Efficacy and safety of ubrogepant for migraine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Abstract

Introduction: The efficacy of ubrogepant 50 mg versus 100 mg daily for migraine remained controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ubrogepant 50 mg versus 100 mg daily on treatment in migraine patients.

Methods: We have searched PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, Cochrane library databases and SCOPUS through 21 March 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of ubrogepant 50 mg versus 100 mg on treatment efficacy in migraine patients. This meta-analysis was performed using the random-effect model.

Results: Three RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with ubrogepant 100 mg in migraine patients, ubrogepant 50 mg obtained comparable pain freedom at 2 h (OR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.64–1.15; p = 0.310), sustained pain freedom 2–24 h (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.54–1.07; p = 0.110), photophobia absence at 2 h (OR = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.63–1.02; p = 0.070), phonophobia absence at 2 h (OR = 1.07; 95% CI = 0.82–1.40; p = 0.620) and nausea absence at 2 h (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.79–1.32; p = 0.880). In terms of safety, adverse events were found to be increased in ubrogepant 100 mg as compared to ubrogepant 50 mg (OR = 0.81; 95% CI = 0.67–0.99; p = 0.040), and there was no statistical difference of serious adverse events between two groups (OR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.40–1.91; p = 0.720).

Conclusions: Ubrogepant 50 mg and 100 mg may be equally effective to alleviate migraine, but ubrogepant 100 mg led to increase incidence of adverse events.

Keywords:

• Migraine
• ubrogepant
• randomized controlled trial
• treatment outcome

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

Not applicable.

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.