Evidence Hub

Estimating Changes in Clinical Outcomes after Discontinuation of Anti-CGRP Targeting Therapy for Migraine Prophylaxis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Makita LM, Fagundes TP, Reginato PH, Carpinelli LP, de Freitas Morais G, Montanarin RT, de Freitas Kleimmann R, Streit RE et al.

CNS drugs, 2026

1,012 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) therapies have significantly improved migraine prevention, but the long-term impact of discontinuation remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes following the cessation of anti-CGRP therapy.

METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched up to September 2024 for randomized or observational studies reporting post-discontinuation effects in patients with episodic or chronic migraine who had been preventively treated with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies or gepants. The primary outcome was the mean change in monthly migraine days from baseline to post-discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included acute headache medication use, the mean change in migraine frequency from active therapy to treatment cessation, and ≥ 50% responder rates. Heterogeneity was assessed with prediction intervals (PIs) for binary outcomes and I2 statistics for continuous data. Random-effects models pooled mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs), with subgroup analyses based on follow-up duration, study design, and individuals with chronic migraine.

RESULTS: Eight studies (n = 1012) evaluating anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies interruption were included. No studies on gepant cessation were found. Monthly migraine days decreased significantly post-discontinuation compared with baseline (MD -3.78; 95% CI -4.89, -2.67; I2 = 57%; p < 0.05), with reductions of - 5.70 days at…

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: 1,012 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