COMPARATIVE CLINICAL EFFICACY STUDY BETWEEN ERENUMAB AND FREMANEZUMAB

Compare the efficacy of monoclonal antibody drugs against the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway in migraine and to establish whether they can be considered equivalent therapeutic alternatives in this pathology

Retrospective observational study. 21 patients with chronic migraine on treatment with Fremanezumab 225mg/30 days and 24 patients on treatment with Erenumab 70mg/30 days for at least 6 months. Data were collected at baseline and six months on the following. Scales: Headache Impact Test (HIT), Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS), pain intensity numerical scale: 0 (no pain) and 10 (unbearable pain). Days of migraine per month.

Results:

Mean HIT at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 68.6 (62-76);54(36-70) and 66 (42-78); 53 (9-72) respectively. In both it decreased by more than 6 points (efficacy criteria).

Mean MIDAS at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 70 (25-127); 25 (0-135) and 73.3 (19-150); 23 (0-68) respectively. In both cases it decreased more than 30% (efficacy criteria).

Mean pain intensity at baseline, and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab was 8.8 (6-10); 6(5-8) and 8.6 (7-10); 6 (10-0) respectively.

Migraine days at the mean month at baseline and 6 months for Fremanezumab and Erenumab were16.6 (10-30); 5.3 (0-11) days and 17 (3-30); 5.8(2-15) days. In both cases reduction > 50%.

Conclusion:

The initial values of the scales are very similar. The initial situation of the patient is not a trigger for the use of one or the other.

Clinically there is no difference between the two drugs.