Annual indirect costs savings in patients with episodic or chronic migraine: a post-hoc analysis of phase 3 galcanezumab clinical trials in the United States

References

• Renjith V, Pai MS, Castelino F, et al. Clinical profile and functional disability of patients with migraine. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2016;7(2):250–256.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shimizu T, Sakai F, Miyake H, et al. Disability, quality of life, productivity impairment and employer costs of migraine in the workplace. J Headache Pain. 2021;22(1):29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munakata J, Hazard E, Serrano D, et al. Economic burden of transformed migraine: results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) study. Headache. 2009;49(4):498–508.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford JH, Foster SA, Nichols RM, et al. A real-world analysis of patient-reported outcomes in patients with migraine by preventive treatment eligibility status in the US and Europe. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020;4(1):53.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yucel A, Thach A, Kumar S, et al. Estimating the economic burden of migraine on US employers. Am J Manag Care. 2020;26(12):e403–e408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonafede M, Sapra S, Shah N, et al. Direct and indirect healthcare resource utilization and costs among migraine patients in the United States. Headache. 2018;58(5):700–714.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dueland AN, Leira R, Burke TA, et al. The impact of migraine on work, family, and leisure among young women - a multinational study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(10):1595–1604.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messali A, Sanderson JC, Blumenfeld AM, et al. Direct and indirect costs of chronic and episodic migraine in the United States: a web-based survey. Headache. 2016;56(2):306–322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipton RB, Lee L, Saikali NP, et al. Effect of headache-free days on disability, productivity, quality of life, and costs among individuals with migraine. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2020;26(10):1344–1352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polson M, Williams TD, Speicher LC, et al. Concomitant medical conditions and total cost of care in patients with migraine: a real-world claims analysis. Am J Manag Care. 2020;26(1 Sup):S3–S7. pl).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb YN. Galcanezumab: first global approval. Drugs. 2018;78(16):1769–1775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stauffer VL, Dodick DW, Zhang Q, et al. Evaluation of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: the EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(9):1080–1088.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skljarevski V, Matharu M, Millen BA, et al. Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: results of the EVOLVE-2 phase 3 randomized controlled clinical trial. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(8):1442–1454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Detke HC, Goadsby PJ, Wang S, et al. Galcanezumab in chronic migraine: the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled REGAIN study. Neurology. 2018;91(24):e2211–e2221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulleners WM, Kim BK, Láinez MJA, et al. Safety and efficacy of galcanezumab in patients for whom previous migraine preventive medication from two to four categories had failed (CONQUER): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3b trial. Lancet Neurol. 2020;19(10):814–825.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford J, Tassorelli C, Leroux E, et al. Changes in patient functioning and disability: results from a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating galcanezumab for chronic migraine prevention (REGAIN). Qual Life Res. 2021;30(1):105–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smitherman TA, Tietjen GE, Schuh K, et al. Efficacy of galcanezumab for migraine prevention in patients with a medical history of anxiety and/or depression: a post Hoc analysis of the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled REGAIN, and pooled EVOLVE-1 and EVOLVE-2 studies. Headache. 2020;60(10):2202–2219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter JK, Di Tanna GL, Lipton RB, et al. Costs of acute headache medication use and productivity losses among patients with migraine: insights from three randomized controlled trials. Pharmacoecon Open. 2019;3(3):411–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tobin J, Ford JH, Tockhorn-Heidenreich A, et al. Annual indirect cost savings in patients with episodic or chronic migraine: post-hoc analyses from multiple galcanezumab clinical trials. J Med Econ. 2022;25(1):630–639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS). The international classification of headache disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). Cephalalgia. 2013;33(9):629–808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Migraine Disability Assessment Test: National Headache Foundation. [cited 2022 Aug 4]. Available from: https://headaches.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/MIDAS.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Konduri KC, Astroza S, Sana B, et al. Joint analysis of time use and consumer expenditure data: examination of two approaches to deriving values of time. Transportation Res Record. 2011;2231(1):53–60.
   Google Scholar
• International Monetary Fund. World Economic Outlook Database [cited 2022 Aug 4]. Available from: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2019/October.
   Google Scholar
• Bureau of Labor and Statistics. “American time use survey — 2021 results.” U.S. Department of Labor. USDL-20-1275 2020. p. 1–26. [cited 2022 Aug 4]. Available from: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf#:∼:text=The%20estimates%20in%20this%20news%20release%20are%20based,i.ndividuals%20age%2015%20and%20over%20spend%20their%20time.
   Google Scholar
• Hoenig JM, Heisey DM. The abuse of power. Am Stat. 2001;55(1):19–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine M, Ensom MH. Post hoc power analysis: an idea whose time has passed? Pharmacotherapy. 2001;21(4):405–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Althouse AD. Post hoc power: not empowering, just misleading. J Surg Res. 2021;259:a3–a6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khanal S, Underwood M, Naghdi S, et al. A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacological treatments for adults with chronic migraine. J Headache Pain. 2022;23(1):122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen JL, Munshi K, Peasah SK, et al. Trends in utilization and costs of migraine medications, 2017–2020. J Headache Pain. 2022;23(1):111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinelli M, Leonardi M, Paemeleire K, et al. Structured headache services as the solution to the ill-health burden of headache. 3. Modelling effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of implementation in Europe: findings and conclusions. J Headache Pain. 2021;22(1):90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu XH, Markson LE, Lipton RB, et al. Burden of migraine in the United States: disability and economic costs. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159(8):813–818.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins K, Wang S, Rupnow MF. Indirect cost burden of migraine in the United States. J Occup Environ Med. 2007;49(4):368–374.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Whyte J, et al. An international study to assess reliability of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score. Neurology. 1999;53(5):988–994. Sep 22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charles A. The evolution of a migraine attack - a review of recent evidence. Headache. 2013;53(2):413–419.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burton WN, Chen CY, Li X, et al. Evaluation of a workplace-based migraine education program. J Occup Environ Med. 2016;58(8):790–795.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu J, Smith KJ, Brixner DI. Cost effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for the prevention of migraine: a Markov model application. CNS Drugs. 2010;24(8):695–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipton RB, Brennan A, Palmer S, et al. Estimating the clinical effectiveness and value-based price range of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in patients with prior treatment failures: a US societal perspective. J Med Econ. 2018;21(7):666–675.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenen J, Manise M, Nonis R, et al. Monoclonal antibodies blocking CGRP transmission: an update on their added value in migraine prevention. Rev Neurol (Paris). 2020;176(10):788–803.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Kolodner KB, et al. Validity of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score in comparison to a diary-based measure in a population sample of migraine sufferers. Pain. 2000;88(1):41–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martelletti P, Schwedt TJ, Vo P, et al. Healthcare resource use and indirect costs associated with migraine in Italy: results from the My Migraine Voice survey. J Med Econ. 2021;24(1):717–726.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lublóy Á. Economic burden of migraine in Latvia and Lithuania: direct and indirect costs. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar