ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2026
Real-world effectiveness and safety of CGRP monoclonal antibodies in elderly migraine patients: a Korean multicenter study.
Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have demonstrated significant efficacy in general migraine populations, real-world data specifically focusing on elderly patients remain limited. This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness and safety of CGRP mAbs in Korean migraine patients aged 65 and older.
methodsThis multicenter, retrospective real-world study analyzed 107 patients aged ≥ 65 years initiated on CGRP mAbs (galcanezumab or fremanezumab) at nine Korean university hospitals between January 2022 and April 2025. Effectiveness was measured by the proportion of patients achieving a ≥ 30%, ≥ 50%, or ≥ 75% reduction in monthly headache days (MHD) at 3, 6, and 12 months. Response rates were reported using an intention-to-treat (ITT) framework in which non-attendees were conservatively classified as non-responders, with the observed-case analysis presented as a sensitivity analysis. Safety was ascertained at each follow-up visit through open-ended clinical interview and patient self-report; adverse events were adjudicated for drug relationship by the treating clinician. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent predictors of ≥ 50% response at 3 months.
resultsOf 107 enrolled patients, 103 reached the 3-month time point, 93 reached 6 months, and 61 reached 12 months by the data lock. On an ITT basis, the ≥ 50% response rate was 38.8% (40/103) at 3 months, 40.9% (38/93) at 6 months, and 31.1% (19/61) at 12 months. The corresponding observed-case rates were 48.2%, 67.9%, and 70.4%, respectively. A linear mixed-effects model confirmed a significant reduction in MHD over time (F = 48.912, p < 0.001). Female sex was a significant positive predictor of ≥ 50% response at 3 months (adjusted OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.04-9.93, p = 0.043), while prior failure of OnabotulinumtoxinA was a negative predictor (adjusted OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-0.95, p = 0.043). One all-cause death (ruptured dissecting aneurysm) occurred during follow-up and was adjudicated as unrelated to study drug; no other serious adverse events were reported. Documented adverse events were mild and included constipation and injection site reactions.
conclusionAlthough long-term follow-up data were available for only a limited number of patients, a substantial proportion of those who continued treatment demonstrated a response of at least 50%. These results imply that CGRP-targeted therapy could be an effective and well-tolerated preventive treatment option for older migraine patients.
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.