ReviewInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2025
Efficacy and Safety of Switching between Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies: A Detailed Monthly and Long-term Follow-up Study and Literature Review.
Review in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan: A Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Effect of Galcanezumab on PHQ-9 and GAD-7 in Patients with Migraine: A Real-world Study in Japan.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Switching from one anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody (CGRP mAb) to another can be beneficial for treating patients with migraine who do not respond well to the first CGRP mAb. However, detailed and long-term follow-up reports of both efficacy and safety remain insufficient. We conducted a case-series analysis of patients with migraine who switched from galcanezumab to erenumab, both belonging to the class of CGRP mAbs. Methods We conducted a single-center retrospective real-world study. Patients with migraine who first received galcanezumab for ≥3 months and then switched to erenumab at Keio University Hospital were enrolled to investigate changes in monthly migraine days (MMD), response rate, and adverse effects (e.g., injection-site reactions). Additionally, we performed a narrative review of the literature on switching CGRP mAbs. Results Among the nine patients enrolled, the 50% response rate for MMD was 33% at 3 months after switching. Two patients (22%) initially responded at the 3-month assessment, but later reverted to baseline MMD levels. Switching from galcanezumab to erenumab increased the frequency of constipation, which was typically managed using laxatives. Participants who experienced injection-site reactions tended to exhibit similar reactions regardless of the type of CGRP mAb used. Five patients (56%) demonstrated an improvement in satisfaction after erenumab initiation at least once. A literature review revealed that the characteristics of the cohorts varied among studies. Conclusion Switching from galcanezumab to erenumab was effective in some patients, while it was associated with some tolerable side effects, and it improved patient satisfaction in approximately half of the patients, despite interindividual diversity in responses and fluctuating responses after switching, which warrants further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.