INDIANAPOLIS, June 3, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- To
improve the understanding and advance the treatment of migraine,
Eli Lilly and Company (NYSE: LLY) presented data on unmet
needs in migraine from the OVERCOME (U.S.) study and on its
portfolio of migraine medicines during the American Headache
Society (AHS) 2021 Virtual Annual Scientific Meeting, June 3-6. New findings from OVERCOME (U.S.)
revealed the top six reasons why people hesitate to seek migraine
care.1 Real-world data insights revealed greater
adherence and persistence for Emgality®
(galcanezumab-gnlm), a calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal
antibody (CGRP mAb), compared to oral standard of care (non-CGRP
mAb) preventive migraine treatments in a healthcare claims study
and greater probability of patient preference for the
Emgality auto-injector profile compared to Aimovig®
(erenumab) and AJOVY® (fremanezumab) device
characteristics in a survey.2,3 In the first pairwise
comparison network meta-analysis (NMA) for the acute treatment of
migraine comprehensive of the totality of literature available to
date, people taking 100 mg and 200 mg doses of REYVOW®
(lasmiditan) C-V had greater odds of early onset of efficacy
compared to those taking Nurtec® (rimegepant) or
UBRELVY® (ubrogepant).4
"People with migraine want and need rapid and complete freedom
from migraine. It's important they find treatment options that work
for them so they can stay on them, rather than be dissatisfied or
worse, give up hope and not even seek treatment. These new insights
reveal barriers to optimal care and reinforce the robust profiles
of Emgality and REYVOW as preventive and acute migraine medicines,
respectively," said Ilya Yuffa,
senior vice president and president, Lilly Bio-Medicines. "We hope
to inspire people with migraine and healthcare providers to talk
about the impact this debilitating neurologic disease has on daily
life. People should expect more, and get more, from their
treatments on the path to freedom from debilitating migraine
pain."
OVERCOME Study Reveals Nearly Half of Respondents Hesitate to
Seek Migraine Care
In the most recent results from the OVERCOME (U.S.) study,
nearly half (45%, n=17,951/39,494) of participants hesitated to
seek migraine care and of those, 42% (7,495/17,951; 31 respondents
could not recall) did not seek migraine care in the preceding 12
months. Of the 7,495, nearly half (45%) reported that they want to
take care of their symptoms on their own, and more than one-third
(35%) were concerned their migraine would not be taken seriously.
Other reasons cited included not believing their migraine attacks
were serious or painful enough (29%), financial considerations
(29%) and insurance access, and reimbursement (21%). 42% of those
who did not seek migraine care in the preceding 12
months experienced at least moderate disability, as measured
by Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS), which assesses the
impact of headache attacks on daily activities in school, work, at
home or socially across three months. Due to the debilitating
impact of migraine attacks, advocacy organizations encourage people
with a mild or above MIDAS score to see their healthcare
provider.1
"OVERCOME, the largest population-based study of its kind,
provides crucial insights to improve migraine care," said
Robert E. Shapiro, M.D., Department
of Neurological Sciences, Larner
College of Medicine, University of
Vermont, and scientific advisor to the OVERCOME study.
"Given that nearly half of survey respondents hesitated to seek
migraine care, we urgently need to understand the bases for these
barriers and promote more effective dialogue between healthcare
providers and people with migraine to improve their health
outcomes."
Emgality, and Other CGRP mAbs, Helped More Patients Stay on
Treatment Compared to Oral Standard of Care (Non-CGRP mAb)
Preventive Migraine Treatments
Lilly's analysis is the first study of U.S. healthcare
administrative claims to evaluate adherence and persistence of the
CGRP mAb class of migraine preventive medicines compared to the
oral standard of care (non-CGRP mAb) for migraine preventive
treatments over six months. After matching on the propensity to
initiate a CGRP mAb treatment (n=2,986 for each group), more people
taking Emgality were adherent (more than half, 51.2%) compared to
those taking oral standard of care (non-CGRP mAb) treatments (less
than a third, 27.6%) at six months. After propensity matching
(n=7,867 for each group), more people taking CGRP mAb treatments
were adherent (nearly half, 49.0%) compared to those taking oral
standard of care (non-CGRP mAb) preventive treatments (less than a
third, 27.8%) at six months.2 Adherence to index
medication was assessed as proportion of days covered (PDC) >80%
over a six-month post-index period.
