Evidence Hub

Decoding the long-term safety of anti-CGRP (receptor) mAbs: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Hoehne CL, Overeem LH, Sanchez-Del-Rio M, Deligianni C, Gil-Gouveia R, Versijpt J, Amin FM, Lampl C et al.

The journal of headache and pain, 2026

1 citation

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety (≥12 months) of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor in migraine prevention by synthesising evidence from clinical trials and real-world studies. We focus on drug discontinuation due to adverse events and the type and frequency of adverse events. This is the first review to analyse the effects of the long-term use of all anti-CGRP (receptor) mAbs, aiming to provide novel insights for clinical practice and future treatment strategies. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies with ≥12 months of anti-CGRP (receptor) mAb use between January 2013 and April 2025. A random-effects meta-analysis of proportions (logit transformation, inverse variance weighting, restricted maximum likelihood) was performed to estimate pooled discontinuation and adverse event rates. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I score. RESULTS: From a total of 1,499 records, 14 met the inclusion criteria and were eligible for data analysis. These 14 records corresponded to 11 individual studies with observational durations all exceeding 12 months. Seven studies investigated erenumab, two eptinezumab, and one each fremanezumab and galcanezumab. All studies were judged to have a severe risk of bias due to their underlying design. The overall pooled proportion of treatment discontinuation for any reason among patients receiving anti-CGRP (receptor)…

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.

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