Trial Outcomes & Findings for Comparison of Patient-reported Outcomes for Rimegepant and Triptans in the 2023 US National Health and Wellness Survey (NCT NCT06680206)
NCT ID: NCT06680206
Last Updated: 2026-01-22
Results Overview
Number of participants according to migraine medication type: 1) as prescription drug only, 2) as OTC only or 3) as both prescription drug and OTC based on the use of migraine medication classes is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
COMPLETED
1395 participants
At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.
2026-01-22
Participant Flow
In this retrospective observational study, data of participants who used rimegepant or triptans for migraine (diagnosed by physician) in Year 2023, was retrieved from United States National Health and Wellness Survey (NHWS). Retrieved retrospective data was evaluated in approximately 1.41 months (from study start date: 10-Oct-2024 to study completion date: 20-Nov-2024) per objectives of the study.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Rimegepant
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Triptans
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
137
|
1258
|
|
Overall Study
Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting (IPTW) Adjustment
|
135
|
1260
|
|
Overall Study
Sensitivity Analysis
|
105
|
1258
|
|
Overall Study
Sensitivity Analysis IPTW Adjustment
|
103
|
1257
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
137
|
1258
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Comparison of Patient-reported Outcomes for Rimegepant and Triptans in the 2023 US National Health and Wellness Survey
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Rimegepant
n=137 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Triptans
n=1258 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Total
n=1395 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Customized
18-29 years
|
25 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
178 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
203 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
30-39 years
|
26 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
185 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
211 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
40-49 years
|
39 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
249 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
288 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
50-59 years
|
29 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
282 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
311 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
60-69 years
|
13 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
248 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
261 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
70-79 years
|
5 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
108 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
113 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
80-89 years
|
0 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
124 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
1016 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
1140 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
13 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
242 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
255 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
|
18 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
122 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
140 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
|
119 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
1136 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
1255 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race · Black
|
12 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
114 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
126 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race · White
|
116 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
1062 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
1178 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Race · Other
|
9 Participants
n=270 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=4 Participants
|
91 Participants
n=9 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Number of participants according to migraine medication type: 1) as prescription drug only, 2) as OTC only or 3) as both prescription drug and OTC based on the use of migraine medication classes is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Migraine Medication Type (Prescription Drug or Over the Counter [OTC])
Prescription Drug only
|
682 Participants
|
74 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Migraine Medication Type (Prescription Drug or Over the Counter [OTC])
Prescription drug and OTC
|
578 Participants
|
61 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Migraine Medication Type (Prescription Drug or Over the Counter [OTC])
OTC only
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Number of participants according to migraine treatment type: 1) acute use only, 2) prevention use only, or 3) both acute and prevention use based on the use of migraine medication classes is reported in this outcome measure. Acute treatments included: triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, barbiturates, ergots, gepants \[acute; including Nurtec\], ditan, combination analgesics, and other acute treatment; preventive treatment included: anticonvulsants, beta blocker, antidepressant, calcitonin gene-related peptide antibodies monoclonal antibodies (CGRP mAb), botox, and gepant \[prevention treatment including Nurtec\]). Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Migraine Treatment Type (Acute or Prevention)
Acute use only
|
837 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Migraine Treatment Type (Acute or Prevention)
Prevention use only
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Migraine Treatment Type (Acute or Prevention)
Both Acute and Prevention use
|
423 Participants
|
135 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Total number of distinct acute migraine agent drug classes used by participants is reported as mean in this outcome measure. Acute migraine agents included: triptans, NSAIDs, opioids, barbiturates, ergots, gepants \[acute; including Nurtec\], ditan, combination analgesics, and other acute treatment. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Total Number of Acute Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
|
2.2 Drug classes per participant
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
2.1 Drug classes per participant
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Number of participants categorized by the number of distinct acute migraine agent drug classes used is reported in this outcome measure. Categories included 1 drug class, 2 or more drug classes, and 3 or more drug classes. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Number of Acute Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
3 or more drug classes
|
406 Participants
|
40 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Number of Acute Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
1 drug class
|
431 Participants
|
51 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Number of Acute Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
2 or more drug classes
|
829 Participants
|
84 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. The analysis was performed on all participants reported under Overall Number of Participants Analyzed.
