Citations

Migraine is one of the most prevalent and disabling neurological diseases, significantly affecting quality of life and productivity, as well as contributing to substantial societal costs. Recent innovations, including calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway inhibitors and onabotulinumtoxinA, have transformed migraine prevention by offering high efficacy and excellent tolerability, thus improving adherence. Clinical trials and real-world studies show that significant reductions in migraine frequency and, in some cases, complete migraine freedom is achievable. In this Position Statement, we advocate for raising the standards of migraine prevention by setting ambitious treatment goals aimed at optimal outcomes, such as migraine freedom or very low number of days with migraine or moderate/severe headache. We emphasize the importance of addressing residual migraine burden, highlighting that achieving a ≥50% reduction in monthly migraine days, although often considered a successful response, may not fully restore quality of life. Relying solely on percentage-based improvements can obscure the persisting impact of residual burden. This Position Statement does not want to change the standards for clinical trials but aims primarily at real-world clinical practice and proposes a shift from percentage-based measures of success to absolute goals while on treatment. We outline a framework that categorizes outcomes into four tiers: migraine freedom (no days with migraine or moderate-to-severe headache), optimal control (less than four days with migraine or moderate-to-severe headache), modest control (four to six days with migraine or moderate-to-severe headache) and insufficient control (more than days with migraine or moderate-to-severe headache). Focusing on residual burden while on treatment aims to further improve patient quality of life and drive innovation in preventive therapies and non-pharmacological approaches. By advocating for higher standards, this Position Statement, is not aimed primarily to drive reimbursement policies for migraine preventive treatments, but seeks to inspire clinicians, researchers and policymakers to prioritize ambitious goals in migraine prevention, ultimately enhancing patient outcomes and reducing the broader societal and economic impact of this debilitating condition.

Abstract Introduction We describe the safety of sotorasib monotherapy in patients with KRAS G12C-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and discuss practical recommendations for managing key risks. Methods Incidence rates of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were pooled from 4 clinical trials: CodeBreaK 100 (NCT03600883), CodeBreaK 101 (NCT04185883), CodeBreaK 105 (NCT04380753), and CodeBreaK 200 (NCT04303780) and graded according to CTCAE v5.0. Adverse events were deemed sotorasib-related per investigator causality assessment. Results In the pooled population (n = 549), TRAEs were reported in 388 (70.7%) patients (grade 1: 124 [22.6%]; grade 2: 117 [21.3%]; grade ≥ 3: 147 [26.8%]). Gastrointestinal and hepatic TRAEs, including diarrhea (171 [31.1%]), nausea (80 [14.6%]), elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT; 68 [12.4%]), and elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST; 67 [12.2%]) were the most common (≥10%). Dose interruption and dose reduction of sotorasib resulted in the resolution of >90% of diarrhea events; median time to resolution were 18.0 days and 22.0 days, respectively. Similar trends were observed for elevated ALT and AST events. Patients who stopped immunotherapy <3 months before initiating sotorasib had a higher incidence of treatment-related hepatotoxicity (80/240 [33.3%]) than those who stopped immunotherapy ≥3 months before initiating sotorasib (26/188 [13.8%]). Treatment-related pneumonitis/interstitial lung disease (ILD) and corrected QT (QTc) prolongation were observed in 9 (1.6%) and 4 (0.7%) patients, respectively. Two (0.4%) patients died with TRAEs, 1 with ILD whose ultimate cause of death was disease progression, and the other with an unknown cause. Conclusions Sotorasib has a well-characterized safety profile in patients with KRAS G12C-mutated advanced NSCLC, and key risks are manageable with dose modification.

Background In an effort to improve migraine management around the world, the International Headache Society (IHS) has here developed a list of practical recommendations for the acute pharmacological treatment of migraine. The recommendations are categorized into optimal and essential, in order to provide treatment options for all possible settings, including those with limited access to migraine medications. Methods An IHS steering committee developed a list of clinical questions based on practical issues in the management of migraine. A selected group of international senior and junior headache experts developed the recommendations, following expert consensus and the review of available national and international headache guidelines and guidance documents. Following the initial search, a bibliography of twenty-one national and international guidelines was created and reviewed by the working group. Results A total of seventeen questions addressing different aspects of acute migraine treatment have been outlined. For each of them we provide an optimal recommendation, to be used whenever possible, and an essential recommendation to be used when the optimal level cannot be attained. Conclusion Adoption of these international recommendations will improve the quality of acute migraine treatment around the world, even where pharmacological options remain limited.

Importance Adding fulvestrant to anastrozole (A+F) improved survival in postmenopausal women with advanced estrogen receptor (ER)–positive/ERBB2 (formerly HER2)–negative breast cancer. However, the combination has not been tested in early-stage disease. Objective To determine whether neoadjuvant fulvestrant or A+F increases the rate of pathologic complete response or ypT1-2N0/N1mic/Ki67 2.7% or less residual disease (referred to as endocrine-sensitive disease) over anastrozole alone. Design, Setting, and Participants A phase 3 randomized clinical trial assessing differences in clinical and correlative outcomes between each of the fulvestrant-containing arms and the anastrozole arm. Postmenopausal women with clinical stage II to III, ER-rich (Allred score 6-8 or >66%)/ERBB2-negative breast cancer were included. All analyses were based on data frozen on March 2, 2023. Interventions Patients received anastrozole, fulvestrant, or a combination for 6 months preoperatively. Tumor Ki67 was assessed at week 4 and optionally at week 12, and if greater than 10% at either time point, the patient switched to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or immediate surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the endocrine-sensitive disease rate (ESDR). A secondary outcome was the percentage change in Ki67 after 4 weeks of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) (week 4 Ki67 suppression). Results Between February 2014 and November 2018, 1362 female patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [8.2] years) were enrolled. Among the 1298 evaluable patients, ESDRs were 18.7% (95% CI, 15.1%-22.7%), 22.8% (95% CI, 18.9%-27.1%), and 20.5% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.6%) with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Compared to anastrozole, neither fulvestrant-containing regimen significantly improved ESDR or week 4 Ki67 suppression. The rate of week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10% was 25.1%, 24.2%, and 15.7% with anastrozole, fulvestrant, and A+F, respectively. Pathologic complete response/residual cancer burden class I occurred in 8 of 167 patients and 17 of 167 patients, respectively (15.0%; 95% CI, 9.9%-21.3%), after switching to neoadjuvant chemotherapy due to week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. PAM50 subtyping derived from RNA sequencing of baseline biopsies available for 753 patients (58%) identified 394 luminal A, 304 luminal B, and 55 nonluminal tumors. A+F led to a greater week 4 Ki67 suppression than anastrozole alone in luminal B tumors (median [IQR], −90.4% [−95.2 to −81.9%] vs −76.7% [−89.0 to −55.6%]; P < .001), but not luminal A tumors. Thirty-six nonluminal tumors (65.5%) had a week 4 or week 12 Ki67 greater than 10%. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, neither fulvestrant nor A+F significantly improved the 6-month ESDR over anastrozole in ER-rich/ERBB2-negative breast cancer. Aromatase inhibition remains the standard-of-care NET. Differential NET response by PAM50 subtype in exploratory analyses warrants further investigation. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01953588