In the six-month study with a maximum 60-day gap between
prescription fills, three out of four patients (74.3%) taking
Emgality filled four or more prescriptions and persistently used
treatment for 148.9 days or nearly five months. By comparison,
28.7% of people taking oral standard of care (non-CGRP mAb)
treatments filled four or more prescriptions and they persisted on
treatment for 92.7 days or approximately three months. N=2,986 for
each group. Two out of three patients (66.2%) taking a CGRP
mAb filled their fourth or more prescription and persistently used
treatment for 142.6 days compared to less than one out of
three (29%) of those taking oral standard of care (non-CGRP
mAb) preventive treatments with a persistence of 93 days (n=7,867
for each group). Persistence was measured by number of days of
continuous therapy from index until the end of the six-month
post-index period, allowing for a maximum gap between fills of 60
days.2
After propensity matching Emgality and oral standard of care
(non-CGRP mAb) patients (n=2,986 for each group), patients taking
oral standard of care (non-CGRP mAb) treatment were nearly 2.5
times more likely to discontinue treatment than those taking
Emgality (61.2% compared to 25.6%). Similarly, after propensity
matching oral standard of care (non-CGRP mAb) and CGRP mAb patients
(n=7,867 for each group), patients taking oral standard of care
(non-CGRP mAb) preventive migraine treatments were twice as likely
to discontinue treatment than those taking CGRP mAb treatments
(61.3% compared to 31%).2
Emgality Auto-Injector Characteristics Had
a Higher Probability to be Preferred by Patients Compared to Device
Characteristics of Other Self-Injectable Preventive Migraine
Treatments
1,067 adults residing in the United
States, the United Kingdom,
and Germany with moderate to
severe episodic migraine or chronic migraine and experience with
migraine preventive treatments within 5 years, completed a
stated-preference web-based survey using a discrete choice
experiment (DCE). Experience with clinician-prescribed preventive
treatments for migraine within the previous 5 years was required
and people who were treatment-naïve were excluded. On average,
participants were 41.2 years old, had lived with migraine for 17.4
years, and they had previously used on average 3.5 preventive
treatments. Half (50.4%) had experience using self-injectables, and
more than half (54.8%) had low or no fear of needles. More than
two-thirds (72.0%) of the participants had severe or very severe
disability based on MIDAS.3
Self-injectable treatments were predicted to
be preferred over oral treatments in nearly nine out of ten
(86.3%) choices made by participants. Preferences for two
hypothetical injectable treatments were primarily driven by shorter
injection duration, an auto-retracting needle, and longer
outside-of-refrigerator storage. A profile comparable to the
Emgality device had the highest likelihood of being preferred by
nearly half of participants (45.6%) compared to a device profile
comparable to Aimovig and AJOVY (29.4% and 25%,
respectively).3
A DCE is an established preference elicitation method that is
used to understand the effect of changes in key treatment
attributes on patients' preferences. Participants repeatedly chose
their preferred treatment among three hypothetical preventive
treatment options for migraine characterized by the same attributes
and varying levels of each: two CGRP-targeting mAb treatments
administered using auto-injectors and a daily oral treatment by
completing 15 DCE choice tasks. The three treatment options were
described by varying levels of seven attributes, identified from
literature review and focus groups and that were introduced to
participants by a video: dosing schedule, storage requirements,
base and pinching requirements, injection steps, injection
duration, needle removal, and dose confirmation.
This study did not evaluate patient use of the devices nor did
it compare the clinical safety and efficacy of these
treatments.
For additional information, please see the Patient Preferences
for Self-Injectable Preventive Treatments for Migraine study
details below.
"Our device was designed with patients in mind, and we are
pleased to see that for people with migraine, there's a greater
probability that they prefer the Emgality auto-injector profile
over those of the Aimovig and AJOVY devices, using
discrete choice experiment methods. We are also thrilled that
nearly 75% of people on Emgality consistently filled their
prescriptions compared to the less than 30% of those taking
non-CGRP mAb (oral standard of care) preventive migraine
medications at the fourth fill. In the absence of head-to-head
studies, these real-world insights about Emgality are especially
valuable given high discontinuation rates for people taking
non-CGRP mAb treatments," said Antje
Tockhorn-Heidenreich, senior research scientist, Global
Patient Outcomes and Real World Evidence, Eli Lilly and
Company.