Preventive migraine agents included: anticonvulsants, beta blocker, antidepressant, CGRP mAb, botox, and gepant \[prevention treatment including Nurtec\]. Total number of distinct preventive migraine agent drug classes used by participants is reported as mean in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Total Number of Prevention Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
|
0.5 Drug classes per participant
Standard Deviation 0.8
|
1.5 Drug classes per participant
Standard Deviation 0.7
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. The analysis was performed on all participants reported under Overall Number of Participants Analyzed.
Number of participants categorized by the number of distinct prescription preventive migraine agent drug classes used reported in this outcome measure. Categories included use of 1 drug class, 2 or more drug classes, and 3 or more drug classes. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Number of Prevention Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
1 drug class
|
297 Participants
|
79 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Number of Prevention Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
2 or more drug classes
|
126 Participants
|
56 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Number of Prevention Migraine Agent Drug Classes Used
3 or more drug classes
|
25 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Number of participants according to current migraine treatments on drug classes including: Nurtec (rimegepant) only, acute agents, triptans, NSAIDs, opioids, barbiturates, ergots, gepants \[acute; including Nurtec\], ditan, combination analgesics, and other acute treatment (aspirin lysine/metoclopramide hydrochloride monohydrate or indometacin/caffeine/prochlorperazine), prevention agents (anticonvulsants, beta-blocker, antidepressant, CGRP mAb, botox, and gepant) are reported in this outcome measure. One participant could receive more than one migraine treatment. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Nurtec (rimegepant) only
|
0 Participants
|
135 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Acute agents
|
1259 Participants
|
135 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Triptans
|
1260 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
NSAIDs
|
187 Participants
|
22 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Opioids
|
132 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Barbiturates
|
96 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Ergots
|
35 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Gepants (acute; including Nurtec)
|
33 Participants
|
135 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Ditan
|
3 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Combination analgesics
|
206 Participants
|
18 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Other (acute treatment)
|
20 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Prevention agents
|
423 Participants
|
135 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Anticonvulsants
|
191 Participants
|
18 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Beta blocker
|
45 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Antidepressant
|
53 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
CGRP mAb
|
188 Participants
|
28 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Botox
|
76 Participants
|
15 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments
Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec)
|
29 Participants
|
135 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, 'Number Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified rows.
Number of participants according to treatment satisfaction for the migraine drug classes including: acute agents, NSAIDs, opioids, barbiturates, ergots, gepants (acute), ditans, combination analgesics, other, prevention agents, anticonvulsants, beta blockers, antidepressants, CGRPs mAb, botox, and gepant reported in this outcome measure. Treatment satisfaction for each of the migraine drug class was categorized as: extremely dissatisfied, very dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, somewhat satisfied, very satisfied, extremely satisfied. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Very dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
17 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Somewhat satisfied
|
11 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Very satisfied
|
13 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Extremely satisfied
|
5 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Extremely dissatisfied
|
2 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Very dissatisfied
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
4 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
51 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Somewhat satisfied
|
47 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Very satisfied
|
34 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - CGRPs mAb · Extremely satisfied
|
49 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Extremely dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Very dissatisfied
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
3 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Somewhat satisfied
|
33 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Very satisfied
|
23 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Botox · Extremely satisfied
|
16 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Extremely dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Very dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
4 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
1 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Somewhat satisfied
|
12 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Very satisfied
|
9 Participants
|
51 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepant (prevention treatment including Nurtec) · Extremely satisfied
|
3 Participants
|
39 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Very dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Very satisfied
|
5 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
7 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Somewhat satisfied
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Extremely satisfied
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Extremely dissatisfied
|
28 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Very dissatisfied
|
12 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
21 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
106 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Somewhat satisfied
|
107 Participants
|
29 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Very satisfied
|
85 Participants
|
47 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Prevention agents · Extremely satisfied
|
64 Participants
|
33 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Extremely dissatisfied
|
25 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Very dissatisfied
|
4 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
11 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
38 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Very satisfied
|
43 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Somewhat satisfied
|
47 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Anticonvulsants · Extremely satisfied
|
23 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Extremely dissatisfied
|
7 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Very dissatisfied
|
6 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Somewhat satisfied
