ArticleBMC neurology2026
Real-world short-term effectiveness of erenumab after single versus multiple prior preventive treatment failures.
Article in BMC neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundErenumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, has been approved in Germany since 2018 for migraine prophylaxis. Initially, reimbursement regulations restricted its use to drug-resistant patients who had failed or were unsuitable for conventional preventive treatments. Over time, initiation after failure of only one prior preventive treatment became possible. As earlier initiation of effective preventive therapy may improve clinical outcomes, we compared the effectiveness of erenumab in patients with single versus multiple prior preventive treatment failures.
methodsIn this retrospective single-center study, data from 196 patients with episodic or chronic migraine who received erenumab for at least three months were analysed. Patients were categorised into a multiple prior preventive therapy (MPT) group (n = 140), comprising individuals with two to six previous preventive treatment failures, and single preventive therapy (SPT) group (n = 56), including patients who had received no more than one prior treatment failure before initiating erenumab. To evaluate the association between prior treatment exposure and treatment response, a multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed with achievement of a ≥ 50% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD) as the primary outcome. Subgroup analyses, LASSO-based variable selection, and propensity score weighting were conducted as sensitivity analyses.
resultsA clinically meaningful treatment response (50% MHD response) was achieved by 35.7% (n = 20/56) of patients in the SPT group and 30.7% (n = 43/140) in the MPT group. No significant difference in treatment effectiveness was observed between groups. In the adjusted logistic regression model, SPT was not significantly associated with treatment response (SPT vs. MPT: adjusted OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.53-3.69; p = 0.5).
conclusionShort-term effectiveness of erenumab was comparable in patients with no more than one versus multiple prior preventive treatment failures, suggesting that treatment response is not solely dependent on the number of previous preventive treatment failures. These findings should be interpreted in light of the retrospective single-center design and the limited sample size, which resulted in relatively wide confidence intervals.
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.