REYVOW (100 mg and 200 mg) Demonstrated Greater Odds of
Achieving Two Hour Pain Freedom and Two Hour Pain
Relief Compared to Nurtec and UBRELVY in Network
Meta-Analysis (NMA)
In the first NMA of its kind to include the totality of Phase 2
and 3 studies (n=13,514) available to date and to measure rapid
efficacy at two hour pain freedom, two hour pain relief and one
hour pain relief for all Phase 3 doses of REYVOW,
Nurtec and UBRELVY, REYVOW 100 mg and 200 mg had
greater odds for achieving pain freedom at two hours and pain
relief at two hours compared to all doses of
Nurtec and UBRELVY (statistically significant
for majority of pairwise comparisons). People taking REYVOW 100 mg
and 200 mg had greater odds of achieving pain relief at one hour
compared to Nurtec 75 mg ODT and UBRELVY 50
mg. There were no published data on Nurtec 75 mg
tablet and UBRELVY 25 mg and 100 mg for this endpoint. REYVOW
50 mg had comparable efficacy to the doses of
Nurtec and UBRELVY.4
Pairwise treatment
comparisons*
|
REYVOW 200
mg
Odds ratio (95%
credible interval)
|
REYVOW 100
mg
Odds ratio (95%
credible interval)
|
REYVOW 50
mg
Odds ratio (95%
credible interval)
|
Pain freedom at
two hours
|
REYVOW vs.
Nurtec 75 mg
|
1.80
(1.49–2.16)
|
1.39
(1.15–1.67)
|
1.12
(0.87–1.42)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 25 mg
|
1.88
(1.44–2.45)
|
1.46
(1.11–1.89)
|
1.17
(0.86–1.58)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 50 mg
|
1.83
(1.46–2.27)
|
1.42
(1.13–1.76)
|
1.14
(0.86–1.48)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 100 mg
|
1.60
(1.21–2.08)
|
1.23
(0.93–1.61)
|
0.99
(0.72–1.35)
|
Pain relief at two
hours
|
REYVOW vs.
Nurtec 75 mg
|
1.27
(1.05–1.53)
|
1.31
(1.09–1.58)
|
0.93
(0.74–1.16)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 25 mg
|
1.47
(1.13–1.90)
|
1.52
(1.17–1.97)
|
1.08
(0.81–1.43)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 50 mg
|
1.34
(1.08–1.68)
|
1.39
(1.12–1.74)
|
0.99
(0.76–1.27)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 100 mg
|
1.32
(1.02–1.71)
|
1.37
(1.05–1.77)
|
0.97
(0.73–1.30)
|
Pain relief at one
hour
|
REYVOW vs. Nurtec 75
mg
|
1.54
(1.18–2.01)
|
1.40
(1.07–1.82)
|
0.97
(0.72–1.32)
|
REYVOW vs.
UBRELVY 50 mg
|
1.54
(1.22–1.95)
|
1.39
(1.10–1.76)
|
0.97
(0.74–1.28)
|
*Pairwise treatment
comparisons – results from Bayesian fixed-effect NMA. Adjusted by
baseline risk for pain freedom at 2 hours.
|
In the very early-onset exploration sensitivity analysis, REYVOW
200 mg had higher odds of achieving pain relief at 30 minutes
compared to Nurtec 75 mg ODT and UBRELVY 50
mg. REYVOW 100 mg and 200 mg had higher odds of achieving pain
freedom at one hour compared to UBRELVY 50 mg. There were no
published data on Nurtec 75 mg (tablet and ODT) or
UBRELVY 25 mg and 100 mg for this endpoint.4
Pairwise comparisons were evaluated in accordance with published
guidelines.5 Robustness of the results was investigated
assessing the model's convergence and goodness of fit, and through
sensitivity analyses, including looking at 1) only Phase 3 trials,
2) both Nurtec formulations (tablet and ODT), and
3) very early-onset including pain relief at 30 minutes and pain
freedom at one hour.4
"We must address barriers to migraine care and inspire people to
talk with healthcare providers about their treatment goals and the
impact migraine has on their lives. It is so important that people
find migraine medications that work for them; and we are excited to
present new insights about migraine, Emgality, and REYVOW. We
encourage everyone to expect more, and get more, from their
preventive and acute migraine treatments, and to know that freedom
from this disabling pain is possible," said Michael Cobas Meyer, M.D., vice president,
global medical affairs, Lilly Bio-Medicines.
