Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab
A retrospective comparative study was conducted to compare the efficacy of monoclonal antibody drugs against the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway in migraine and to establish whether they can be considered equivalent therapeutic alternatives for this pathology. A total of 21 patients with chr...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-11-01
|
Series: | Medical Sciences Forum |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2673-9992/14/1/54 |
_version_ | 1797609878145990656 |
---|---|
author | Raquel Fresquet Lucia Sopena Jose Manuel Vinuesa Aritz Merchan Lucía Cazorla Maria Perez Alberto Frutos Mercedes Arenere Maria del Puerto Pardo Maria de los Ángeles Allende Tránsito Salvador |
author_facet | Raquel Fresquet Lucia Sopena Jose Manuel Vinuesa Aritz Merchan Lucía Cazorla Maria Perez Alberto Frutos Mercedes Arenere Maria del Puerto Pardo Maria de los Ángeles Allende Tránsito Salvador |
author_sort | Raquel Fresquet |
collection | DOAJ |
description | A retrospective comparative study was conducted to compare the efficacy of monoclonal antibody drugs against the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway in migraine and to establish whether they can be considered equivalent therapeutic alternatives for this pathology. A total of 21 patients with chronic migraine were treated with Fremanezumab 225 mg/30 days and 24 patients treated with Erenumab 70 mg/30 days for at least 6 months. Data were collected at baseline and at six months using the following scales: Headache Impact Test (HIT), Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS), and a numerical scale of pain intensity (0 (no pain) and 10 (unbearable pain)). Days of migraine per month were recorded. Mean HIT at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 68.6 (62–76) and 54 (36–70) and 66 (42–78) and 53 (9–72), respectively. In both cases, it decreased by more than 6 points (efficacy criteria). Mean MIDAS at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 70 (25–127) and 25 (0–135) and 73.3 (19–150) and 23 (0–68), respectively. In both cases, it decreased by more than 30% (efficacy criteria). Mean pain intensity at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 8.8 (6–10) and 6(5–8) and 8.6 (7–10) and 6 (10–0), respectively. Mean number of migraine days in a month at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab were 16.6 (10–30) and 5.3 (0–11) days and 17 (3–30) and 5.8(–15) days, respectively. In both cases, the reduction was > 50%. It can be concluded that the initial values of the scales are very similar. The initial situation of the patient is not a trigger for the use of one drug or the other. Clinically, there is no difference between the two drugs. |
first_indexed | 2024-03-11T06:06:26Z |
format | Article |
id | doaj.art-b8b8f7e493444103a9f769503980bcac |
institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
issn | 2673-9992 |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-03-11T06:06:26Z |
publishDate | 2022-11-01 |
publisher | MDPI AG |
record_format | Article |
series | Medical Sciences Forum |
spelling | doaj.art-b8b8f7e493444103a9f769503980bcac2023-11-17T12:57:35ZengMDPI AGMedical Sciences Forum2673-99922022-11-011415410.3390/ECMC2022-13227Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and FremanezumabRaquel Fresquet0Lucia Sopena1Jose Manuel Vinuesa2Aritz Merchan3Lucía Cazorla4Maria Perez5Alberto Frutos6Mercedes Arenere7Maria del Puerto Pardo8Maria de los Ángeles Allende9Tránsito Salvador10Department of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainDepartment of pharmacy, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, 50009 Zaragoza, SpainA retrospective comparative study was conducted to compare the efficacy of monoclonal antibody drugs against the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway in migraine and to establish whether they can be considered equivalent therapeutic alternatives for this pathology. A total of 21 patients with chronic migraine were treated with Fremanezumab 225 mg/30 days and 24 patients treated with Erenumab 70 mg/30 days for at least 6 months. Data were collected at baseline and at six months using the following scales: Headache Impact Test (HIT), Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS), and a numerical scale of pain intensity (0 (no pain) and 10 (unbearable pain)). Days of migraine per month were recorded. Mean HIT at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 68.6 (62–76) and 54 (36–70) and 66 (42–78) and 53 (9–72), respectively. In both cases, it decreased by more than 6 points (efficacy criteria). Mean MIDAS at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 70 (25–127) and 25 (0–135) and 73.3 (19–150) and 23 (0–68), respectively. In both cases, it decreased by more than 30% (efficacy criteria). Mean pain intensity at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 8.8 (6–10) and 6(5–8) and 8.6 (7–10) and 6 (10–0), respectively. Mean number of migraine days in a month at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab were 16.6 (10–30) and 5.3 (0–11) days and 17 (3–30) and 5.8(–15) days, respectively. In both cases, the reduction was > 50%. It can be concluded that the initial values of the scales are very similar. The initial situation of the patient is not a trigger for the use of one drug or the other. Clinically, there is no difference between the two drugs.https://www.mdpi.com/2673-9992/14/1/54drugmigraineantibody |
spellingShingle | Raquel Fresquet Lucia Sopena Jose Manuel Vinuesa Aritz Merchan Lucía Cazorla Maria Perez Alberto Frutos Mercedes Arenere Maria del Puerto Pardo Maria de los Ángeles Allende Tránsito Salvador Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab Medical Sciences Forum drug migraine antibody |
title | Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab |
title_full | Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab |
title_fullStr | Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab |
title_short | Comparative Clinical Efficacy Study between Erenumab and Fremanezumab |
title_sort | comparative clinical efficacy study between erenumab and fremanezumab |
topic | drug migraine antibody |
url | https://www.mdpi.com/2673-9992/14/1/54 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT raquelfresquet comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT luciasopena comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT josemanuelvinuesa comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT aritzmerchan comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT luciacazorla comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT mariaperez comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT albertofrutos comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT mercedesarenere comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT mariadelpuertopardo comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT mariadelosangelesallende comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab AT transitosalvador comparativeclinicalefficacystudybetweenerenumabandfremanezumab |