Frovatriptan and rizatriptan economic EVAluation: the FREEVA study

Optimized Acute Treatment of Migraine Is Associated With Greater Productivity in People With Migraine: Results From the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to ascertain whether level of optimization of acute treatment of migraine is related to work productivity across the spectrum of migraine.

METHODS

Data were from the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study, an internet-based longitudinal survey. Respondents with migraine who reported full-time employment and use of ≥1 acute prescription medication for migraine were included. We determined relationships among lost productive time (LPT; measured with the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale), acute treatment optimization (Migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire- ), and monthly headache days (MHDs).

RESULTS

There was a direct relationship between LPT and MHD category. Greater acute treatment optimization was associated with lower total LPT, less absenteeism, and less presenteeism within each MHD category.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing acute treatment for migraine may reduce LPT in people with migraine and reduce indirect costs.

Naturalistic assessment of patterns and predictors of acute headache medication use among women with comorbid migraine and overweight or obesity

Given the potential for obesity to complicate migraine treatment outcomes, there is a need to understand patterns and correlates of acute medication use among individuals with this comorbidity. Experience sampling methodology (ESM) was used to characterize patterns of acute medication use among those with migraine and overweight/obesity and to examine individual and momentary factors related to medication use (both migraine-specific and nonspecific medications). Women with migraine and overweight/obesity (N = 170) seeking behavioral migraine treatment completed questionnaires followed by 28 days of daily ESM headache diaries. Participants used medications to treat 71.9% of attacks, 20% of which were treated with migraine-specific medications. Participants were more likely to use medication in the context of longer and more severe attacks that started earlier in the day. Presence of aura and greater work-related pain interference uniquely related to migraine-specific medication use. Questionnaire-assessed factors were not related to medication use, although older age and higher educational attainment related to more frequent use. A substantial proportion of attacks were left untreated, suggesting unmet treatment needs in this population. Results also suggest that ESM-assessed factors are more salient correlates of medication use compared to questionnaires. Additional investigation of barriers to medication use is needed.

Economic Evaluation of Treatments for Migraine: An Assessment of the Generalizability Following a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

All health economics reviews on chronic and episodic migraine published to date underline the heterogeneity of results. Currently, the need for the generalizability of economic evaluations across different jurisdictions is considered a key issue to avoid unnecessary overlaps and to minimize the time to reimbursement decisions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to review the economic evaluations on the prophylaxis and treatments for migraine published in the previous 10 years (since 2009) and to perform a critical assessment of their generalizability.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and EconLit databases. Articles underwent a three-stage selection process. To assess the level of generalizability, we used the checklist implemented by Augustovski et al. Studies were classified as: (1) generalizable; (2) transferable; and (3) context specific.

RESULTS

In total, 227 articles were identified after running the search string and 11 studies were included in our review. Overall, none of the studies was judged as generalizable and three were judged transferable according to the established criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review suggests that no evidence on the economic value of either acute or prophylactic treatments against migraine is generalizable to different jurisdictions. However, the majority of studies reporting results about prophylactic treatments were found to be transferable.

Spotlight on frovatriptan: a review of its efficacy in the treatment of migraine

Migraine is a common neurovascular disorder, affecting millions of people worldwide. Current guidelines recommend triptans as first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe migraine attacks. Frovatriptan is a second-generation triptan with a longer terminal elimination half-life in blood than other triptans (~26 hours). Three double-blind, randomized crossover preference studies have been recently conducted, assessing efficacy and safety of frovatriptan versus rizatriptan, zolmitriptan, and almotriptan, respectively. Frovatriptan showed favorable tolerability and sustained effect, with a significantly lower rate of relapse over 48 hours versus the other triptans. These findings were confirmed in a series of analyses of patient subsets from the three studies, including patients with menstrually related and oral contraceptive-induced migraine, hypertension, obesity, weekend migraine, as well as patients with migraine with aura. In all patient subsets analyzed, lower headache recurrence rates were observed versus the comparator triptans, indicating a more sustained pain-relieving effect on migraine symptoms. A further randomized, double-blind study demonstrated that frovatriptan given in combination with the fast-acting cyclooxygenase inhibitor dexketoprofen provided improved migraine pain-free activity at 2 hours, and gave more sustained pain-free activity at 24 hours, versus frovatriptan alone. These benefits were observed both when the combination was administered early (<1 hour after symptom onset) or late (>1 hour after onset). Different pharmacokinetic, but synergistic, properties between frovatriptan and dexketoprofen may make the combination of these agents particularly effective in migraine treatment, with rapid onset of action and sustained effect over 48 hours. These benefits, together with potential cost-effectiveness advantages versus other triptans could drive selection of the most appropriate treatment for acute migraine attacks.

Investigating the Generalizability of Economic Evaluations Conducted in Italy: A Critical Review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the methodological quality of Italian health economic evaluations and their generalizability or transferability to different settings.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on the PubMed search engine to identify trial-based, nonexperimental prospective studies or model-based full economic evaluations carried out in Italy from 1995 to 2013. The studies were randomly assigned to four reviewers who applied a detailed checklist to assess the generalizability and quality of reporting. The review process followed a three-step blinded procedure. The reviewers who carried out the data extraction were blind as to the name of the author(s) of each study. Second, after the first review, articles were reassigned through a second blind randomization to a second reviewer. Finally, any disagreement between the first two reviewers was solved by a senior researcher.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-one economic evaluations eventually met the inclusion criteria. Over time, we observed an increasing transparency in methods and a greater generalizability of results, along with a wider and more representative sample in trials and a larger adoption of transition-Markov models. However, often context-specific economic evaluations are carried out and not enough effort is made to ensure the transferability of their results to other contexts. In recent studies, cost-effectiveness analyses and the use of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were preferred.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a quite positive temporal trend, generalizability of results still appears as an unsolved question, even if some indication of improvement within Italian studies has been observed.

A review of frovatriptan for the treatment of menstrual migraine

The objective of this review is to provide an overview of menstrual migraine (MM) and of frovatriptan and to assess clinical trial data regarding the efficacy and safety of frovatriptan for the acute and short-term prophylaxis of MM. Randomized controlled trials comparing frovatriptan with placebo or a triptan comparator for the acute or prophylactic treatment of MM were selected for review. MM affects up to 60% of women with migraine. Compared with attacks at other times of the cycle, menstrual attacks are longer, more severe, less responsive to treatment, more likely to relapse, and more disabling than attacks at other times of the cycle. No drugs are licensed for acute treatment of MM; triptans are recommended for treatment of moderate to severe attacks for menstrual and nonmenstrual attacks. Perimenstrual prophylaxis is indicated for patients with predictable MM that does not respond to symptomatic treatment alone. Treatment is unlicensed, but options include triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and hormone manipulation. Frovatriptan is distinctive from other triptans due to its long elimination half-life of 26 hours, which confers a longer duration of action. Post hoc analyses from randomized trials of MM show similar pain relief and pain-free rates for frovatriptan compared with other triptans (2 hours pain-free: relative risk [RR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91–1.76) but significantly lower relapse rates (24 hours sustained pain-free: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.18–0.62). Data from randomized controlled trials show a significant reduction in risk of MM in women using frovatriptan 2.5 mg once daily (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.31–1.86) or twice daily (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.68–2.34) for perimenstrual prophylaxis compared with placebo. The twice daily dosing was more effective than once daily (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11–1.46). These findings support the use of frovatriptan as a first-line acute treatment for MM and for perimenstrual prophylaxis.