About the Studies
- Reasons for Hesitating to Consult for Migraine Care: Results
of the OVERCOME (U.S.) Study
A pooled analysis of the 2018
and 2019 cohorts of the Observational Survey of the
Epidemiology, Treatment and Care of
Migraine (OVERCOME) study evaluated whether 39,494
U.S. respondents hesitated to consult for migraine care and the
reasons why. Comparisons were made between groups on variables
including socio-demographics, migraine diagnosis, number of monthly
headache days, sensitivity to light and sound and nausea, and
self-reported outcomes on severity of disability among
others.1
The OVERCOME study is a multi-cohort,
cross-sectional and longitudinal, prospective web-based patient
survey designed to follow U.S. population samples with migraine for
up to two years following their enrollment. This research aims to
further understand the unmet needs of those with migraine by
assessing the burden of migraine experienced by people living with
the disease, identify barriers to the appropriate treatment of
migraine, and assess how the introduction of novel treatment
options may influence delivery of migraine care and
outcomes.1
- Adherence and Persistence Associated with Calcitonin
Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs) Compared
to Oral Standard of Care (non-CGRP mAb) Migraine Preventive
Treatments Among Adult Patients with Migraine
Retrospective
observational cohort study using U.S. healthcare administrative
claims from the IBM MarketScan Database between May 1, 2017, and December
30, 2019, adherence and persistence rates were evaluated for
12,681 adult patients with migraine initiating treatment with CGRP
mAbs (Emgality, Aimovig or AJOVY), 3,253 patients with Emgality and
21,474 patients prescribed oral standard of care (non-CGRP mAbs)
(antidepressants, beta-blockers, anticonvulsants) or neurotoxin.
This included people with an ICHD-3 migraine diagnosis and patients
had ≥1-year pre-index and ≥6 months post-index continuous
enrollment. In order to control for bias, propensity score matching
was implemented to match CGRP mAb patients to non-CGRP mAb
patients, and Emgality patients to non-CGRP mAb
patients.2
- Patient Preferences for Self-Injectable Preventive
Treatments for Migraine
The DCE was informed by a literature
review and qualitative and quantitative research, including focus
groups and pilot-testing the DCE, and questions fielded among
participants did not include efficacy attributes. Preference was
determined by relative attribute importance scores. Response data
were analyzed using an error-component logit model (EC-MNL); EC-MNL
estimates were used to calculate predictive choice probabilities of
attributes profile comparable to Emgality, Aimovig and AJOVY. The
number of studies included for each outcome was relatively small,
which can lead to unstable models especially when using random
effects models.3
- Relative Efficacy of Lasmiditan versus Rimegepant and
Ubrogepant as Acute Treatments of Migraine: Network Meta-Analysis
(NMA) Findings on Early Onset of Efficacy
The NMA assessed
12 Phase 2-4 blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled
trials involving 13,514 adults with episodic or chronic migraine
with or without aura. The analysis evaluated REYVOW 50 mg, 100 mg,
and 200 mg, Nurtec 75 mg (tablet and ODT), and UBRELVY 25 mg,
50 mg, and 100 mg and early-onset efficacy endpoints included pain
freedom at 2 hours and pain relief at 1 hour and 2 hours. Pairwise
comparisons were reported as odds ratios with 95% credible
intervals. Given the different mechanisms of action among
treatments evaluated in the NMA, the safety profiles of each could
not be compared quantitatively and discontinuation due to adverse
events could not be analyzed.4
ABOUT REYVOW® (lasmiditan) TABLETS
REYVOW
is a novel oral medication that strongly binds to 5-HT1F
receptors located both centrally and peripherally, which may play a
role in migraine, a neurologic disease. REYVOW is approved for the
acute treatment of migraine with or without aura in adults and is
not indicated for the prevention of migraine. REYVOW, the
first and only FDA-approved ditan, is brain-penetrant and
presumably exerts its therapeutic effects by activating these
receptors; however, the precise mechanism is unknown.
IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION FOR REYVOW
WARNINGS
AND PRECAUTIONS
Driving Impairment
REYVOW may cause significant driving impairment. In a driving
study, administration of single 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg doses of
REYVOW significantly impaired subjects' ability to drive.
Additionally, more sleepiness was reported at 8 hours following a
single dose of REYVOW compared to placebo. Advise patients not to
engage in potentially hazardous activities requiring complete
mental alertness, such as driving a motor vehicle or operating
machinery, for at least 8 hours after each dose of REYVOW. Patients
who cannot follow this advice should not take REYVOW. Prescribers
and patients should be aware that patients may not be able to
assess their own driving competence and the degree of impairment
caused by REYVOW.
