BMC Neurology (Jun 2024)

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

  • Sharon Wolters,
  • Johannes A. Carpay,
  • Marja H. Pronk,
  • Karin W.M. Zuurbier,
  • Maurice T. Driessen,
  • Leonidas Lyras,
  • Maarten J. Postma

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03697-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 12

Abstract

Read online

Abstract 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.

Keywords