Rimegepant as an acute treatment in a refractory migraine patient non-responder to two anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies and triptans: Case report and pharmacological considerations
Andrea Burgalassi, Giulia Vigani, Alberto Boccalini, F. De Cesaris, Guido Mannaioni, Alberto Chiarugi, Pierangelo Geppetti, L. Iannone
{"title":"Rimegepant as an acute treatment in a refractory migraine patient non-responder to two anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies and triptans: Case report and pharmacological considerations","authors":"Andrea Burgalassi, Giulia Vigani, Alberto Boccalini, F. De Cesaris, Guido Mannaioni, Alberto Chiarugi, Pierangelo Geppetti, L. Iannone","doi":"10.1177/25158163241235130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Small molecule receptor antagonists (gepants), or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) have recently become available for migraine prophylaxis and/or acute treatment. Considering their shared mechanisms of action, if the failure to an anti-CGRP(R) mAbs preclude the effectiveness of gepants or vice versa is still unknown. Herein, we report the first case of a patient with refractory migraine responsive to the acute use of rimegepant that previously failed two different anti-CGRP(R) mAbs and with no response to other acute treatments. Finally, we performed a literature review on the use of gepants in patients that failed other anti-CGRP and/or triptans. A 56-year-old female with a long history of chronic migraine without aura, fulfilling the EHF definition for a diagnosis of refractory migraine. Overall, the patient treated five not-consecutive migraine attacks. All of them were treated according to the predefined criteria. The mean (±SD) NRS before rimegepant assumption was 7.8 ± 0.9, all attacks cause at least severe impairment at onset, and no rescue medications were used. Pain free at 2 hours was achieved in three out of five attacks (60.0%), with no recurrence of migraine in the following 24 hours. The patient reported also a sustained benefit the day after the drug assumption. The response pain free was achieved after a mean time of 13.3 ± 4.5 minutes considering only attacks successfully treated (three out of five attacks). No adverse events were reported. In conclusion, rimegepant for acute treatment may be a viable option in patients with partial or no response to triptans that failed preventive treatments targeting the CGRP pathway, regardless to ligand or receptor. The failure of anti-CGRP(R) mAbs does not necessarily preclude the use of gepants (acute and/or preventive), but further studies are urgently needed to provide evidence on the efficacy of these treatments in managing drug-resistant migraine and to identify novel treatments for patients.","PeriodicalId":9702,"journal":{"name":"Cephalalgia Reports","volume":"92 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cephalalgia Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/25158163241235130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Small molecule receptor antagonists (gepants), or monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) against calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) have recently become available for migraine prophylaxis and/or acute treatment. Considering their shared mechanisms of action, if the failure to an anti-CGRP(R) mAbs preclude the effectiveness of gepants or vice versa is still unknown. Herein, we report the first case of a patient with refractory migraine responsive to the acute use of rimegepant that previously failed two different anti-CGRP(R) mAbs and with no response to other acute treatments. Finally, we performed a literature review on the use of gepants in patients that failed other anti-CGRP and/or triptans. A 56-year-old female with a long history of chronic migraine without aura, fulfilling the EHF definition for a diagnosis of refractory migraine. Overall, the patient treated five not-consecutive migraine attacks. All of them were treated according to the predefined criteria. The mean (±SD) NRS before rimegepant assumption was 7.8 ± 0.9, all attacks cause at least severe impairment at onset, and no rescue medications were used. Pain free at 2 hours was achieved in three out of five attacks (60.0%), with no recurrence of migraine in the following 24 hours. The patient reported also a sustained benefit the day after the drug assumption. The response pain free was achieved after a mean time of 13.3 ± 4.5 minutes considering only attacks successfully treated (three out of five attacks). No adverse events were reported. In conclusion, rimegepant for acute treatment may be a viable option in patients with partial or no response to triptans that failed preventive treatments targeting the CGRP pathway, regardless to ligand or receptor. The failure of anti-CGRP(R) mAbs does not necessarily preclude the use of gepants (acute and/or preventive), but further studies are urgently needed to provide evidence on the efficacy of these treatments in managing drug-resistant migraine and to identify novel treatments for patients.