|
11 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Very satisfied
|
17 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Very satisfied
|
6 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Beta-blockers · Extremely satisfied
|
11 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Extremely dissatisfied
|
97 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Very dissatisfied
|
45 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
92 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
145 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Somewhat satisfied
|
351 Participants
|
36 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Very satisfied
|
341 Participants
|
42 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Acute agents · Extremely satisfied
|
188 Participants
|
31 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Extremely dissatisfied
|
15 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Very dissatisfied
|
13 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
8 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
24 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Somewhat satisfied
|
65 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Extremely satisfied
|
7 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Extremely dissatisfied
|
6 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Very dissatisfied
|
40 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Very satisfied
|
45 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - NSAIDs · Extremely satisfied
|
17 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Extremely dissatisfied
|
22 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Very dissatisfied
|
13 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
5 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
45 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Opioids · Somewhat satisfied
|
23 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
11 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
10 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Somewhat satisfied
|
14 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Very satisfied
|
8 Participants
|
52 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Extremely satisfied
|
2 Participants
|
38 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Extremely dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Somewhat satisfied
|
18 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Very satisfied
|
9 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Barbiturates · Extremely satisfied
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Very dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Extremely dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Very dissatisfied
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Somewhat satisfied
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Very satisfied
|
1 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ergots · Extremely satisfied
|
31 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Extremely dissatisfied
|
6 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Antidepressants · Extremely dissatisfied
|
7 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Very dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Gepants (acute; including Nurtec) · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
3 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
21 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Somewhat dissatisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Somewhat satisfied
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Very satisfied
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Ditans · Extremely satisfied
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Extremely dissatisfied
|
11 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Very dissatisfied
|
13 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
40 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Somewhat satisfied
|
71 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Very satisfied
|
30 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Combination Analgesics · Extremely satisfied
|
20 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Migraine Drug Class
Current migraine satisfactions - Other (Acute treatment) · Extremely dissatisfied
|
6 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Analysis was performed on all participants reported under "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed".
Participants were categorized based on current use of OTC migraine treatments, including analgesics (acetaminophen only), analgesics (combination), NSAIDs, and other OTCs.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments on OTC Class
Analgesics (acetaminophen only)
|
198 Participants
|
34 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments on OTC Class
Analgesics (Combination)
|
221 Participants
|
28 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments on OTC Class
NSAIDs
|
320 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Current Migraine Treatments on OTC Class
Other
|
4 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Number of participants according to treatment satisfaction for analgesics (acetaminophen only) is reported in this outcome measure. Treatment satisfaction was categorized as: extremely dissatisfied, very dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, somewhat satisfied, very satisfied, extremely satisfied. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=198 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=34 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Extremely dissatisfied
|
13 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Very dissatisfied
|
3 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Somewhat dissatisfied
|
13 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
44 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Somewhat satisfied
|
93 Participants
|
12 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Very satisfied
|
24 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction of Analgesics (Acetaminophen Only)
Extremely satisfied
|
8 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Number of participants according to treatment satisfaction for rimegepant or triptans is reported in this outcome measure. Treatment satisfaction was categorized as: extremely dissatisfied, very dissatisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, somewhat satisfied, very satisfied, extremely satisfied. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Extremely dissatisfied
|
74 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Very dissatisfied
|
46 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Somewhat dissatisfied
|
69 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied
|
101 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Somewhat satisfied
|
333 Participants
|
32 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Very satisfied
|
389 Participants
|
51 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to Treatment Satisfaction to Rimegepant or Triptans
Extremely satisfied
|
248 Participants
|
39 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
