Mapping Migraine-Specific Quality of Life to Health State Utilities in Patients Receiving Rimegepant

Karissa M Johnston, Gilbert L'Italien, Evan Popoff, Lauren Powell, Robert Croop, Alexandra Thiry, Linda Harris, Vladimir Coric, Richard B Lipton, Karissa M Johnston, Gilbert L'Italien, Evan Popoff, Lauren Powell, Robert Croop, Alexandra Thiry, Linda Harris, Vladimir Coric, Richard B Lipton

Abstract

Introduction: Migraine is a debilitating neurological condition, affecting up to 15% of Americans. Recent estimates from a long-term safety study of rimegepant showed evidence of decreased monthly migraine days (MMD) in people with episodic migraine treated with rimegepant 75 mg. The objective of this study was to characterize migraine-specific quality of life version 2.1 (MSQv2) scores and corresponding mapped EuroQol-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) utility values.

Methods: Study participants were randomized into two treatment regimens: individuals with 2-14 MMD received rimegepant 75 mg as needed (PRN), and those with 4-14 MMD at baseline who received rimegepant on a fixed every-other-day schedule plus an as needed dose on days they did not treat (QOD + PRN). MSQv2 was mapped to EQ-5D-3L utilities using a validated algorithm. Outcomes were assessed for the PRN arm at baseline weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52 and for the QOD + PRN arm at baseline and week 12.

Results: At baseline, MSQv2 data were available for 1,800 patients: 1,033 with 2-8 MMD in the PRN group, 481 with 9-14 MMD in the PRN group, and 286 with 4-14 MMD in the QOD + PRN group. For all MSQv2 domains as well as mapped utility values, outcomes improved over each study visit. At baseline, EQ-5D-3L utilities were 0.66, 0.63, and 0.65 for the 2-8 MMD PRN, 9-14 MMD PRN, and 4-14 MMD QOD + PRN groups, respectively. At end-of-study, utilities had increased by + 0.09, + 0.10, and + 0.12 for the three groups, respectively (p < 0.001 for all comparisons with baseline). Similar trends in improvement were observed across MSQv2 subdomains; all differences were statistically significant.

Conclusions: Rimegepant 75 mg, which has been shown to be associated with reduced MMD, is associated with improvement in MSQv2 domains over time, leading to estimated improvement in EQ-5D-3L utilities. While this improvement was observed in all patient-groups, it was most pronounced in those with higher MMD and those taking rimegepant QOD + PRN.

Trial registration: Clinical Trials NCT03266588.

Keywords: EQ-5D; Mapping; Migraine; Migraine-specific quality of life (MSQv2); Patient-reported outcome; Preference-based instrument; Utility.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Absolute monthly migraine days over time in Study 201, stratified by treatment group. The QOD + PRN enrollment group only contributed data to Week 12, and thus Week 24, 36, and 52 data are only available for PRN enrollment groups. MMD monthly migraine days; PRN as needed; QOD every other day
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
MSQv2 domains over time in Study 201, stratified by treatment group; p < 0.001 for all outcomes in all enrollment groups over time. The QOD + PRN enrollment group only contributed data to Week 12, and thus Week 24, 36, and 52 data are only available for PRN enrollment groups
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
EQ-5D-3L utilities mapped from MSQv2 data; p < 0.001 for all outcomes in all enrollment groups over time. The QOD + PRN enrollment group only contributed data to Week 12, and thus Week 24, 36, and 52 data are only available for PRN enrollment groups. MSQv2 migraine-specific quality of life; PRN as needed; QOD every other day
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Relationship between baseline absolute MMD and EQ-5D, and changes from baseline (52 weeks for the PRN groups and 12 weeks for the QOD + PRN group). From left to right baseline MMD versus baseline EQ-5D-3L, baseline MMD versus CFB EQ-5D-3L, and CFB MMD versus CFB EQ-5D-3L. CFB change from baseline; MMD monthly migraine days

