Author:
Alpuente Alicia,Gallardo Victor J,Caronna Edoardo,Torres-Ferrus Marta,Pozo-Rosich Patricia
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) have been developed to numerically quantify disability, impact and quality of life. They have been widely used in migraine clinical trials. However, we still do not know which PRO more accurately reflects preventive treatment response from a patient’s perspective or which one may help us with treatment decisions in clinical practice. They have been used to enforce the efficacy results in clinical trials and real-world evidence so far. The aim of this study was to analyze which PROM is (1) better correlated with all primary efficacy endpoints and (2) which one is better associated with treatment continuation with CGRP-mAbs at week-12, which is usually the moment when this decision is made.
Methods
Patients with migraine who had received 3 administrations of CGRP-mAbs were evaluated in this prospective cohort study. Primary efficacy outcomes considered: a change in migraine days (MMD), headache days (MHD), pain intensity (INT), acute medication days (AMD) and 50% responder rate. The Spearman coefficient (rs) was the measure used for quantify the strength of the correlation between PROMs and treatment efficacy outcomes changes. A stepwise logistic regression identified which PROM was independently associated with treatment continuation at week-12.
Results
263 patients completed 12 weeks of treatment. The efficacy outcomes and PROMs scores were statistically significantly reduced at week-12 for all patients. The role function-restrictive (RFR) domain of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life (MSQ) questionnaire was statistically significantly correlated with all primary efficacy outcomes. Relative changes in MSQ total score (OR[95%]: 0.840[0.619-0.973]; p=0.037) and Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) scale (OR[95%]: 15.569[6.254-31.533]; p<0.001) were the PROMs associated with treatment continuation as independent factors at week-12.
Conclusions
Changes in MSQ questionnaire and PGIC scale at week-12 were the PROMs with higher association with CGRP-mAbs response from a patient’s perspective and medical decision-taking.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Clinical Neurology,General Medicine
Reference40 articles.
1. Dodick DW (2018) Migraine. Lancet. (London, England) 391:1315–1330
2. Ashina M, Katsarava Z, Do TP et al (2021) Migraine: epidemiology and systems of care. Lancet (London, England) 397:1485–1495
3. Buse DC, Scher AI, Dodick DW et al (2016) Impact of Migraine on the Family: Perspectives of People With Migraine and Their Spouse/Domestic Partner in the CaMEO Study.Mayo Clin Proc25;S0025-6196(16)00126-9.
4. Collaborators G (2016) (2018) H. Global, regional, and national burden of migraine and tension-type headache, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol 17:954-976
5. Ashina M, Buse DC, Ashina H et al (2021) Migraine: integrated approaches to clinical management and emerging treatments. Lancet (London, England) 397:1505–1518
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献