RAND-36=standardized survey evaluating 8 domains of functional health and well-being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. Score for each of the 8 domains were scaled from 0=worst condition to 100=best condition, higher scores indicated better health status. These 8 domains were summarized as summary scores: physical component scores (derived from physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health), mental component scores (derived from social functioning, role emotional mental health and vitality) and global health composite score (derived from physical and mental component scores). Each of the summary scores were standardized to a T-score with mean=50 and SD=10. Scores ranged from 0 to 100, where 0 (worst condition) to 100 (best condition), where higher scores represent better health status. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Research and Development (RAND-36) Physical Component Score, Mental Component Score and Global Health Score - Primary Analysis
Mental summary composite T score
|
37.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.6
|
38.2 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12
|
|
Research and Development (RAND-36) Physical Component Score, Mental Component Score and Global Health Score - Primary Analysis
Physical summary composite T score
|
39.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.9
|
39.5 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12
|
|
Research and Development (RAND-36) Physical Component Score, Mental Component Score and Global Health Score - Primary Analysis
Global health composite T score
|
36.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.7
|
37.2 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.4
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
EQ-5D-5L is participant completed questionnaire that consisted of two components: a five-item health state profile and visual analog scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile had 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension had 5 levels: 1= no problems, 2= slight problems, 3= moderate problems, 4= severe problems and 5= extreme problems. Responses to 5 dimensions comprised health state/a single utility index value. E.g. if a participant responds "no problems" for each 5 dimensions, then health state was coded as "11111" with a predefined index value to it. Every health state (coded as combination of responses) had unique predefined utility index value assigned to it per US value sets, by EuroQol. Index scores ranged from -0.59 to 1; where 1 =best possible health state. Negative values= health states perceived as worse than dead, (death=0). Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) Index Score - Primary Analysis
|
0.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.2
|
0.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.2
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
The EQ-5D-5L is a participant completed questionnaire that consisted of two components: a five-item health state profile and a VAS. EQ-5D VAS was used to record participant's rating for his/her current health state on a vertical VAS with scores ranging from 0 to 100, where 0 = worst imaginable health state and 100 = best imaginable health state. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
EQ-5D-5L Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score - Primary Analysis
|
66.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.6
|
66.5 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.8
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
The WPAI is a standardized Patient reported outcome (PRO) that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage of work time missed ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity) to-100% (total loss of work productivity) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Work Time Missed in Past 7 Days Based on Work Productivity and Activity Impairment - General Health (WPAI-GH) Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
|
9.6 Percentage work time missed
Standard Deviation 19.9
|
7.1 Percentage work time missed
Standard Deviation 17.1
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage impairment experienced ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity/high impairment) to 100% (total loss of work productivity) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage Impairment Experienced While at Work in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
|
27.6 Percentage impairment
Standard Deviation 25.4
|
29.4 Percentage impairment
Standard Deviation 26.2
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage overall work impairment experienced ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity/high impairment) to 100% (total loss of work productivity/high impairment) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage Overall Work Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
|
31.1 Percentage work impairment
Standard Deviation 28.5
|
31.6 Percentage work impairment
Standard Deviation 28.1
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, 'Number Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for the specified rows.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage of total activity impairment ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity) to 100% (total loss of work productivity/high impairment) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. In this outcome measure, percentage total activity impairment among total population, employed, unemployed and disabled is reported. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
Total activity impairment
|
37.6 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 28.6
|
41.3 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 29.3
|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
Activity impairment among employed
|
31.1 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 26.5
|
31.8 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 26.4
|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
Activity impairment among unemployed
|
41.6 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 27.9
|
48.8 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 27.4
|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Primary Analysis
Activity impairment among disabled
|
69.4 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 21
|
70 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 23.9
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
MIDAS is a retrospective, self-administered, 7-item questionnaire that measured headache-related disability as lost time due to headache from paid work or school, household work, and non-work activities. Participants provided the number of missed work or school days (MIDAS Item 1); missed household chores days (MIDAS Item 2); missed social or leisure activity days (MIDAS Item 3); and days with productivity loss at work or school (MIDAS Item 4), days with productivity loss in household work (MIDAS Item 5), frequency of headaches (MIDAS Item 6) and the intensity of the headache pain (MIDAS Item 7). The score ranged from 0 (no disability) to 90 (maximum disability) for each of individual item scores. The 5 item scores (Item 1 to Item 5) were summed to compute the MIDAS total score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 450 (maximum disability). Lower scores indicate less headache-related disability. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 1 (MGMIDAS1)
|
2.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 6.1
|
2.0 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.5
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 2 (MGMIDAS2)
|
4.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.6
|
6.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.2
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 4 (MGMIDAS4)
|
7.6 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.4
|
8.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.6
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS (Total score)
