Trial reportEuropean journal of neurology2024
Erenumab versus topiramate: migraine-related disability, impact and health-related quality of life.
Trial report in European journal of neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Erenumab versus topiramate: migraine-related disability, impact and health-related quality of life.European journal of neurology · 2024Trial
- Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies Versus Topiramate for Migraine Prophylaxis: Six-Month, Real-World, Intention-to-Treat Retrospective Evidence from the GRASP Study Group.Neurology international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeHER-MES was the first head-to-head study of erenumab against topiramate (standard of care). This post hoc analysis of the HER-MES study evaluated the effect of erenumab versus topiramate on patient-reported outcomes at week 24.
methodsAdult patients with episodic or chronic migraine (n = 777) were randomized (1:1) to monthly subcutaneous erenumab (n = 389) or daily oral topiramate (n = 388). Migraine-related disability, as measured by the Headache Impact Test 6 (HIT-6) and Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2), was analysed in the entire study cohort and true completers.
resultsIn the erenumab group (vs. topiramate), significant improvements were reported in Headache Impact Test 6 total scores (composite populations, -10.88 vs. -7.72; true completers, -11.92 vs. -10.61) and a higher proportion of patients achieved a ≥5-point reduction from baseline with erenumab (composite populations, 72.2% vs. 53.9%; true completers, 79.64% vs. 71.43%). The adjusted mean change from baseline in the SF-36v2 score was greater with erenumab for both physical component summary (composite population, 5.48 vs. 3.63; true completers, 5.95 vs. 5.23) and mental component summary (composite populations, 1.00 vs. -1.18; true completers, 1.74 vs. -0.33). A higher proportion of patients on erenumab versus topiramate had a ≥5-point improvement in SF-36v2 for the physical component summary (composite populations, 47.7% vs. 37.4%; true completers, 52.1% vs. 48.9%) and mental component summary (composite populations, 25.3% vs. 16.8%; true completers, 27.3% vs. 17.7%).
conclusionsThis post hoc analysis demonstrated that patients treated with erenumab had significant improvements in headache impact and quality of life as measured by patient-reported outcomes versus patients treated with topiramate.
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.