Treatment patterns and characteristics of patients with migraine in Japan: A retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data. (October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Meyers, Juliana L; Davis, Keith L; Lenz, Robert A; Sakai, Fumihiko; Xue, Fei
• Is Part Of: Cephalalgia. Volume 39:Number 12(2019)
• Page Start: 1518
• Page End: 1534
• Publication Date: 2019-10
• Subjects: Migraine -- prophylactic treatment -- treatment pattern -- adherence -- Japan; Headache -- Periodicals; 616.8491
• DOI: 10.1177/0333102419851855
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0333-1024

Abstract

Objective: To describe treatment patterns of migraine patients in the Japan Medical Data Center (JMDC) database. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient migraine diagnoses, ≥1 outpatient diagnosis and ≥1 migraine-specific acute treatment (triptan or ergotamine), or ≥2 migraine-specific acute treatments from 1 May 2011 to 30 April 2014 were identified. Patients were required to be enrolled in a health plan for ≥1 year before and after the index date. The first migraine diagnosis or acute treatment defined the index date. Patients were stratified by the migraine treatments observed after the index date (i.e. migraine-specific acute treatment only [AT], prophylactic with or without migraine-specific acute treatment [PT], or no treatment [NT]) and described regarding the first migraine treatment regimen and subsequent treatment patterns during up to 1 year of follow-up. Results: A total of 16, 443 patients met the eligibility criteria (9873 AT, 3022 PT, and 3548 NT). AT patients had mean (SD) 10.3 (20.5) acute treatment days during 1-year follow-up, and 81.9% received triptans. When assessing the first migraine treatment regimen during follow-up in PT patients, 29.2% received prophylactic treatment only and 51.7% received both acute and prophylactic treatment. Calcium-channel blockers with or without concomitant triptans (34.4%) were the most common first regimen. Approximately 62.2% discontinued initial prophylactic treatment after an average of 61.2 days (SD = 65.3) of persistent treatment. Among discontinuers, 15.2% reinitiated original treatment and 7.0% switched treatment post-discontinuation within a year, while the remaining patients did not receive prophylactic therapy following discontinuation. Conclusions: Among Japanese migraine patients, prophylactic use was low and associated with a high rate of discontinuation following a brief treatment period. Many patients reinitiated or switched treatment following discontinuation, while a significant proportion of patients remained discontinued from prophylactic therapy, suggesting a high unmet need.