Ford Janet, Nichols Russell M, Ye Wenyu, Tockhorn-Heidenreich Antje, Cotton Sarah, Jackson James
Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Adelphi Real World, Bollington, UK.
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Jul 14;13:647-660. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S304158. eCollection 2021.
To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients with migraine, including those who were preventive-naïve and preventive-treated.
This was a point-in-time, real-world study of patients with migraine in the US and EU5 (France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and UK) and their physicians using data from the Adelphi Migraine Disease Specific Programme (DSP™). Physicians completed patient record forms (PRFs) for the next nine consulting patients with migraine plus a tenth patient, who did not need to be consecutive, for whom prior preventive migraine treatments had failed at least once, in order to achieve oversampling of such patients. Patients were given self-completion (PSC) forms that included the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 (MSQ), Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS), and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire. Populations of interest included preventive-naïve and preventive-treated patients defined by the number of treatment lines (1-2 or 3+ preventive regimens). Continuous variables were compared using -test or ANOVA if normally distributed and Mann-Whitney if not. Chi-squared was used for categorical variables.
During August-December 2017, 615 physicians (359 PCPs, 256 neurologists) completed PRFs for 5785 patients (71% female; mean age 40 (±14) years; 65% in full- or part-time employment). Of these, 2798 completed a PSC (preventive-naïve/1-2/3+ preventive lines, n=1707/1034/57). Preventive-treated patients had a greater patient-reported burden across multiple measures versus preventive-naïve patients. Preventive-treated patients had lower MSQ scores indicating greater functional impairment, higher MIDAS scores indicating greater migraine-associated disability, and higher WPAI scores indicating greater overall work and activity impairment than preventive-naïve patients. The magnitude of difference was greatest for the 3+ preventive-treatments cohort. Patterns were similar in the US and EU5.
Among patients with migraine who are preventive-treated, including those with multiple lines of therapy, there remain considerable unmet needs in terms of restoring patient function.
评估偏头痛患者(包括未接受过预防性治疗和接受过预防性治疗的患者)的患者报告结局(PROs)。
这是一项对美国和欧盟5国(法国、德国、西班牙、意大利和英国)的偏头痛患者及其医生进行的即时性、真实世界研究,使用了来自阿德尔菲偏头痛疾病特定项目(DSP™)的数据。医生为接下来的9名偏头痛患者以及第10名患者填写患者记录表(PRF),第10名患者无需连续入选,其先前的预防性偏头痛治疗至少失败过一次,以便对这类患者进行过度抽样。患者填写自我完成(PSC)表格,其中包括偏头痛特异性生活质量问卷v2.1(MSQ)、偏头痛残疾评估量表(MIDAS)和工作效率与活动障碍(WPAI)问卷。感兴趣的人群包括根据治疗线数(1 - 2种或3种以上预防性治疗方案)定义的未接受过预防性治疗和接受过预防性治疗的患者。如果连续变量呈正态分布,则使用t检验或方差分析进行比较;如果不呈正态分布,则使用曼 - 惠特尼检验。分类变量使用卡方检验。
在2017年8月至12月期间,615名医生(359名初级保健医生、256名神经科医生)为5785名患者填写了PRF(71%为女性;平均年龄40(±14)岁;65%为全职或兼职工作)。其中,2798名患者完成了PSC(未接受过预防性治疗/1 - 2种预防性治疗线/3种以上预防性治疗线,n = 1707/1034/57)。与未接受过预防性治疗的患者相比,接受过预防性治疗的患者在多项指标上的患者报告负担更大。接受过预防性治疗的患者MSQ得分较低,表明功能损害更大;MIDAS得分较高,表明与偏头痛相关的残疾更大;WPAI得分较高,表明总体工作和活动障碍比未接受过预防性治疗的患者更大。3种以上预防性治疗队列的差异幅度最大。美国和欧盟5国的模式相似。
在接受预防性治疗的偏头痛患者中,包括接受过多种治疗方案的患者,在恢复患者功能方面仍存在相当大的未满足需求。