Search

Introduction: The ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care Of MigrainE (OVERCOME) European Union (EU) is part of an overarching population-based study program that also includes the United States and Japan. Here, we report data on the migraine/severe headache burden and the use of acute medication and healthcare resources in Spain and Germany., Methods: OVERCOME (EU) was an online, non-interventional, cross-sectional survey conducted in adults in Spain and Germany between October 2020 and February 2021. A total migraine cohort was established based on health survey participants who reported headache/migraine in the last 12 months AND identified as having migraine based on modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, third edition criteria OR self-reported physician diagnosis. Data were analyzed for the total migraine cohort and the subcohort with moderate to severe headache attacks, with average pain severity ≥ 5 points, pain duration ≥ 4 h, and at least moderate disability due to migraine [Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score ≥ 11] over the past 3 months., Results: Pain of moderate or severe intensity was the most frequent symptom in the total migraine cohort (n = 19,103/20,756; 92.0%). Proportions of participants reporting severe disability (MIDAS Grade IV), poorer quality of life (QoL; Migraine-Specific QoL Questionnaire), and higher interictal burden (Migraine Interictal Burden Scale-4), generally increased with number of headache days (HDs)/month. Most participants (92.5%) reported current acute migraine/severe headache medication use, although only 39.0% were using triptans. In the moderate to severe attacks subcohort (n = 5547), 48.4% were using triptans, with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs the most common acute medication. The moderate to severe attacks subcohort also reported poorer QoL and greater pain and disability with increasing HDs/month, although severe interictal burden was reported for ~ 60% of participants regardless of HDs/month. Treatment satisfaction (six-item migraine Treatment Optimization Questionnaire) in those using triptans was generally poor in both total and subcohorts., Conclusion: High migraine-related burden levels were reported, despite use of acute medication. Although triptans are recommended for moderate to severe migraine attacks in Spanish and German guidelines, less than half of participants were using triptans; treatment satisfaction in those using triptans was generally poor. New tailored treatment options may help address unmet needs in current acute treatment., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: The estimated prevalence of migraines in South Korea is 6.0%, with affected patients having unmet needs. The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody, for episodic migraine (EM) prevention was evaluated in South Korean patients., Methods: During the double-blind period of the EVOLVE-2 phase 3 trial, patients with EM were randomized into placebo, 120 mg-galcanezumab, and 240-mg galcanezumab treatment groups. The primary endpoint was the overall mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days during the 6-month double-blind period. We conducted a post-hoc analysis of the South Korean cohort in EVOLVE-2., Results: Among 98 South Korean patients in the intent-to-treat population, significant changes from baseline were observed in the number of monthly migraine headache days in the 240-mg galcanezumab group compared with the placebo group (-2.64, p =0.013), in the percentage of patients with ≥50% reduction in the number of monthly migraine headache days (120 mg: odds ratio=2.43, p =0.030; 240 mg: odds ratio=2.60, p =0.019), in the number of monthly migraine headache days with acute medication use (120 mg: -2.22, p =0.006; 240 mg: -2.23, p =0.005), and in the Migraine-Specific Quality-of-Life Role Function-Restrictive (120 mg: 8.34, p =0.040). Numerical improvements from baseline were observed relative to the placebo group in at least one galcanezumab group for: the percentage of patients with ≥75% reduction in the number of monthly migraine headache days functional impairment, and disease severity. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event in the combined galcanezumab group was injection site reaction, which led to treatment discontinuation for one patient., Conclusions: Galcanezumab treatment demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety and tolerability profile in South Korean patients with EM., Competing Interests: Byung-Kun Kim and Min Kyung Chu, contributing editors of the Journal of Clinical Neurology, were not involved in the editorial evaluation or decision to publish this article., (Copyright © 2023 Korean Neurological Association.)

