Erenumab safety and efficacy in migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials [post]

2018 unpublished
Erenumab is a new medicine approved lately in the US for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of erenumab in patients with migraine. Methods: The electronic database composed of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library was independently retrieved by two reviewers. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared between placebo and erenumab were included in this analysis. mean differences (MDs) and Pooled risk
more » ... ) and Pooled risk ratios (RRs) as well as their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous and dichotomous data, respectively. Results: Total five RCTs representing 2928 patients were included. Pooled analysis showed significant reductions of the 50% reduction(RR 1.55; 95%CI,1.35 to 1.77; P < 0.00001; I²=49%). In addition, the mean monthly migraine days (MMMDs) from baseline in the erenumab group compared with placebo (MD -1.32, 95%CI, -1.73 to -0.91; P < 0.00001; I²=100%) and migraine-specific medication days (MSMDs) from baseline (MD -1.41; 95%CI, -1.80 to -1.02; P 0.00001; I²=100%) were significantly increased for the erenumab group compared with placebo. Furthermore, there was significant reduction of MSMDs from baseline in 140mg erenumab group compared to 70mg (MD=0.55; 95%CI:0.54 to 0.66; Z =10.95; P<0.00001; I²=90% ). Finally, there were no significant differences between erenumab group and placebo of any adverse events and serious adverse events. Conclusion: Among patients with migraine, both 70mg and 140mg erenumab are associated with reduction of MMMDs, MSMDs from baseline and increased rate of 50% reduction without increased risk of any adverse events and serious adverse events. Availability of data and materials All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [and its Additional files]. Authors' contributions CZ, JG, HX, WL, and RT all made substantial contributions to the study conception and design; analysis and interpretation of data; and drafting and/or critically reviewing the manuscript. CZ, JG and HX was involved in acquisition of data. CZ, 13 JG, HX, WL, and RT all reviewed and approved the final draft of the manuscript. CZ, JG, HX, WL, and RT all agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable. Consent for publication Not applicable.
doi:10.21203/rs.2.47/v1 fatcat:tooxrmbjh5a4jh2qdqrdujvx4u