No abstract

No abstract

Objective: To prospectively assess the efficacy and safety of fremanezumab for migraine prophylaxis in patients with failure of at least three previous preventive treatments.Changes in disability as quality-of-life outcomes after fremanezumab treatment were also examined.Methods: Two hundred and four patients with either high-frequency EM (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM), who attained at least three consecutive monthly sessions with fremanezumab 225 mg and otherwise met the inclusion criteria, were included in the study.The crude response (at least 50% reduction in monthly headache days [MHD]) rates to fremanezumab were assessed. Scores in the following efficacy outcomes were then compared from baseline to the last efficacy evaluation follow-up: (i) MHD, (ii) monthly days with moderate/severe peak headache intensity, and (iii) monthly days with intake of abortive medication. The disability was evaluated with the Migraine Disability Assessment; the quality of life (QOL) status was assessed with the Headache Impact-6 Test, and the EQ-5D questionnaire. Results:In the majority of HFEM cases (n = 81/97; 83.5%) and CM patients (n = 67/107; 62.6%), fremanezumab proved effective in reducing the MHDs by at least 50% and was associated with clinically meaningful improvement in all other efficacy variables. The migraine-related disability experienced by our patients decreased and their QOL increased. We recorded just 36 cases reporting mild adverse events, including pain, rash or pruritus (n = 26), flu-like symptoms (n = 8), and hair loss (n = 2). Conclusion:With our prospective results, we provide further real-world data to support the favorable benefit/risk profile of fremanezumab in the prophylaxis of both HFEM and CM.

We report the outcome of a pilot, open‐label study that tested the potential of lacosamide (200 mg/bi.d) as an effective and safe symptomatic treatment against acute painful oxaliplatin‐induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OXAIPN). Lacosamide was introduced in 18 colorectal cancer patients with evidence of clinically significant acute, painful OXAIPN after infusion of the third course (T1) of oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy (FOLFOX4) and was maintained until completion of all 12 courses (T4). The OXA‐Neuropathy Questionnaire (OXA‐NQ) was used to record the severity of acute OXAIPN; the PI‐NRS estimated the severity of neuropathic pain, while the chronic OXAIPN was graded with TNSc. The EuroQOL (EQ‐5D) instrument was also applied. The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale measured the lacosamide‐attributed perception of change. LCM‐responders were considered those with ≥50% reduction in PI‐NRS and OXA‐NQ scores at T4, compared to T1. Patients experienced on T1 a median number of acute OXAIPN symptoms of 4 and had a median neuropathic pain severity score of 6, which was strongly related to lower quality of life, according to EQ‐VAS (P < .001). At T4, 12 patients (66.7%) were classified as responders. A significant clinical improvement was documented in the severity of acute OXAIPN and neuropathic pain in relation to lacosamide (P < .001) at T4 compared to T1, which was associated with improved EQ‐VAS scores (P < .001). Twelve patients scored PGIC ≥5 (lacosamide‐attributed) at T4. There were no incidences of early drop‐outs for safety reasons. Lacosamide appears to be an effective and well‐tolerated symptomatic treatment against acute, painful OXAIPN.

We investigated whether rechallenge with oxaliplatin (OXA) can worsen the preexisting oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OXAIPN) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Patients previously treated with OXA, having clinically significant grade 1 or 2 OXAIPN were assessed, after receiving rechallenge with OXA, using the clinical version of the Total Neuropathy Score (TNSc). Peripheral neuropathy was assessed at the end of first OXA exposure and at completion of OXA rechallenge. The first line OXA-based chemotherapy was completed at least 9 months earlier (OXA-free interval). We studied 25 mCRC patients, 14 males and 11 females, with a median age of 63 (35-77) years. After their first exposure to OXA-based chemotherapy, 9 (36%) patients developed grade 1 OXAIPN and 16 patients grade 2 (64%) neurotoxicity. OXA reintroduction with a median of 10 (8-14) cycles led to

Objective: To define, in a real-world population of patients with high-frequency episodic (HFEM) or chronic migraine (CM), the predictive role of socio-demographic or phenotypic profiling of responders to fremanezumab. Patients and methods: Two-hundred and four adult fremanezumab-treated patients with either HFEM or CM, who failed to at least three preventive treatments, provided data at baseline on several individual socio-demographic and phenotypic variables. These variables were analyzed for their ability to independently predict the response (50–74% response rates) or super-response (≥ 75% response rates) to fremanezumab. Patients were followed from 3–18 months of fremanezumab exposure. Results: The main finding to emerge from univariate analyses was that three baseline socio-demographic/clinical variables, i.e., age group 41–70 years (p = 0.02); female gender (p = 0.03); patients with HFEM (p = 0.001), and three clinical phenotypic variables, i.e., strict unilateral pain (p = 0.05); pain in the ophthalmic trigeminal branch (p = 0.04); and the “imploding” quality of pain (p = 0.05), were significantly related to fremanezumab response. However, in multivariate analysis, only HFEM (p = 0.02), the presence of strict unilateral (p = 0.03), and pain location in the ophthalmic trigeminal branch (p = 0.036) were independently associated with good fremanezumab response. Allodynia (p = 0.04) was the only clinical predictive variable of super-responsiveness to fremanezumab. Conclusions: A precise phenotypic profiling with identification of pain characteristics consistent with peripheral and/or central sensitization might reliably predict the responsiveness to fremanezumab in migraine prophylaxis.

Objective: this post hoc analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of fremanezumab in difficult-to-treat chronic migraine (CM) patients with and without psychiatric comorbidities (PCs), mainly anxiety and/or depression. Methods: We assessed data from CM patients with and without PCs who failed at least 3 preventives and eventually received at least 3 consecutive monthly doses of fremanezumab 225 mg. Outcomes included the crude response (≥50% reduction in monthly headache days (MHDs)) rates to fremanezumab from the baseline to the last clinical follow-up. The changes in MHDs; MHDs of moderate/greater severity; monthly days with intake of abortive medication; and the proportion of patients’ changing status from with PCs to decreased/without PCs were also compared. Disability and quality of life (QOL) outcomes were also assessed. Results: Of 107 patients enrolled, 65 (60.7%) had baseline PCs. The percentage of patients with (n = 38/65; 58.5%) and without (n = 28/42; 66.6%) PCs that achieved a ≥50% reduction in MHDs with fremanezumab was comparable (p = 0.41), whereas MHDs were significantly reduced (difference vs. baseline) in both patients with PCs (mean −8.9 (standard error: 6.8); p < 0.001) and without PCs (−9.8 (7.5); p < 0.001). Both groups experienced significant improvements in all other efficacy, disability, and QOL outcomes at comparable rates, including in MHD reduction. A significant proportion of fremanezumab-treated patients with baseline PCs de-escalated in corresponding severities or even reverted to no PCs (28/65; 43.1%) post-fremanezumab. Conclusions: fremanezumab appears to be effective as a preventive treatment in difficult-to-treat CM patients with and without PCs while also being beneficial in reducing the severity of comorbid anxiety and/or depression.

No abstract