Objectives: Given the substantial disease burden, appropriate and effective management of migraine is a public health priority. To gain insights into real-world migraine management practices in Taiwan, current treatment patterns, costs, and health care resource use were assessed., Methods: This was a retrospective, longitudinal study using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Included patients had an initial diagnosis of migraine (defined using International Classification of Diseases codes) between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2017. Data analyzed included demographics; the use, number, and type of acute and preventive medications; and drug and medical services costs. Data were stratified according to migraine type (chronic [CM] or episodic [EM] migraine)., Results: A total of 312,718 patients were included in the analyses: 53,992 (17.3%) had CM and 258,726 (82.7%) had EM. Most patients (81.7%) had used acute and/or preventive medications; acute medications used more frequently than preventive medications (78.0% vs. 20.2%). Acute medications were used by 81.6 and 77.3% of patients with CM and EM, respectively. Commonly used acute medications were acetaminophen (68.8%), ergots (49.4%), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (38.4%); the use of triptans (6.0%), tramadol (3.1%), and other opioids (0.2%) was less common. A total of 28.6 and 18.5% of patients with CM and EM, respectively, used preventive medications. Flunarizine (68.9%), propranolol (40.7%), and topiramate (16.0%) were the most commonly used preventive medications. Most patients had used 1-2 acute or preventive medications, with the use of ≥3 acute or preventive medications more common in patients with CM than EM. Average total medical cost per annum was 4,169 New Taiwan Dollars (NTDs) per CM patient and 2,928 NTDs per EM patient, with CM patients having higher costs associated with medical service utilization and acute medication use., Conclusion: These real-world data suggest unmet needs for Taiwanese patients with migraine, including under-utilization of preventive medications and greater costs and health care resource use for patients with CM versus EM. These findings provide important information on treatment patterns, cost, and health care resource use for patients with migraine in Taiwan., Competing Interests: H-FC, TP, YH, and GD are full-time employees of Eli Lilly and Co. Y-FW has received honoraria as a speaker from Taiwan branches of Allergan/AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB, Viatris, Orient EuroPharma, Chugai, and Teva. He has received research grants from the Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology, and Taipei Veterans General Hospital. S-JW has served on the advisory boards of Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly and Novartis; has received honoraria as a moderator from Allergan/AbbVie, Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Biogen and Eisai and has been the PI in trials sponsored by Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Allergan/AbbVie. He has received research grants from the Taiwan Minister of Technology and Science (MOST), Brain Research Center, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University from The Featured Areas Research Center Program within the framework of the Higher Education Sprout Project by the Ministry of Education (MOE) in Taiwan, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan Headache Society and Taiwan branches of Eli Lilly, Novartis, and Pfizer. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wang, Wang, Huang, Chen, Yen, Shia, Tsai, Chan, Panni and Dell’Agnello.)

Background: Insights into the burden, needs and treatment of migraine from internet-based surveys in diverse real-world migraine populations are needed, especially at a time when novel preventive migraine medications are becoming part of the therapeutic armamentarium. The objectives of this analysis are to describe traditional preventive (orals and onabotulinum toxin A) treatment patterns in the OVERCOME (EU) study migraine cohort, as well as treatment patterns and patient satisfaction with current treatment in a subgroup of respondents eligible for migraine preventive medication., Methods: The cross-sectional non-interventional OVERCOME (EU) study was conducted (October 2020-February 2021) via an online survey among adults (aged ≥ 18 years) resident in Germany or Spain. Participants, registered in existing online panels, who were willing to provide consent were considered. The migraine cohort included participants reporting headache/migraine in the past year, identified based on a validated migraine diagnostic questionnaire and/or self-reported physician diagnosis. A subgroup of survey respondents defined as eligible for migraine preventive medication at the point in time the cross-sectional survey was taken was also analysed. Variables assessed included sociodemographic and migraine-related clinical characteristics, preventive (traditional and calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies) treatment patterns and patient satisfaction with current treatment. Results are descriptive only., Results: Of the 20,756 participants in the migraine cohort, 78.5% sought professional medical care, 50.8% received a migraine diagnosis and only 17.7% had ever used preventive medication. Half (53.3%) of participants currently using preventives took their most recent medication for six months or less. Most patients (73.9%) classified as eligible for preventive medication (based on headache frequency and/or at least moderate disability due to migraine) reported not using traditional preventives and many of those who did (66.8%) were not satisfied with their current standard of care., Conclusions: Our findings highlight the low proportion of people diagnosed with migraine despite a higher rate of consultation and suggest the need for better access to treatment for people with migraine and new preventive therapies with improved efficacy and safety profiles to improve adherence and patient satisfaction., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Migraine-attributed burden, impact, disability and migraine-impacted quality of life are important concepts in clinical management, clinical and epidemiological research, and health policy, requiring clear and agreed definitions. We aimed to formulate concise and precise definitions of these concepts by expert consensus., Methods: We searched the terms migraine-attributed burden, impact, disability and migraine-impacted quality of life in Embase and Medline from 1974 and 1946 respectively. We followed a Delphi process to reach consensus on definitions., Results: We found widespread conflation of concepts and inconsistent terminology within publications. Following three Delphi rounds, we defined migraine-attributed burden as "the summation of all negative consequences of the disease or its diagnosis"; migraine-attributed impact as "the effect of the disease, or its diagnosis, on a specified aspect of life, health or wellbeing"; migraine-attributed disability as "physical, cognitive and mental incapacities imposed by the disease"; and migraine-impacted quality of life as "the subjective assessment by a person with the disease of their general wellbeing, position and prospects in life". We complemented each definition with a detailed description., Conclusion: These definitions and descriptions should foster consistency and encourage more appropriate use of currently available quantifying instruments and aid the future development of others.