dc.contributor.author
Hong, Ja Bin
dc.contributor.author
Lange, Kristin Sophie
dc.contributor.author
Fitzek, Mira
dc.contributor.author
Overeem, Lucas Hendrik
dc.contributor.author
Triller, Paul
dc.contributor.author
Siebert, Anke
dc.contributor.author
Reuter, Uwe
dc.contributor.author
Raffaelli, Bianca
dc.date.accessioned
2025-09-25T08:23:53Z
dc.date.available
2025-09-25T08:23:53Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/49549
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-49271
dc.description.abstract
Background: Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) pathway are safe and effective treatments for migraine prevention. However, the high cost of these novel therapies has led to reimbursement policies requiring patients to try multiple traditional preventives before access. In Germany, a recent change in insurance policy significantly expanded coverage for the CGRP receptor mAb erenumab, enabling migraine patients who failed just one prior prophylactic medication to receive this mAb. Here, we compare the clinical response to treatment with erenumab in migraine patients treated using the old and new coverage policy.Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we included CGRP-mAb naive patients with episodic or chronic migraine, who started erenumab at our headache center according to either the old or the new insurance policy and received at least 3 consecutive injections. Headache diaries and electronic documentation were used to evaluate reductions in monthly headache and migraine days (MHD and MMD) and >= 50% and >= 30% responder rates at month 3 (weeks 9-12) of treatment.Results: We included 146 patients who received erenumab according to the old policy and 63 patients that were treated using the new policy. At weeks 9-12 of treatment, 37.7% of the old policy group had a 50% or greater reduction in MHD, compared to 63.5% of the new policy group (P < 0.001). Mean reduction in MHD was 5.02 days (SD = 5.46) and 6.67 days (SD = 5.32, P = 0.045) in the old and new policy cohort, respectively. After propensity score matching, the marginal effect of the new policy on treatment outcome was 2.29 days (standard error, SE: 0.715, P = 0.001) more reduction in MHD, and 30.1% (SE: 10.6%, P = 0.005) increase in >= 50% response rate for MHD.Conclusions: Starting erenumab earlier in the course of migraine progression in a real-world setting may lead to a better response than starting after multiple failed prophylactic attempts. Continually gathering real-world evidence may help policymakers in deciding how readily to cover CGRP-targeted therapies in migraine prevention.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
preventive treatment
en
dc.subject
monoclonal antibodies
en
dc.subject
calcitonin gene-related peptide
en
dc.subject
insurance coverage
en
dc.subject
health policy
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Impact of a reimbursement policy change on treatment with erenumab in migraine – a real-world experience from Germany
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
144
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.1186/s10194-023-01682-2
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
The Journal of Headache and Pain
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
1
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
Springer Nature
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
24
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.funding
Springer Nature DEAL
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
37899428
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
1129-2377