Evidence Hub

Effectiveness and tolerability of pharmacological prophylaxis in migraine patients with prior preventive treatment failure: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Khalili M, Haghdoost F, Liaghatdar A, Torabiardakani K, Mahdian F, Atkin-Jones T, Levit T, Moradi S et al.

Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache, 2026

7,281 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Background Despite advances in migraine management, some patients fail to respond to preventive treatments for migraine. We aimed to assess the comparative effects of available pharmacological prophylaxis in adults with a treatment failure history. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus up to July 2025. Pairs of reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles to identify randomized controlled trials of prophylactic pharmacological interventions that enrolled adults diagnosed with chronic or episodic migraine and a prior preventive treatment failure. We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence. Results We included 18 randomized trials (7281 participants). Compared to placebo, low certainty evidence suggest fremanezumab [mean difference (MD) −3.30 (95% CI: −4.11 to −2.49)], eptinezumab [MD −3.35 (95% CI: −4.38 to −2.32)], galcanezumab [MD −2.73 (95% CI: −3.43 to −2.03)], atogepant [MD −2.30 (95% CI: −3.47 to −1.13)], and erenumab [MD −2.20 (95% CI: −2.72 to −1.68)] may be among the most effective in reducing the monthly migraine headache days. Low to moderate certainty evidence suggests that, compared with placebo, galcanezumab [relative risk (RR) 1.94 (95% CI: 1.52 to 2.48)], fremanezumab [RR 3.98 (95% CI: 2.40 to 6.59)], atogepant [RR 2.80 (95% CI: 1.73 to 4.54)], erenumab [RR 2.56 (95% CI: 2.01 to 3.26)], and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 7,281 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free