References

    1. American Headache Society AHS consensus statement: the american headache society position statement on integrating new migraine treatments into clinical practice. Headache. 2019;59:1–18.
    1. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS). The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(1):1–211.
    1. Mayans L, Walling A. Acute Migraine headache: treatment strategies. Am Fam Physician. 2018;97(4):243–251.
    1. Doane M, Gupta S, Fang J, et al. The humanistic and economic burden of migraine in Europe: a cross-sectional survey in five countries. Neurol Ther. 2020;2020:1–15.
    1. Doane M, Gupta S, Vo P, et al. Associations between headache-free days and patient-reported outcomes among migraine patients: a cross-sectional analysis of survey data in Europe. Pain Ther. 2019;8(2):203–216. doi: 10.1007/s40122-019-0133-1.
    1. Stafford M, Hareendran A, Ng-Mak D, Insinga R, Xu R, Stull D. EQ-5DTM-derived utility values for different levels of migraine severity from a UK sample of migraineurs. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:65. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-10-65.
    1. Blumenfeld A, Varon S, Wilcox T, et al. Disability, HRQoL and resource use among chronic and episodic migraineurs: results from the International Burden of Migraine Study (IBMS) Cephalalgia. 2011;31(3):301–315. doi: 10.1177/0333102410381145.
    1. Ford JH, Jackson J, Milligan G, Cotton S, Ahl J, Aurora SK. A real-world analysis of migraine: a cross-sectional study of disease burden and treatment patterns. Headache. 2017;57(10):1532–1544. doi: 10.1111/head.13202.
    1. Buse DC, Rupnow MF, Lipton RB. Assessing and managing all aspects of migraine: migraine attacks, migraine-related functional impairment, common comorbidities, and quality of life. Mayo Clin Proc. 2009;84(5):422–435. doi: 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)60561-2.
    1. Lampl C, Thomas H, Stovner LJ, Tassorelli C, Katsarava Z, Laínez JM, et al. Interictal burden attributable to episodic headache: findings from the Eurolight project. J Headache Pain. 2016;17:9. doi: 10.1186/s10194-016-0599-8.
    1. Xu R, Insinga R, Golden W, Hu X. EuroQol (EQ-5D) health utility scores for patients with migraine. Qual Life Res. 2011;20:601–608. doi: 10.1007/s11136-010-9783-5.
    1. Diener H-C, Tassorelli C, Dodick DW, Silberstein SD, Lipton RB, Ashina M, et al. Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of migraine attacks in episodic migraine in adults. Cephalalgia. 2020;40(10):1026–1044. doi: 10.1177/0333102420941839.
    1. Tassorelli C, Diener HC, Dodick DW, Silberstein SD, Lipton RB, Ashina M, et al. Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of preventive treatment of chronic migraine in adults. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(5):815–832. doi: 10.1177/0333102418758283.
    1. Gillard P, Devine B, Varon S, Liu L, Sullivan S. Mapping from disease-specific measures to health-state utility values in individuals with migraine. Value in Health. 2012;15(3):485–495. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.007.
    1. Croop R, Goadsby P, Stock D, et al. Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet for the acute treatment of migraine: a randomised, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet. 2019;394(10200):737–745. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31606-X.
    1. Croop R, Lipton RB, Kudrow D, Stock DA, Kamen L, Conway CM, et al. Oral rimegepant for preventive treatment of migraine: a phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet. 2020;397(10268):51–60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32544-7.
    1. Harris L, L'Italien G, Croop R, Stock E, Thiry A, Cowrie K, et al. Acute treatment of migraine with oral rimegepant 75 mg improves health related quality of life: results from a long-term, open-label safety study (BHV3000-201)(1943) Neurology. 2020;94:1943.
    1. Lipton R, Berman G, Kudrow D, Mullin K, Thiry A, Lovegren M, et al. Long-Term, Open-Label Safety Study of Rimegepant 75 mg for the Treatment of Migraine (Study 201): Interim Analysis of Safety and Exploratory Efficacy. In: American Headache Society 61st Annual Scientific Meeting; July 11–14; Philadelphia, PA: AHS; 2019.
    1. McGinley J, L'Italien G, Thiry A, Croop R, Coric V, Lipton R. Rimegepant 75 mg results in reductions in monthly migraine days: secondary analysis of a multicenter, open label long-term safety study of rimegepant for the acute treatment of migraine. Neurology. 2020;94:1793. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009315.
    1. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version) Cephalalgia Int J Headache. 2013;33(9):629–808. doi: 10.1177/0333102413485658.
    1. Bagley C, Rendas-Baum R, Maglinte G, Yang M, Varon S, Lee J, et al. Validating Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 in episodic and chronic migraine. Headache. 2012;52(3):409–412. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.01997.x.
    1. Jhingran P, Osterhaus J, Miller D, Lee J, Kirchdoerfer L. Development and validation of the migraine-specific quality of life questionnaire. Headache. 1998;38(4):295–302. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.1998.3804295.x.
    1. Speck R, Shalhoub H, Ayer D, Ford J, Wyrwich K, Bush E. Content validity of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 electronic patient-reported outcome. J Patient-Report Outcomes. 2019;3:39. doi: 10.1186/s41687-019-0138-x.
    1. Glaxo Welcome Inc. Migraine specific quality of life questionnaire (version 2.1). ePROVIDE; 1998.
    1. Cole JC, Lin P, Rupnow MF. Minimal important differences in the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) version. Cephalalgia. 2009;29(11):1180–1187. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2009.01852.x.
    1. EuroQoL Research Foundation. EQ-5D-3L User Guide 2018. 2018. .
    1. Di Tana G, Porter J, Lipton R, Hatswell A, Sapra S, Villa G. Longitudinal assessment of utilities in patients with migraine: an analysis of erenumab randomized controlled trials. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17:171. doi: 10.1186/s12955-019-1242-6.
    1. Lipton R, Brennan A, Palmer S, Hatswell A, Porter J, Sapra 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;2018:1–10.
    1. NICE. Fremanezumab for preventing migraine: technology appraisal guidance [TA631]. 2020. . . Accessed 3 Jun 2020.
    1. NICE. Galcanezumab for preventing migraine: Technology appraisal guidance [TA659]. 2020. . . Accessed 18 Nov 2020.
    1. NICE. Erenumab for preventing migraine: Technology appraisal guidance [TA682]. 2021. . 2021.

Source: PubMed

3
購読する