ArticleHeadache2026
Effectiveness and tolerability of galcanezumab for migraine prevention in patients ≥65 years: A real-life multicenter study.
Article in Headache, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with migraine aged ≥65 years old are underrepresented in clinical trials. This study compares effectiveness, excellent response, and tolerability of galcanezumab in patients ≥65 years and those younger than 65 years, specifically assessing age as a predictor of response.
methodsThis real-life, multicenter cohort study included patients with chronic or high-frequency episodic migraine who did not respond to more than or equal to three preventive drugs, treated with galcanezumab, and followed for 12 months from 12 Spanish hospitals, between November 2019 and January 2022. Effectiveness was defined as ≥50% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD), and excellent response as ≥75% reduction at 6 months. Tolerability was based on the percentage of patients discontinuing due to adverse events.
resultsWe included 1055 patients (934 patients <65 years, 121 patients ≥65 years). Older patients had higher baseline MHD [25 (interquartile range [IQR] 15-30) vs. 20 (14-30), p = 0.045], but lower HIT-6 scores [67 (IQR 63-72) vs. 69 (66-73), p < 0.001]. Effectiveness was similar across age groups at 3 (57.0% vs. 48.8%, p = 0.090), 6 (57.0% vs. 51.8%, p = 0.281), and 12 months (52.1% vs. 51.4%, p = 0.889). However, excellent response was more frequent in the ≥65 years group at 3 months (32.2% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.028) and 6 months (33.9% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.012), with a non-significant difference at 12 months (33.1% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.071). Tolerability was comparable within age groups (5.8% discontinuation due to adverse effects in patients ≥65 years vs. 6.7% in patients <65 years; p = 0.837). Age was independently associated with effectiveness (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.004-1.03) and excellent response (aOR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04). A statistically significant association was found in the logistic regression model for excellent response when age was dichotomized at 65 years, with increasing age linked to a higher likelihood of an excellent treatment response (aOR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.13-2.82, p = 0.012).
conclusionsGalcanezumab is as effective and well-tolerated in patients aged ≥65 years as in younger patients but older patients showed a higher rate of excellent response. Age is associated with a better response to galcanezumab.
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.