature. Eventually, three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with 2,466 patients were included in our study.

resultsWe pooled 2,466 patients from 3 RCTs and primary outcome was mean monthly migraine days, the secondary endpoints were monthly headache days, acute medication use days per month and ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days, baseline to end of trials. It was found that atogepant (10 mg, 30 mg, 60 mg once a day) led to a significant reduction in monthly migraine days (P < 0.00001, P < 0.00001, P = 0.007), monthly headache days (P < 0.00001, P < 0.00001, P = 0.001), and monthly medication use days (P < 0.00001, P < 0.00001, P = 0.0001), and an increase in the proportion of people with ≥ 50% reduction in monthly migraine days (P = 0.0008, P = 0.02, P = 0.04) in comparison with placebo. Moreover, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in outcomes of adverse events between atogepant and placebo.

conclusionsAtogepant has shown good efficacy and safety in the prophylactic treatment of migraine, and further studies are expected.

Indexed as

Migraine DisordersAnalgesicsHumansPiperidinesPyridinesPyrrolesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSpiro CompoundsTreatment OutcomeAnalgesicsatogepantPiperidinesPyridinesPyrrolesSpiro Compounds

Identifiers

PMID35093013
PMCPMC8903713
OpenAlexW4210800132

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.