Central Nervous System Depression
REYVOW may cause central nervous system (CNS) depression, including
dizziness and sedation. Because of the potential for REYVOW to
cause sedation, other cognitive and/or neuropsychiatric adverse
reactions, and driving impairment, REYVOW should be used with
caution if used in combination with alcohol or other CNS
depressants. Patients should be warned against driving and other
activities requiring complete mental alertness for at least 8 hours
after REYVOW is taken.
Serotonin Syndrome
In clinical trials, reactions consistent with serotonin syndrome
were reported in patients treated with REYVOW who were not taking
any other drugs associated with serotonin syndrome. Serotonin
syndrome may also occur with REYVOW during coadministration with
serotonergic drugs. Serotonin syndrome symptoms may include mental
status changes, autonomic instability, neuromuscular signs, and/or
gastrointestinal signs and symptoms. The onset of symptoms usually
occurs within minutes to hours of receiving a new or a greater dose
of a serotonergic medication. Discontinue REYVOW if serotonin
syndrome is suspected.
Medication Overuse Headache
Overuse of acute migraine
drugs may lead to exacerbation of headache (i.e., medication
overuse headache). Medication overuse headache may present as
migraine-like daily headaches or as a marked increase in frequency
of migraine attacks. Detoxification of patients including
withdrawal of the overused drugs and treatment of withdrawal
symptoms (which often includes a transient worsening of headache)
may be necessary.
ADVERSE REACTIONS
The most common adverse reactions
associated with REYVOW (≥2% and greater than placebo in clinical
studies) were dizziness, fatigue, paresthesia, sedation, nausea
and/or vomiting and muscle weakness.
ABUSE
REYVOW contains lasmiditan, a Schedule V
controlled substance (C-V).
REYVOW has abuse potential. Evaluate patients for risk of drug
abuse and observe them for signs of lasmiditan misuse or abuse.
See Full Prescribing Information and Medication
Guide.
LM HCP ISI 28SEPT2020
About Emgality
Emgality is a monoclonal antibody that
selectively binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and was
approved by the FDA in September 2018 for the preventive
treatment of migraine in adults. Emgality is the only CGRP
monoclonal antibody with response rates in the episodic migraine
headache population on ≥50%, ≥75% and 100% reduction from baseline
in monthly migraine headache days over Months 1 to 6 included in
its Full Prescribing Information. In June 2019, Emgality
was approved by the FDA for the treatment of episodic cluster
headache in adults.
Indications and Usage for Emgality (galcanezumab-gnlm) 120 mg
Injection
Emgality is a calcitonin gene-related peptide
(CGRP) antagonist indicated in adults for the:
- preventive treatment of migraine
- treatment of episodic cluster headache
Important Safety Information for
Emgality
Contraindications
Emgality is
contraindicated in patients with serious hypersensitivity to
galcanezumab-gnlm or to any of the excipients.
Warnings and Precautions
Hypersensitivity
Reactions
Hypersensitivity reactions, including dyspnea,
urticaria, and rash, have occurred with Emgality in clinical
studies and the postmarketing setting. Cases of anaphylaxis and
angioedema have also been reported in the postmarketing setting. If
a serious or severe hypersensitivity reaction occurs, discontinue
administration of Emgality and initiate appropriate therapy.
Hypersensitivity reactions can occur days after administration and
may be prolonged.
Adverse Reactions
The most common adverse reactions
(incidence ≥2% and at least 2% greater than placebo) in Emgality
clinical studies were injection site reactions.
Please see Full Prescribing Information,
including Patient Information, for Emgality. See
Instructions for Use included with the device.
GZ HCP ISI 10DEC2019
About Migraine
Migraine is a severely disabling
neurologic disease characterized by recurrent episodes of moderate
to severe headache accompanied by other symptoms including nausea,
sensitivity to light, and sensitivity to sound.6,7 More
than 30 million American adults have migraine, with three times
more women than men affected by migraine.8 Migraine is
often incapacitating, leading to high personal, societal and
economic burden. According to the Medical Expenditures Panel
Survey, total annual healthcare costs associated with migraine are
estimated to be as high as $56
billion in the United
States, yet it remains under-recognized and
under-treated.9
About Lilly's Commitment to Headache Disorders
For
more than 25 years, Lilly has been committed to helping people
affected by headache disorders, investigating more than a dozen
different compounds for the treatment of migraine and cluster
headache. These research programs have accelerated our
understanding of these diseases and furthered the advancement of
treatments for headache disorders including REYVOW, approved by the
FDA for the acute treatment of migraine, with or without aura, in
adults and Emgality, approved by the FDA for the preventive
treatment of migraine and the treatment of episodic cluster
headache. Our goal is to apply our combined clinical, academic and
professional experience to build a research portfolio that delivers
broad solutions and addresses the needs of people affected by these
disabling neurologic diseases.
