|
|
|
|
LEADER |
03400nam a2200277Ia 4500 |
001 |
10.1186-s10194-022-01440-w |
008 |
220718s2022 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 11292369 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a Relative efficacy of lasmiditan versus rimegepant and ubrogepant as acute treatments for migraine: network meta-analysis findings
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b BioMed Central Ltd
|c 2022
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s10194-022-01440-w
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a Background: In the absence of head-to-head trials, comprehensive evidence comparing onset of efficacy of novel agents for acute treatment of migraine is lacking. This study aimed to explore the relative efficacy of lasmiditan (serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine] 1F receptor agonist) versus rimegepant and ubrogepant (calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists) for the acute oral treatment of migraine through network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods: Data included in the NMA were identified through a systematic literature search (conducted April 2018, updated May/December 2020) of phase II–IV, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic/episodic migraine with/without aura. Treatments included: lasmiditan 50, 100, 200 mg; rimegepant 75 mg; ubrogepant 25, 50, 100 mg. Pairwise treatment comparisons from Bayesian fixed-effect/random-effects NMA, adjusted by baseline risk where appropriate, were conducted. Comparisons were reported as odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. Early-onset efficacy endpoints included: pain freedom at 2 hours and pain relief at 1 and 2 hours. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) profiles were summarised. Heterogeneity and inconsistency in the network were explored; sensitivity analyses investigated robustness of findings. Results: Across 12 RCTs included in the base case, females represented >80% of included patients (mean age 37.9–45.7 years). Odds of achieving both pain freedom and pain relief at 2 hours were higher with lasmiditan 100 and 200 mg versus rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 25 and 50 mg. Results for pain relief at 1 hour were consistent with those at 2 hours, but fewer comparisons were available. There were no statistically significant differences between lasmiditan 50 mg and ubrogepant or rimegepant for any outcome. Sensitivity analyses were in the same direction as base case analyses. Most commonly reported ADRs (incidence ≥2%) were: dizziness, fatigue, paraesthesia, sedation, nausea/vomiting and muscle weakness with lasmiditan; nausea with rimegepant; and nausea, somnolence and dry mouth with ubrogepant. Conclusions: The efficacy findings of this indirect comparison indicate that lasmiditan 100 mg or 200 mg might be an appropriate acute treatment option for patients with migraine seeking a fast onset of action. Differently from rimegepant and ubrogepant, lasmiditan use is associated with mainly neurological events, which are mostly mild or moderate in severity and self-limiting. 350/350 words © 2022, The Author(s).
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Acute treatments
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Efficacy
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Gepants
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Lasmiditan
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Migraine
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Network meta-analysis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Rimegepant
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Ubrogepant
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Belger, M.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Johansson, E.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Polavieja, P.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Venkata, S.K.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
|
|a Wilhelm, S.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t Journal of Headache and Pain
|