Evidence Hub

The chronopharmacology of atogepant in migraine prevention: A real-world evaluation of influence of timing of administration on effectiveness and tolerability

Iannone LF, Sebastianelli G, Santis F, Corrado M, Marcosano M, Ornello R, Grazzi L, Montisano DA et al.

Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache, 2026

81 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

AimTo assess whether the timing of atogepant administration influences its tolerability and effectiveness over 12 weeks in patients with episodic and chronic migraine in a real-world setting.MethodsThis is a post-hoc analysis of the STAR study, a prospective, Italian, multicenter study evaluating atogepant 60 mg for migraine prevention. Data were collected at baseline (T0) and after the first 12 weeks (T3) of treatment. Patients were grouped by administration timing (morning vs. evening) and by administration with or without food. Changes in monthly headache days (MHDs), monthly migraine days (MMDs), and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) were measured. Tolerability was evaluated via adverse events (AEs). Linear mixed-effects models (LMMs) were used.ResultsEighty-one patients (86% females, mean age 50.8 ± 13.7 years) were included. At T3, MMDs decreased from 16.6 to 9.7 (p < 0.001) and MHDs from 19.8 to 11.9 (p < 0.001); 60% of patients achieved ≥50% reduction in MMDs. AEs occurred in 34 (42%) participants. Atogepant was taken in the morning by 57% and in the evening by 43% of patients. Fifty-seven out of 81 participants (70.4%) took atogepant with food. No significant differences in MMDs, MHDs, or AEs emerged between morning and evening users. Evening users had higher baseline MIDAS scores (estimated marginal means [EMMs]: 69.9 vs. 39.9, p = 0.034) that showed a greater reduction compared to morning users (F(1,63) = 6.29, p = 0.015), reaching similar final scores after…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 81 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