Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35725856›Full record

ReviewNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2022

The ultimate guide to the anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies galaxy.

Davide Mascarella, Eleonora Matteo, Valentina Favoni, Sabina Cevoli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

4 authors.

Davide MascarellaDepartment of Biomedical and NeuroMotor Sciences of Bologna, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Eleonora MatteoDepartment of Biomedical and NeuroMotor Sciences of Bologna, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Valentina FavoniIRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Sabina CevoliIRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. sabina.cevoli@unibo.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4668-4295

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies have represented a real revolution in the field of headaches, being the result of an extraordinary process of translation of new pathophysiological discoveries into successful therapies. Nonetheless, clinical practice is far more complex than pivotal trials setting, and real-world studies are blooming to deepen knowledge of these revolutionary medications.

objectiveTo provide an updated guide for evidence-based clinical practice.

methodsPivotal phase 3 randomised clinical trials for each anti-CGRP(-R) monoclonal antibody were considered. We evaluated prospective real-world studies and summarised evidence on anti-CGRP mAbs use beyond episodic and chronic migraine.

resultsAll phase 3 RCTs showed an unprecedented profile of efficacy and safety in migraine prevention for the four anti-CGRP mAbs. However, plenty of questions remained open after the approval process. Real-world studies filled the gap and effectiveness results equalled or unexpectedly outperformed RCTs figures in most cases; safety results showed a lower incidence of adverse events, but a higher frequency of reported constipation compared to RCTs. Almost all studies displayed a rapid and progressive headache worsening following treatment suspension. Several positive response predictors were suggested, such as unilateral pain, allodynia in episodic migraineurs, response to triptans, and a lower number of failed prophylaxes. Comparable effectiveness was observed in resistant/refractory patients. In medication overuse headache patients, a clear clinical benefit was observed irrespective of any possible detoxification program.

conclusionsOur narrative review restates the remarkable efficacy, effectiveness, and safety profile in both RCTs and real-world settings and provides scientific evidence for clinical practice.

Indexed as

Headache Disorders, SecondaryMigraine DisordersAntibodies, MonoclonalCalcitonin Gene-Related PeptideClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicHeadacheHumansProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntibodies, MonoclonalCalcitonin Gene-Related PeptideAnti-CGRP monoclonal antibodiesCalcitonin gene related peptideCGRPCluster headacheMigraineMigraine treatment

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.