About Eli Lilly and Company
Lilly is a global health
care leader that unites caring with discovery to create medicines
that make life better for people around the world. We were founded
more than a century ago by a man committed to creating high-quality
medicines that meet real needs, and today we remain true to that
mission in all our work. Across the globe, Lilly employees work to
discover and bring life-changing medicines to those who need them,
improve the understanding and management of disease, and give back
to communities through philanthropy and volunteerism. To learn more
about Lilly, please visit us at lilly.com and
lilly.com/newsroom.
Lilly Forward-Looking Statement
This press release
contains forward-looking statements (as that term is defined in the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) about REYVOW
(lasmiditan), as an acute treatment for patients with migraine, and
Emgality (galcanezumab-gnlm), as a preventive treatment for
patients with migraine and as a treatment for patients with
episodic cluster headache, and reflects Lilly's current beliefs and
expectations. However, as with any pharmaceutical product, there
are substantial risks and uncertainties in the process of drug
research, development, and commercialization. Among other things,
there is no guarantee that future study results will be consistent
with study findings to date, that REYVOW and/or Emgality will
receive any additional regulatory approvals, or that REYVOW and/or
Emgality will be commercially successful. For further discussion of
these and other risks and uncertainties, see Lilly's most recent
Form 10-K and Form 10-Q filings with the United States Securities
and Exchange Commission. Except as required by law, Lilly
undertakes no duty to update forward-looking statements to reflect
events after the date of this release.
P-LLY
All product/company names shown herein are the trademarks of
their respective owners.
References:
- Shapiro R. et al, Reasons for Hesitating to Consult for
Migraine Care: Results of the OVERCOME (U.S.) Study. Poster
presented at: 63rd Virtual Annual Scientific Meeting of
the American Headache Society (AHS), 2021; June 3, 2021.
- Foster S. et al, Adherence and Persistence Associated with
Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs)
Compared to non-CGRP mAb Treatments for Prevention of Migraine.
Poster presented at: 63rd Virtual Annual Scientific
Meeting of the American Headache Society (AHS), 2021; June 3, 2021.
- Seo J. et al, Patient Preferences for Self-injectable
Preventive Treatments for Migraine. Poster presented at:
63rd Virtual Annual Scientific Meeting of the American
Headache Society (AHS), 2021; June 3,
2021.
- Polavieja P. Relative Efficacy of Lasmiditan Versus Rimegepant
and Ubrogepant as Acute Treatments of Migraine: Network
Meta-Analysis Findings on Early Onset of Efficacy. Poster presented
at: 63rd Virtual Annual Scientific Meeting of the
American Headache Society (AHS), 2021; June 3, 2021.
- "Evidence Synthesis TSD Series." NICE Decision Support Unit,
nicedsu.org.uk/technical-support-documents/evidence-synthesis-tsd-series/.
- Katsarava Z, Buse D, Manack A, et al. Defining the differences
between episodic migraine and chronic migraine. Current Pain
Headache Reports. 2012;16:86.
- Blumenfeld AM, Payne KA, Varon SF, et al. Disability, HRQOL,
and resource use amongst chronic and episodic migraineurs. Results
from the International Burden of Migraine Study (IBMS).
Cephalalgia. 2011;31:301.
- Lipton RB, Bigal ME, Diamond M, et al., Migraine prevalence,
disease burden, and the need for preventive therapy. Neurology.
2007;68:343-349.
- Raval AD, Shah A. National trends in direct health care
expenditures among U.S. adults with migraine: 2004 to 2013. Journal
of Pain. 2017;57:60.
Refer
to:
|
Jen Dial;
dial_jennifer_kay@lilly.com; 317-220-1172 (Lilly
Bio-Medicines)
|
|
Kevin
Hern; hern_kevin_r@lilly.com; 317-277-1838 (Investor
Relations)
|
View original content to download
multimedia:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/lilly-reveals-critical-barriers-to-optimal-migraine-care-and-insights-from-novel-clinical-and-patient-centric-real-world-evidence-supporting-lillys-preventive-and-acute-treatment-portfolio-at-ahs-2021-301304727.html
SOURCE Eli Lilly and Company