|
26.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 36
|
32.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 40.8
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 3 (MGMIDAS3)
|
7.2 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.7
|
9.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.5
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 5 (MGMIDAS5)
|
5.0 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.4
|
4.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.3
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 6 (MGMIDAS6)
|
16.6 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.8
|
21.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.0
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Item 7 (MGMIDAS7)
|
6.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.9
|
6.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.8
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
MIDAS is a retrospective, self-administered, 7-item questionnaire that measured headache-related disability as days with lost time or productivity due to headache from paid work or school, household work, and non-work activities. Participants were categorized according to MIDAS scores as Grade I = Little or No Disability (Score: 0-5), Grade II= Mild Disability (Score: 6-10), Grade III = Moderate Disability (Score: 11-20), Grade IV =severe disability (Score: \>=21). Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Grade I
|
363 Participants
|
36 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Grade II
|
138 Participants
|
20 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Grade III
|
238 Participants
|
25 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade- Primary Analysis
MIDAS Grade IV
|
521 Participants
|
54 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Emergency Room (ER) Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
334 Participants
|
36 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Number of ER visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 ER visit reported as mean in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=334 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=36 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of ER Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
0.5 ER visits
Standard Deviation 1.4
|
0.5 ER visits
Standard Deviation 1.1
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Hospitalizations in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
147 Participants
|
15 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of hospitalizations within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 hospitalization is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=147 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=15 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Hospitalizations in Past 6 Months - Primary Analysis
|
2.5 Hospitalizations
Standard Deviation 6.6
|
1.5 Hospitalizations
Standard Deviation 1.1
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Family Practitioner Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
979 Participants
|
102 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of family practitioner visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 family practitioner visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=979 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=102 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Family Practitioner Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
2 Family Practitioner Visits
Standard Deviation 2
|
2 Family Practitioner Visits
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Cardiologist Visits in Past 6 Month- Primary Analysis
|
130 Participants
|
21 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of cardiologist visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 cardiologist visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=130 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=21 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Cardiologist Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
1.8 Cardiologist Visits
Standard Deviation 1.5
|
1.6 Cardiologist Visits
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 month of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Neurologist Visits in Past 6 Months - Primary Analysis
|
374 Participants
|
72 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of neurologist visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 neurologist visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=374 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=72 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Neurologist Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
2 Neurologist Visits
Standard Deviation 1.3
|
2.6 Neurologist Visits
Standard Deviation 6
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1260 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=135 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
1228 Participants
|
132 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study and were adjusted using IPTW method (pseudo-set); hence, numbers of participants are different here from those presented in participant flow and baseline section. Here, "Overall Number of Participants Analyzed" signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of traditional healthcare provider visits within the last six months due to due to any cause among those who had at least 1 healthcare provider visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariate.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1228 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=132 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits in Past 6 Months- Primary Analysis
|
7.8 Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits
Standard Deviation 8.1
|
9.5 Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits
Standard Deviation 10.6
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
RAND-36=standardized survey evaluating 8 domains of functional health and well-being: physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social functioning, role emotional and mental health. Score for each of the 8 domains were scaled from 0=worst condition to 100=best condition, higher scores indicated better health status. These 8 domains were summarized as summary scores: physical component scores (derived from physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, general health), mental component scores (derived from social functioning, role emotional mental health and vitality) and global health composite score (derived from physical and mental component scores). Each of the summary scores were standardized to a T-score with mean=50 and SD=10. Scores ranged from 0 to 100, where 0 (worst condition) to 100 (best condition), where higher scores represent better health status. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Research and Development (RAND-36) Physical Component Score, Mental Component Score and Global Health Score - Sensitivity Analysis.
Mental summary composite T score
|
38.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.4
|
39.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.9
|
|
Research and Development (RAND-36) Physical Component Score, Mental Component Score and Global Health Score - Sensitivity Analysis.
Physical summary composite T score
|
41.2 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.6
|
40.6 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.5
|
|
Research and Development (RAND-36) Physical Component Score, Mental Component Score and Global Health Score - Sensitivity Analysis.
Global health composite T score
|
38 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.4
|
38.3 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
EQ-5D-5L is participant completed questionnaire that consisted of two components: a five-item health state profile and visual analog scale (VAS). EQ-5D health state profile had 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension had 5 levels: 1= no problems, 2= slight problems, 3= moderate problems, 4= severe problems and 5= extreme problems. Responses to 5 dimensions comprised health state/a single utility index value. E.g. if a participant responds "no problems" for each 5 dimensions, then health state was coded as "11111" with a predefined index value to it. Every health state (coded as combination of responses) had unique predefined utility index value assigned to it per US value sets, by EuroQol. Index scores ranged from -0.59 to 1; where 1 =best possible health state. Negative values= health states perceived as worse than dead, (death=0). Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) Index Score- Sensitivity Analysis
|
0.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.2
|
0.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.2
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At the time of survey during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
The EQ-5D-5L is a participant completed questionnaire that consisted of two components: a five-item health state profile and a VAS. EQ-5D VAS was used to record participant's rating for his/her current health state on a vertical VAS with scores ranging from 0 to 100, where 0 = worst imaginable health state and 100 = best imaginable health state. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
EQ-5D-5L Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Score- Sensitivity Analysis
|
68.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.5
|
69.6 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.2
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage of work time missed ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity) to 100% (high impairment/total loss of work productivity) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Work Time Missed in Past 7 Days Based on Work Productivity and Activity Impairment - General Health (WPAI-GH) Questionnaire- Sensitivity Analysis
|
8.8 Percentage work time missed
Standard Deviation 19.2
|
6.4 Percentage work time missed
Standard Deviation 14
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage impairment experienced ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity) to 100% (high impairment/total loss of work productivity) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage Impairment Experienced While at Work in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire-Sensitivity Analysis
|
25 Percentage impairment
Standard Deviation 24.7
|
28.1 Percentage impairment
Standard Deviation 26.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage overall work impairment experienced ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity) to 100% (high impairment/total loss of work productivity) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage Overall Work Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Sensitivity Analysis
|
28.4 Percentage work impairment
Standard Deviation 27.9
|
30.4 Percentage work impairment
Standard Deviation 28.5
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 7 days before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
The WPAI is a standardized PRO that assessed the previous 7 days of completing the questionnaire. WPAI:GH is a self-reported measure of work productivity and impairment, which had four scores: absenteeism (work time missed); presenteeism (impairment at work/reduced on the job effectiveness); work productivity loss (overall work impairment/absenteeism plus presenteeism); and total activity impairment. The scores for percentage of total activity impairment ranged from 0 (no impairment/high productivity) to100% (high impairment/total loss of work productivity) with higher score indicating greater impairment and less productivity. In this outcome measure, percentage total activity impairment among total population, employed, unemployed and disabled is reported. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Sensitivity Analysis
Total activity impairment
|
34.4 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 28.3
|
37.6 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 28
|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Sensitivity Analysis
Activity impairment among employed
|
28.3 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 25.9
|
30.6 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 25.6
|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Sensitivity Analysis
Activity impairment among unemployed
|
38.7 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 28.3
|
44.4 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 27.7
|
|
Percentage Total Activity Impairment in Past 7 Days Based on WPAI-GH Questionnaire- Sensitivity Analysis
Activity impairment among disabled
|
68.8 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 19.3
|
63.3 Percentage activity impairment
Standard Deviation 26.9
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
MIDAS is a retrospective, self-administered, 7-item questionnaire that measured headache-related disability as lost time due to headache from paid work or school, household work, and non-work activities. Participants provided the number of missed work or school days (MIDAS Item 1); missed household chores days (MIDAS Item 2); missed social or leisure activity days (MIDAS Item 3); and days with productivity loss at work or school (MIDAS Item 4), days with productivity loss in household work (MIDAS Item 5), frequency of headaches (MIDAS Item 6) and the intensity of the headache pain (MIDAS Item 7). The score ranged from 0 (no disability) to 90 (maximum disability) for each of individual item scores. The 5 item scores (Item 1 to Item 5) were summed to compute the MIDAS total score ranging from 0 (no disability) to 450 (maximum disability). Lower scores indicate less headache-related disability. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS (Total score)
|
21.6 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.1
|
25.6 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 36
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 1 (MGMIDAS1)
|
1.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.9
|
1.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.8
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 2 (MGMIDAS2)
|
4.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.6
|
4.9 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.3
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 3 (MGMIDAS3)
|
5.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.8
|
7.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.1
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 4 (MGMIDAS4)
|
6.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.6
|
7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.8
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 5 (MGMIDAS5)
|
3.8 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.1
|
4.1 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.7
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 6 (MGMIDAS6)
|
14.3 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.8
|
19.5 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.9
|
|
Migraine Disability Assessment Scale (MIDAS) Total Score and Individual Item Scores- Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Item 7 (MGMIDAS7)
|
6.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.9
|
6.7 Units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.8
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 3 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
MIDAS is a retrospective, self-administered, 7-item questionnaire that measured headache-related disability as days with lost time or productivity due to headache from paid work or school, household work, and non-work activities. Participants were categorized according to MIDAS scores as Grade I = Little or No Disability (Score: 0-5), Grade II= Mild Disability (Score: 6-10), Grade III = Moderate Disability (Score: 11-20), Grade IV =severe disability (Score: \>=21). Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade - Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Grade I
|
398 Participants
|
29 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade - Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Grade II
|
159 Participants
|
17 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade - Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Grade III
|
270 Participants
|
23 Participants
|
|
Number of Participants According to MIDAS Grade - Sensitivity Analysis
MIDAS Grade IV
|
430 Participants
|
34 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Emergency Room (ER) Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
301 Participants
|
27 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Number of ER visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 ER visit reported as mean in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=301 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=27 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of ER Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
1.8 ER visits
Standard Deviation 1.5
|
1.4 ER visits
Standard Deviation 0.6
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Hospitalizations in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
111 Participants
|
11 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of hospitalizations within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 hospitalization is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=111 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=11 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Hospitalizations in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
1.8 Hospitalizations
Standard Deviation 1.3
|
1.2 Hospitalizations
Standard Deviation 0.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Family Practitioner Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
976 Participants
|
76 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of family practitioner visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 family practitioner visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=976 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=76 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Family Practitioner Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
2 Family Practitioner Visits
Standard Deviation 1.9
|
1.9 Family Practitioner Visits
Standard Deviation 1.2
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Cardiologist Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
137 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of cardiologist visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 cardiologist visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=137 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=14 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Cardiologist Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
1.7 Cardiologist Visits
Standard Deviation 1.4
|
1.3 Cardiologist Visits
Standard Deviation 0.5
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 month of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Neurologist Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
358 Participants
|
57 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of neurologist visits within the last six months due to any cause among those who had at least 1 neurologist visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=358 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=57 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Neurologist Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
1.9 Neurologist Visits
Standard Deviation 1.3
|
2.6 Neurologist Visits
Standard Deviation 6.4
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational studyPopulation: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW.
Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariates.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1257 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=103 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants With Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
1227 Participants
|
101 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 6 months before the survey was taken, during 1 year of data identification (Year 2023); available retrospective data was evaluated over approximately 1.41 months of this observational study.Population: Analysis population included all eligible participants whose data were retrieved and observed in the study. For sensitivity analysis a subset of rimegepant users with less than 12 days of rimegepant use per month were included and the numbers were adjusted using IPTW method, which created pseudo population, leading to difference from the sample sizes before IPTW. Here, 'Overall Number of Participants Analyzed' signifies number of participants evaluable for this outcome measure.
Mean number of traditional healthcare provider visits within the last six months due to due to any cause among those who had at least 1 healthcare provider visit is reported in this outcome measure. Analysis was performed using IPTW method to adjust for confounding by the covariate.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Triptans
n=1227 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on triptan use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
Rimegepant
n=101 Participants
Participants with self-reported diagnosis of migraine currently on rimegepant use at the time of survey (NHWS in year 2023) were included. No intervention was administered as part of this study.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Mean Number of Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits in Past 6 Months- Sensitivity Analysis
|
7.7 Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits
Standard Deviation 8
|
9.2 Traditional Healthcare Provider Visits
Standard Deviation 10.3
|
Adverse Events
Rimegepant
Triptans
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee Pfizer has the right to review disclosures, requesting a delay of less than 60 days. Investigator will postpone single center publications until after disclosure of pooled data (all sites), less than 12 months from study completion/termination at all participating sites. Investigator may not disclose previously undisclosed confidential information other than study results.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER