Prophylactic Treatment of Migraine

Cost Effectiveness of Fremanezumab in Episodic and Chronic Migraine Patients from a Japanese Healthcare Perspective

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Fremanezumab is an effective treatment for episodic (EM) and chronic migraine (CM) patients in Japan, but its cost effectiveness remains unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the cost effectiveness of fremanezumab compared with standard of care (SOC) in previously treated EM and CM patients from a Japanese healthcare perspective.

METHODS

Estimated regression models were implemented in a probabilistic Markov model to inform effectiveness and health-related quality-of-life data for fremanezumab and SOC. The model was further populated with data from the literature. The adjusted Japanese healthcare perspective included productivity losses. The main model outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (2022 Japanese Yen [¥]), and incremental outcomes including the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Analyses were performed separately for the EM and CM patients and combined. Costs and effects were discounted at an annual rate of 2.0%.

RESULTS

The mean QALYs over a 25-year time horizon for the EM and CM populations combined were 13.03 for SOC and 13.15 for fremanezumab. The associated costs were ¥27,550,292 for SOC and ¥28,371,048 for fremanezumab. QALYs were higher and costs lower for EM patients compared with CM patients for both fremanezumab and SOC. The deterministic ICERs of fremanezumab versus SOC were ¥6,334,861 for EM, ¥7,393,824 for CM, and ¥6,530,398 for EM and CM combined. Indirect costs and choice of mean migraine days model distribution had a substantial impact on the ICER.

CONCLUSION

Using fremanezumab in a heterogeneous mixture of Japanese EM and CM patients resulted in a reduction of monthly migraine days and thus more QALYs compared with SOC. The cost effectiveness of fremanezumab versus SOC in EM and CM patients resulted in an ICER of ¥6,530,398, from an adjusted Japanese public healthcare perspective.

Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System and Migraine: A Systematic Review of Human Studies

Migraine is a common neurologic condition marked by recurrent episodes of headache. Its pathophysiology is highly complex involving neuronal, inflammatory and vascular mechanisms. The Renin-Angiotensin System (RAS) can modulate all these mechanism, being a potential pharmacological target for migraine treatment. We carried out a systematic review of the studies evaluating the involvement of RAS in patients with migraine. There is evidence from genetic studies exploring the relation between migraine and RAS-related genes and from clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of Angiotensin II Type 1 (AT1) receptor antagonists and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in migraine prophylaxis. RAS seems to play a role in the pathophysiology of migraine, but more direct evidence is still missing.

Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.) in the prophylactic treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown an analgesic effect of ginger in the acute treatment of migraine, and there is anecdotal evidence of its efficacy in migraine prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the potential of ginger to prevent migraine attacks.

METHODS

This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial took place at the Headache Clinic, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil), involving 107 patients. Only subjects diagnosed with episodic migraine, aged between 18 and 60 years old, and who were not taking any prophylactic medication, were enrolled in the study. After one month of observation, subjects selected for the study were randomized 1:1 into placebo and treatment groups. Patients received capsules three times per day of 200 mg of dry extract of ginger (5% active ingredient) or placebo (cellulose) for three months. Visits were performed monthly and the patients were asked to fill in a migraine diary. The adherence to treatment was evaluated by counting capsules.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients who responded to treatment (i.e. a reduction of 50% in the number of migraine attacks at the end of treatment) did not differ between the groups. There was a decrease in the number of days with severe pain, analgesic use for acute migraine and duration of migraine attacks in both groups, without significant difference between ginger and placebo groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Ginger provides no greater benefit in the prophylactic treatment of migraine when compared to placebo. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02570633).

Real-world healthcare resource utilization related to migraine treatment failure: a panel-based chart review in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain

Aims: This retrospective chart review examined the six-month migraine-related healthcare resource use (HRU) among European patients who had ≥4 migraine days per month and previously failed at least two prophylactic migraine treatments. Methods: Neurologists, headache specialists, and pain specialists in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain who treated ≥10 patients with migraine in 2017 were recruited (April-June 2018) to extract anonymized patient-level data. Eligible physicians randomly selected charts of up to five adult patients with clinically-confirmed migraine, ≥4 migraine days in the month prior to the index date, and had previously failed at least two prophylactic migraine treatments. Treatment failure was defined as discontinuation due to lack of efficacy and/or tolerability. Demographic and disease characteristics as of the index date, and migraine-related HRU incurred during the 6-month study period, were recorded. Results: A total of 104 physicians contributed 168 charts for patients (63% female). On average, patients were 38 years old and failed 2.3 prophylactic treatments as of the index date. During the study period, 83% of patients had ≥1 outpatient visit for migraine in the physician's office, and 27% went to the ER/A&E. Approximately 5% of patients were hospitalized for migraine, with an average of one hospitalization and an average length of stay of 3 days. Approximately 39% of patients had ≥1 blood test, 22% had ≥1 magnetic resonance imaging, 17% had ≥1 electroencephalogram, and 13% had ≥1 computerized tomography scan. Visits to other healthcare providers were common. Limitations: This study is subject to the limitations of chart review studies, such as errors in data entry. Conclusions: Across four European countries, the HRU burden of migraine among patients who previously failed at least two prophylactic treatments was high, indicating a need for more effective prophylactic treatments to appropriately manage migraine and reduce the HRU burden attributable to this common disorder.