Richard B. Lipton, MD
Neurology
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Bronx, New York
Ella Engstrom, BS
Neurology
OPEN Health
Bethesda, Maryland
Daniel Serrano, PhD
Neurology
OPEN Health
Bethesda, Maryland
Linda Davis, MD
Neurology
Kolvita Family Medical Group
Mission Viejo, California
Katherine Sommer, PhD
Neurology
AbbVie
Irvine, California
Janette Contreras-De Lama, PhD
Neurology
AbbVie
Irvine, California
Susan Hutchinson, MD
Neurology
Orange County Migraine and Headache Center
Irvine, California
Using data collected via the Migraine Buddy application, this prospective, observational study evaluated real-world acute treatment effectiveness in people taking preventive treatment and ubrogepant 50 mg or 100 mg for acute treatment of migraine. Eligible participants were adults who reported ≥3 migraine attacks in the last 30 days, had treated ≥3 prior attacks with ubrogepant, and were concurrently taking an anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody (mAb), onabotulinumtoxinA, or both as migraine preventive treatment. Self-reported assessments were collected daily for approximately 30 days. Daily assessments included meaningful pain relief (MPR), defined as a reduction of headache pain to a meaningful degree or remaining pain free if no pain was reported at ubrogepant dosing, and return to normal function (RNF) after dosing. This analysis reports results from the first ubrogepant-treated attack and first 10 ubrogepant-treated attacks in the ubrogepant plus onabotulinumtoxinA group. The repeated attack endpoints were modeled via logistic generalized estimating equations to account for the correlated nature of the repeated attacks.
Results:
A total of 122 participants reported using ubrogepant as acute treatment in combination with onabotulinumtoxinA (without an anti-CGRP mAb) as migraine preventive treatment. A median of 9 attacks (IQR, 6–12) per respondent were recorded. The mean age of participants was 40.4 years, and the majority of participants were female (95.9%) and White (92.2%); 86.9% of respondents had severe or very severe disability as measured by the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), 84.2% were triptan insufficient responders, 55.7% used ubrogepant 100 mg, and most participants (82.5%) took a single dose of ubrogepant to treat an attack. For the first ubrogepant-treated attack at 2 and 4 hours post-dose, MPR was achieved in 53.3% and 76.2% of participants, respectively. RNF was achieved by 25.4% and 45.9% of ubrogepant-treated participants at 2 and 4 hours post-dose, respectively. For the first 10 ubrogepant-treated attacks, MPR was achieved in 44.8% and 72.9% of attacks at 2 and 4 hours post-dose, respectively. RNF was achieved by 30.1% and 52.1% at 2 and 4 hours post-dose, respectively, for the first 10 ubrogepant-treated attacks.
Conclusion:
These findings support the real-world effectiveness of ubrogepant as an acute treatment in combination with onabotulinumtoxinA, providing evidence for a common treatment pattern. These results also demonstrate the feasibility of using a novel, app-based design to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of migraine treatment. Evaluating the real-world effectiveness of ubrogepant in combination with other preventive treatments is an area of future research consideration.
References: