Citations

Mayo Clinic

Clear

25 citation(s) found for "Cady, Roger".

Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of eptinezumab in patients with a dual diagnosis of chronic migraine and medication‐overuse headache: Subgroup analysis of PROMISE‐2
Marmura, Michael J. , Tepper, Stewart J. , Cowan, Robert P. , Starling, Amaal J. , Diamond, Merle L., Hirman, Joe, Mehta, Lahar, Brevig, Thomas, Sperling, Bjørn, Cady, Roger , Marmura, Michael J , Cowan, Robert P , Diener, Hans‐Christoph

Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain | December 14, 2020 | Volume: 61 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 125-136

10.1111/head.14036 | PMID 33314079 Get It

Abstract Objective To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg compared with placebo in patients with the dual diagnosis of chronic migraine (CM) and medication‐overuse headache (MOH). Background Eptinezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene‐related peptide, may be effective for treating patients with a dual diagnosis of CM and MOH. Methods PROMISE‐2 (NCT02974153) was a double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled, phase 3 study that comprised a screening visit, a 28‐day pretreatment period, and a 32‐week study duration. Patients in this exploratory analysis of a prespecified subgroup had confirmed diagnoses of both CM and MOH at screening. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous eptinezumab 100, 300 mg, or placebo every 12 weeks. Efficacy outcomes included mean changes from baseline in monthly migraine days (MMDs) during weeks 1–12, migraine responder rates at week 12, and percentages of patients below International Classification of Headache Disorders thresholds for CM and MOH over weeks 1–24. Results There were 431 patients who were diagnosed with CM and MOH as specified in the protocol and received eptinezumab 100 mg ( n = 139), 300 mg ( n = 147), or placebo ( n = 145). During the baseline period, these patients experienced an average of 16.7 migraine days across treatment arms. Over weeks 1–12, eptinezumab‐treated patients experienced greater reductions from baseline in MMDs than placebo patients (100 mg, change from baseline = −8.4, difference from placebo [95% confidence interval (CI)] = −3.0 [−4.56, −1.52], p < 0.0001 vs. placebo; 300 mg, change from baseline = −8.6, difference from placebo [95% CI] = −3.2 [−4.66, −1.78], p < 0.0001 vs. placebo; placebo, −5.4). Compared with placebo, more eptinezumab‐treated patients were ≥50% migraine responders (100 mg, 84/139 [60.4%]; 300 mg, 91/147 [61.9%]; placebo, 50/145 [34.5%]) or ≥75% responders (100 mg, 38/139 [27.3%]; 300 mg, 44/147 [29.9%]; placebo, 21/145 [14.5%]) over weeks 1–12. Therapeutic benefits with eptinezumab were observed from day 1 after dosing, and improvements were sustained with an additional dose. For the full 24‐week treatment period, 71/139 (51.1%), 80/147 (54.4%), and 47/145 (32.4%) of 100, 300 mg, and placebo‐treated patients, respectively, were below CM thresholds, and of the patients who provided sufficient acute medication data, 47/93 (50.5%), 53/107 (49.5%), and 26/96 (27.1%), respectively, were below medication‐overuse thresholds. Conclusions In patients diagnosed with both CM and MOH, eptinezumab treatment resulted in greater reductions in MMDs, higher responder rates, and fewer patients meeting CM and MOH criteria, thus demonstrating the efficacy and clinical utility of eptinezumab in this patient population.
Eptinezumab Demonstrated Efficacy in Sustained Prevention of Episodic and Chronic Migraine Beginning on Day 1 After Dosing
Gottschalk, Christopher , Cady, Roger , Hirman, Joe, Smith, Jeff , Snapinn, Steve, Dodick, David W.

Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain | November 9, 2020 | Volume: 60 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 2220-2231

10.1111/head.14007 | PMID 33165938 Get It

Objective To determine the onset of preventive efficacy with eptinezumab in patients with migraine. Background Eptinezumab is a monoclonal antibody inhibiting calcitonin gene‐related peptide approved as an intravenously administered treatment for the prevention of migraine. Methods Patients who received eptinezumab 100 mg, eptinezumab 300 mg, or placebo in PROMISE7‐1 (episodic migraine; 100 mg, n = 221; 300 mg, n = 222; placebo, n = 222) or PROMISE7‐2 (chronic migraine; 100 mg, n = 356; 300 mg, n = 350; placebo, n = 366) were included. Testing of the percentage of patients with a migraine on day 1 after dosing was prespecified and alpha‐controlled. In further exploration of this prespecified endpoint, a post hoc closed testing procedure, which controlled the false‐positive (type 1) error rate, provided a statistically rigorous evaluation of migraine prevention onset. The procedure involved up to 84 tests of significance, all of which were performed in sequence until the first nonsignificant result. Results For both studies, all tests for significance for eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg, from days 1‐84 through day 1 alone, achieved nominal significance ( P < .05), indicating that eptinezumab was fully effective beginning on day 1. Over each interval, the treatment effect was comparable to the effect over weeks 1‐12. Mean changes from baseline in monthly migraine days for the primary endpoint period ranged from −3.9 to −4.9, −4.1 to −4.9, and −2.2 to −3.2 for eptinezumab 100, 300 mg, and placebo, respectively, in PROMISE7‐1 and from −7.2 to −8.0, −7.9 to −8.2, and −4.3 to −5.6, respectively, in PROMISE7‐2. The difference from placebo (95% confidence interval) in day 1 treatment effect was −2.2 (−4.1, −0.3) and −2.5 (−4.4, −0.6) days/month for eptinezumab 100 and 300 mg, respectively, in PROMISE7‐1, and was −3.8 (−5.6, −2.0) and −4.0 (−5.8, −2.1) days/month for 100 and 300 mg, respectively, in PROMISE7‐2. Conclusions The migraine preventive effect of eptinezumab is rapid and sustained in patients with episodic or chronic migraine, with onset of optimal preventive efficacy observed on the day following the initial dose.
Eptinezumab for prevention of chronic migraine: A randomized phase 2b clinical trial
Silberstein, Stephen D., Goadsby, Peter J. , Biondi, David M., Hirman, Joe, Cady, Roger , Smith, Jeff , Goadsby, Peter J , Dodick, David W. , Lipton, Richard B.

Cephalalgia | June 25, 2019 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1075-1085

10.1177/0333102419858355 | PMID 31234642 Get It

Background Calcitonin gene-related peptide plays an important role in migraine pathophysiology. We evaluated eptinezumab, an intravenous (IV) anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody, for the prevention of chronic migraine. Objective To determine the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of four dose levels of eptinezumab and to inform the phase 3 development program. Methods This was a phase 2b, parallel-group, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging clinical trial. Men and women (N = 616) aged 18–55 years were included if they had a diagnosis of chronic migraine, with onset at age ≤35 years and history of chronic migraine ≥1 year. During the 28-day screening period, patients must have had ≥15 headache days, including ≥8 migraine days, with ≥5 migraine attacks as recorded in the electronic diary. Patients were assigned in a 1:1:1:1:1 ratio to eptinezumab 300, 100, 30, 10 mg or placebo, administered as a single IV infusion. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients with a ≥75% decrease in monthly migraine days over weeks 1–12 compared with the 28-day screening period. Results The ≥75% migraine responder rates over weeks 1–12 for eptinezumab 300, 100, 30, and 10 mg were 33.3%, 31.4%, 28.2%, and 26.8%, respectively, versus 20.7% for placebo ( p = 0.033, 0.072, 0.201, 0.294 vs. placebo). Secondary efficacy endpoints (e.g. ≥50% responder rate, change from baseline in frequency of migraine/headache days, and percentage of severe migraines) had results favoring the three higher eptinezumab doses versus placebo. Eptinezumab was well tolerated and adverse event rates were similar to placebo. Conclusions The results of this trial demonstrate that eptinezumab appears effective and well-tolerated for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine and justifies the conduct of pivotal phase 3 trials for migraine prevention. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02275117.
Topiramate intervention to prevent transformation of episodic migraine: The topiramate INTREPID study
Silberstein, Stephen D., Cady, Roger , Freitag, Fred, Mathew, Ninan T., Biondi, David M., Ascher, Steven, Olson, William H., Hulihan, Joseph, Lipton, Richard B. , Dodick, David W.

Cephalalgia | May 17, 2010 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 18-30

10.1177/0333102410372427 | PMID 20974598 Get It

Objective: The study sought to evaluate whether topiramate prevents development of chronic daily headache (CDH, ≥15 headache days per month) in adult subjects with high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM, 9–14 migraine headache days/month). A secondary objective was to assess the efficacy of topiramate as preventive migraine treatment in this population. Methods: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing topiramate 100 mg/day and placebo for 26 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was new-onset CDH at month 6. Secondary efficacy measures included migraine and headache days. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. Results: A total of 159 topiramate subjects and 171 placebo subjects were efficacy-evaluable. At month 6, 1.4% of topiramate subjects versus 2.3% of placebo subjects had CDH ( p = .589). Compared with placebo, topiramate treatment was associated with statistically significant reductions in mean number of migraine days (6.6 vs. 5.3/28 days; p = .001) and headache days (6.6 vs 5.3/28 days; p = .001). Most commonly reported AEs in the topiramate versus placebo group included paresthesia (32.4% vs. 7.0%), fatigue (14.8% vs. 8.6%), dizziness (11.4% vs. 7.6%) and nausea (10.8% vs. 9.2%). Conclusion: Topiramate 100 mg/day did not prevent the development of CDH at six months in subjects with HFEM. Topiramate was effective in reducing headache days and migraine headache days and generally well tolerated.
An Otolaryngology, Neurology, Allergy, and Primary Care Consensus on Diagnosis and Treatment of Sinus Headache
Levine, Howard L., Setzen, Michael, Cady, Roger , Schreiber, Curtis P., Eross, Eric J., Blumenthal, Harvey J., Lumry, William R. , Berman, Gary , Durham, Paul L. , Dodick, David W.

Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery | February 22, 2006 | Volume: 134 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 516-523

10.1016/j.otohns.2005.11.024 | PMID 16500456 Get It

While “sinus” headache is a widely accepted clinical diagnosis, many medical specialists consider it to be an uncommon cause of recurrent headaches. Unnecessary diagnostic studies, surgical interventions, and medical treatments are often the result of the inappropriate diagnosis of sinus headache. Both the International Headache Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery have attempted to characterize conditions leading to headaches of rhinogenic origin. However, they have done so from different perspectives and in isolation from the other specialty groups. An interdisciplinary ad hoc committee recently convened to discuss the role of sinus disease and the nose in the etiology of headache and to review recent epidemiologic studies suggesting that sinus headache (headache of rhinogenic origin) and migraine are frequently confused with one another. Clinical trial data are presented which clearly indicate that the majority of sinus headaches can actually be classified as migraines. This committee reviewed scientific evidence available from multiple disciplines and concludes that considerable research and clinical study are needed to further understand and explain the role of nasal pathology and autonomic activation in migraine and headaches of rhinogenic origin. However, there was a consensus from this group that greater diagnostic and therapeutic attention needs to be given to patients complaining of sinus headache that may indeed be due to the nose.