A.07 Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine: a single-attack phase 3 study, ACHIEVE I
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: To evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant, an oral CGRP receptor antagonist, for acute treatment of a single migraine attack. Methods: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-attack, phase 3 study (NCT02828020). Patients randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, ubrogepant 50mg, or ubrogepant 100mg had 60 days to treat one migraine attack (moderate/severe pain intensity). Co-primary efficacy endpoints: pain freedom 2 hours post initial dose and absence of most bothersome migraine-associated symptom (MBS). Results: 1672 patients were randomized (safety population: n=1436; mITT population: n=1327). Mean age: 40.7 years; white (82.4%); female (87.5%). A significantly greater percentage of ubrogepant- than placebo-treated patients achieved pain freedom 2 hours post initial dose (50mg: 19.2%, adjusted P=0.0023; 100mg: 21.2%, adjusted P=0.0003; placebo: 11.8%). A significantly greater percentage of ubrogepant patients achieved absence of MBS (50mg: 38.6%, adjusted P=0.0023, 100mg: 37.7%, adjusted P=0.0023; placebo: 27.8%). The adverse event (AE) profile of ubrogepant was similar to placebo. The most common AEs (incidence ≥2% in any treatment group) within 48 hours of initial or optional second dose were nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth (all with incidence <5%). Conclusions: Both co-primary endpoints were met, with clinically meaningful effects on migraine headache pain and MBS. Ubrogepant was well tolerated, with no identified safety concerns.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".