Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ORAL TRIPTANS FOR ACUTE MIGRAINE: MIXED TREATMENT COMPARISON

  • Christian Asseburg (a1), Piia Peura (a2), Tuija Oksanen (a3), Juha Turunen (a4), Timo Purmonen (a5) and Janne Martikainen (a6)...
Abstract

Background: The cost-effectiveness of triptans in the treatment of migraine has not been assessed since generic sumatriptan entered the Finnish market in 2008.

Methods: Using systematic review and mixed treatment comparison, the effectiveness of triptans was estimated with regard to 2-hour response, 2-hour pain-free, recurrence, and any adverse event, using published clinical data. Direct and indirect costs (2010 EUR, societal perspective) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were evaluated over one acute migraine attack using a decision-tree model.

Results: The meta-analysis combined data from fifty-six publications. The highest probability of achieving the primary outcome, “sustained pain-free, no adverse event” (SNAE), was estimated for eletriptan 40 mg (20.9 percent). Sumatriptan 100 mg was the treatment with lowest estimated costs (€20.86), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of eletriptan 40 mg compared with sumatriptan 100 mg was €43.65 per SNAE gained (€19,659 per QALY gained).

Conclusion: Depending on the decision-maker's willingness-to-pay threshold, either sumatriptan 100 mg or eletriptan 40 mg is likely to be cost-effective.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

1.LR Arends , Vokó Z, Stijnen T. Combining multiple outcome measures in a meta-analysis: An application. Stat Med. 2003;22:13351353.

2.DK Arulmozhi , A Veeranjaneyulu , SL Bodhankar . Migraine: Current concepts and emerging therapies. Vascul Pharmacol. 2005;43:176187.

4.N Buscemi , L Hartling , B Vandermeer , L Tjosvold , TP Klassen . Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:697703.

5.MD Ferrari , PJ Goadsby , KI Roon , RB Lipton . Triptans (serotonin, 5-HT1B/1D agonists) in migraine: Detailed results and methods of a meta-analysis of 53 trials. Cephalalgia. 2002;22:633658.

6.PJ Goadsby , T Sprenger . Current practices and future directions in the prevention and acute management of migraine. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9:285298.

8.JPT Higgins , SG Thompson , DJ Spiegelhalter . A re-evaluation of random-effects meta-analysis. J R Statist Soc A Stat Soc. 2009;172:137159.

10.E Loder . Triptan therapy in migraine. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:6370.

11.G Lu , AE Ades . Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004;23:31053124.

16.J Ramsberg , M Henriksson . The cost-effectiveness of oral triptan therapy in Sweden. Cephalalgia. 2007;27:5462.

17.A Sutton , AE Ades , N Cooper , K Abrams . Use of indirect and mixed treatment comparisons for technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26:753767.

19.M Thompson , M Gawel , B Desjardins , N Ferko , D Grima . An economic evaluation of rizatriptan in the treatment of migraine. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23:837850.

20.R Xu , RP Insinga , W Golden , XH Hu . EuroQol (EQ-5D) health utility scores for patients with migraine. Qual Life Res. 2011;20:601608.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary figure 2

 Unknown (13 KB)
13 KB
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary data

 Word (46 KB)
46 KB
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary Table 1

 Word (32 KB)
32 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary figure 3

 Unknown (18 KB)
18 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary figure 1

 Unknown (12 KB)
12 KB
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary data

 Word (37 KB)
37 KB
WORD
Supplementary Materials

Asseburg et al. supplementary material
Supplementary table 2

 Word (39 KB)
39 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score