MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313855458 · doi:10.18433/jpps33158

Persistence and switching patterns of migraine prophylactic medications in Canada: A retrospective claims analysis comparing adherence and evaluating the economic burden of illness

2023· article· en· W4313855458 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrew Ojo, Steven Zhang, Nataly Bleibdrey, Dan Zimskind, Nasir Keshvani, Rob Chalmers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsTD Bank Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigraineMedicineMedical prescriptionPersistence (discontinuity)SumatriptanRetrospective cohort studyIntensive care medicineChronic MigraineMigraine treatmentPediatricsInternal medicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and the burden of illness among adult migraine patients in Canada prescribed migraine prophylactics. Little is known about the relative persistence of treatments in the real-world setting and the impact of migraine prophylactic therapy on patients. As a result, migraine care in Canada continues to inadequately serve patients suffering from frequent headache days, reflecting a large unmet need. METHODS: This retrospective study used Reformulary Group's longitudinal prescription claims database. Private payer data were analyzed to identify 2007 migraine prophylactic naïve patients, with a prior history of acute therapy, for tracking over 24 months to determine treatment patterns and costs. Patient flow is summarized in a Sankey diagram visualizing persistence and switching across different timepoints. RESULTS: Patient persistence to migraine prophylactic medications was low at 24.9% (n=500); Switching from index medications to another prophylactic medication was common (27%), however 50% of patients discontinued without switching. It was observed that acute treatment and opioid use were much lower when patients established and maintained therapy on migraine prophylactics. Overall, angiotensin receptor blockers and CGRP antagonists had high persistence but were underutilized therapies while the inverse was true for antidepressants and anticonvulsants. CONCLUSION: In a real-word setting, recognizing that many patients may discontinue preventative treatment completely after their first therapy, there is a need to employ migraine-specific prophylactics and/or tolerable medications early. Treatment guidelines aligned to costs savings and/or requiring step therapy may be inadvertently failing patients. Further, the impact of migraine on the day-to-day lives of patients and high societal costs such as its impact on productivity should be weighed in considering migraine's burden of illness and the benefits of treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical SciencesSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207