Trial reportThe journal of headache and pain2022
Eptinezumab treatment initiated during a migraine attack is associated with meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcome measures: secondary results from the randomized controlled RELIEF study.
Trial report 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. It is linked to trial NCT04152083 (A Parallel Group, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Eptinezumab Administered Intravenously in Subjects Experiencing an Acute Attack of Migraine), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Parallel Group, Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Eptinezumab Administered Intravenously in Subjects Experiencing an Acute Attack of Migraine
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The efficacy and safety of zavegepant nasal inhalation versus oral calcitonin-gene related peptide receptor antagonists in the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the literature.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of eptinezumab 300 mg with 100 mg for the treatment of migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.African health sciences · 2024Pooled it
- A role of NLRP3 and MMP9 in migraine progression: a systematic review of translational study.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Optimization of acute medication use following eptinezumab initiation during a migraine attack: post hoc analysis of the RELIEF study.The journal of headache and pain · 2022Trial
- Long-term reductions in disease impact in patients with chronic migraine following preventive treatment with eptinezumab.BMC neurology · 2022Trial
- Drugs for Migraine Prophylaxis.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2026Review
- Eptinezumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDemonstrating therapeutic value from the patient perspective is important in patient-centered migraine management. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of eptinezumab, a preventive migraine treatment, on patient-reported headache impact, acute medication optimization, and perception of disease change when initiated during a migraine attack.
methodsRELIEF was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted between 2019 and 2020 in adults with ≥1-year history of migraine and 4-15 migraine days per month in the 3 months prior to screening. Patients were randomized (1:1) to a 30-min infusion of eptinezumab 100 mg or placebo within 1-6 h of a qualifying migraine attack onset. The 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and 6-item Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire (mTOQ-6) were administered at baseline and week 4, and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) at week 4. A post hoc analysis of these measures was conducted in patients who reported headache pain freedom at 2 h after infusion start.
resultsOf 480 patients enrolled and treated, 476 completed the study and are included in this analysis. Mean baseline HIT-6 total scores indicated severe headache impact (eptinezumab, 65.1; placebo, 64.8). At week 4, the eptinezumab-treated group demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in HIT-6 total score compared with placebo (mean change from baseline: eptinezumab, - 8.7; placebo, - 4.5; mean [95% CI] difference from placebo: - 4.2 [- 5.75, - 2.63], P < .0001), with greater reductions in each item score vs placebo (P < .001 all comparisons). Change in HIT-6 total score in the subgroup with 2-h headache pain freedom was - 13.8 for the eptinezumab group compared with - 4.9 for the placebo group. mTOQ-6 total score mean change from baseline favored eptinezumab (change, 2.1) compared with placebo (1.2; mean [95% CI] difference: 0.9 [0.3, 1.5], P < .01). More eptinezumab-treated patients rated PGIC as much or very much improved than placebo patients (59.3% vs 25.9%).
conclusionsWhen administered during a migraine attack, eptinezumab significantly improved patient-reported outcomes after 4 weeks compared with placebo, with particularly pronounced effects in patients reporting headache pain freedom at 2 h after infusion start.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04152083 . November 5, 2019.
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.