, Eli Lilly Japan K.K., 5-1-28, Isogamidori, chuo-ku, Kobe-shi, 651-0086, Japan.
Eli Lilly and Company, Lilly Corporate Center, Indianapolis, IN, 46285, USA.
J Headache Pain. 2019 Jun 7;20(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s10194-019-1012-1.
In Japan, detailed information on the characteristics, disease burden, and treatment patterns of people living with migraine is limited. The aim of this study was to compare clinical characteristics, disease burden, and treatment patterns in people with episodic migraine (EM) or chronic migraine (CM) using real-world data from clinical practice in Japan.
This was an analysis of data collected in 2014 by the Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme, a cross-sectional survey of physicians and their consulting adult patients in Japan, using physician and patient questionnaires. We report patient demographics, prescribed treatment, work productivity, and quality-of-life data for people with CM (≥15 headache days/month) or EM (not fulfilling CM criteria). In descriptive analyses, continuous and categorical measures were assessed using t-tests and Chi-squared tests, respectively.
Physicians provided data for 977 patients (mean age 44.5 years; 77.2% female; 94.5% with EM, 5.5% with CM). A total of 634/977 (64.9%) invited patients (600 with EM; 34 with CM) also provided data. Acute therapy was currently being prescribed in 93.7% and 100% of patients with EM and CM, respectively (p = 0.069); corresponding percentages for current preventive therapy prescriptions were 40.5% and 68.5% (p < 0.001). According to physicians who provided data, preventive therapy was used at least once by significantly fewer patients with EM than with CM (42.3% vs. 68.5%, respectively; p < 0.001). Among patients who provided physicians with information on issues with their current therapy (acute therapy: n = 668 with EM, n = 38 with CM; preventive therapy: n = 295 with EM, n = 21 with CM), lack of efficacy was the most frequently identified problem (acute therapy: EM 35.3%, CM 39.5% [p = 0.833]; preventive therapy: EM 35.3%, CM 52.4% [p = 0.131]). Moderate-to-severe headache-related disability (Migraine Disability Assessment total score ≥ 11) was reported by significantly fewer patients with EM than with CM (21.0% vs. 60.0%, respectively; p < 0.001) among patients who provided data.
Preventive treatment patterns in people with EM versus CM differ in Japan, with both types of migraine posing notable disease burdens. Our findings demonstrate that more effective migraine therapies are required to reduce the burden of the disease.
在日本，关于偏头痛患者的特征、疾病负担和治疗模式的详细信息有限。本研究旨在使用日本临床实践中的真实数据比较发作性偏头痛（EM）和慢性偏头痛（CM）患者的临床特征、疾病负担和治疗模式。
这是 2014 年 Adelphi 偏头痛疾病专项计划的分析，这是一项横断面调查，涉及日本的医生及其就诊的成年患者，使用医生和患者问卷。我们报告了 CM（≥15 个头痛日/月）或 EM（不符合 CM 标准）患者的人口统计学数据、处方治疗、工作生产力和生活质量数据。在描述性分析中，连续和分类测量分别使用 t 检验和卡方检验进行评估。
医生提供了 977 名患者的数据（平均年龄 44.5 岁；77.2%为女性；94.5%为 EM，5.5%为 CM）。977 名受邀患者中，共有 634 名（600 名 EM，34 名 CM）提供了数据。目前，EM 和 CM 患者的急性治疗分别有 93.7%和 100%的患者接受处方（p=0.069）；当前预防性治疗处方的相应百分比分别为 40.5%和 68.5%（p<0.001）。根据提供数据的医生，EM 患者中使用预防性治疗的患者明显少于 CM 患者（分别为 42.3%和 68.5%；p<0.001）。在向医生提供当前治疗问题信息的患者中（急性治疗：n=668 名 EM，n=38 名 CM；预防性治疗：n=295 名 EM，n=21 名 CM），治疗效果不佳是最常见的问题（急性治疗：EM 35.3%，CM 39.5%[p=0.833]；预防性治疗：EM 35.3%，CM 52.4%[p=0.131]）。在提供数据的患者中，EM 患者中度至重度头痛相关残疾（偏头痛残疾评估总分≥11）的报告明显少于 CM 患者（分别为 21.0%和 60.0%；p<0.001）。
在日本，EM 和 CM 患者的预防性治疗模式不同，两种类型的偏头痛都造成了显著的疾病负担。我们的研究结果表明，需要更有效的偏头痛治疗方法来减轻疾病负担。
