A Dutch cost-effectiveness analysis of fremanezumab versus best supportive care in patients with chronic migraine and inadequate response to prior preventive therapy

Background: Chronic migraine (CM) is the most severe and burdensome subtype of migraine. Fremanezumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway as a migraine preventive therapy. This study aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of fremanezumab from a societal perspective in the Netherlands, using a Markov cohort simulation model. Methods: The base-case cost-effectiveness analysis adhered to the Netherlands Authority guidelines. Fremanezumab was compared with best supportive care (BSC; acute migraine treatment only) in patients with CM and an inad... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Wolters, Sharon
Carpay, Johannes A.
Pronk, Marja H.
Zuurbier, Karin W.M.
Driessen, Maurice T.
Lyras, Leonidas
Postma, Maarten J.
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2024
Reihe/Periodikum: Wolters , S , Carpay , J A , Pronk , M H , Zuurbier , K W M , Driessen , M T , Lyras , L & Postma , M J 2024 , ' A Dutch cost-effectiveness analysis of fremanezumab versus best supportive care in patients with chronic migraine and inadequate response to prior preventive therapy ' , BMC NEUROLOGY , vol. 24 , no. 1 , 214 . https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03697-x
Schlagwörter: Burden of disease / Calcitonin gene-related peptide / Chronic migraine / Cost effectiveness / Economic modeling / Fremanezumab / Health technology assessment / Netherlands
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-29190911
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : https://hdl.handle.net/11370/4c32a126-df69-43a7-a774-6e60904aa12a

Background: Chronic migraine (CM) is the most severe and burdensome subtype of migraine. Fremanezumab is a monoclonal antibody that targets the calcitonin gene-related peptide pathway as a migraine preventive therapy. This study aimed to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of fremanezumab from a societal perspective in the Netherlands, using a Markov cohort simulation model. Methods: The base-case cost-effectiveness analysis adhered to the Netherlands Authority guidelines. Fremanezumab was compared with best supportive care (BSC; acute migraine treatment only) in patients with CM and an inadequate response to topiramate or valproate and onabotulinumtoxinA (Dutch patient group [DPG]). A supportive analysis was conducted in the broader group of CM patients with prior inadequate response to 2–4 different classes of migraine preventive treatments. One-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity, and scenario analyses were conducted. Results: Over a lifetime horizon, fremanezumab is cost saving compared with BSC in the DPG (saving of €2514 per patient) and led to an increase of 1.45 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). In the broader supportive analysis, fremanezumab was cost effective compared with BSC, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €2547/QALY gained. Fremanezumab remained cost effective in all sensitivity and scenario analyses. Conclusion: In comparison to BSC, fremanezumab is cost saving in the DPG and cost effective in the broader population.