Cost-effectiveness analysis of rizatriptan and sumatriptan versus Cafergot® in the acute treatment of migraine

CNS Drugs

Volumn 19, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 635-642

  Zhang, Lihua ^a   Hay, Joel W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CAFERGOT; RIZATRIPTAN; SUMATRIPTAN;

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIZZINESS; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MIGRAINE; NAUSEA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SOMNOLENCE; THORAX PAIN;

CAFFEINE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG COMBINATIONS; DRUG THERAPY, COMBINATION; ECONOMICS, PHARMACEUTICAL; ERGOTAMINE; HUMANS; MIGRAINE DISORDERS; SEROTONIN AGONISTS; SUMATRIPTAN; TRIAZOLES; TRYPTAMINES;

EID: 23044502167     PISSN: 11727047     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00023210-200519070-00005     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Celentano DD, et al. Prevalence of migraine headache in the United States: relation to age, income, race, and other sociodemographic factors. JAMA 1992 Jan 1; 267 (1): 64-9
2. Hu XH, Markson LE, Lipton RB, et al. Burden of migraine in the United States: disability and economic costs. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 813-8
3. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Simon D. Work-related disability: results from the American migraine study. Cephalalgia 1996 Jun; 16 (4): 231-8
4. Stang PE, Osterhaus JT, Celentano DD. Migraine: patterns of healthcare use. Neurology 1994 Jun; 44 (6 Suppl. 4): S47-55
5. de Lissovoy G, Lazarus SS. The economic cost of migraine: present state of knowledge. Neurology 1994 Jun; 44 (6 Suppl. 4): S56-62
6. Lofland JH, Johnson NE, Batenhorst AS, et al. Changes in resource use and outcomes for patients with migraine treated with sumatriptan: a managed care perspective. Arch Intern Med 1999 Apr 26; 159 (8): 857-63
7. Patrick DL, Hurst BC, Hughes J. Further development and testing of the migraine-specific quality of life (MSQOL) measure. Headache 2000 Jul-Aug; 40 (7): 550-60
8. Dahlof CG, Dimenas E. Migraine patients experience poorer subjective well-being/quality of life even between attacks. Cephalalgia 1995 Feb; 15 (1): 31-6
9. Smith R. Treating headache. Hosp Med 1998; 33 (9): 21-8
10. Coukell AJ, Lamb HM. Sumatriptan: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in migraine. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (5): 473-90
11. Evans KW, Boan JA, Evans JL, et al. Economic evaluation of oral sumatriptan compared with oral caffeine/ergotamine for migraine. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 12 (5): 566-77
12. Lofland JH, Kim SS, Batenhorst AS, et al. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of sumatriptan in patients with migraine. Mayo Clin Proc 2001; 76: 1093-101
13. Caro JJ, Getsios D, Raggio G, et al. Treatment of migraine in Canada with naratriptan: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Headache 2001 May; 41 (5): 456-64
14. Halpern MT, Lipton RB, Cady RK, et al. Costs and outcomes of early versus delayed migraine treatment with sumatriptan. Headache 2002; 42: 984-99
15. Wells N, Hettiarachchi J, Drummond M, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of eletriptan 40 and 80mg versus sumatriptan 50 and 100mg in the acute treatment of migraine. Value Health 2003 Jul-Aug; 6 (4): 438-47
16. Belsey JD. Cost effectiveness of oral triptan therapy: a transnational comparison based on a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Curr Med Res Opin 2004 May; 20 (5): 659-69
17. Gerth WC, Adelman JU, McCarroll KA. Cost per success comparison of rizatriptan and other triptans based on a stringent measure of efficacy [abstract]. Cephalalgia 2001; 21: 340-1
18. Williams P, Reeder CE. Cost-effectiveness of almotriptan and rizatriptan in the treatment of acute migraine. Clin Ther 2003 Nov; 25 (11): 2903-19
19. Aurora SK, Dempsey J. Headache recurrence and treatment. Curr Treat Options Neurol 2002; 4: 335-42
20. The Subcutaneous Sumatriptan International Study Group. Treatment of migraine attacks with sumatriptan. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 316-21
21. Pascual J, Bussone G, Hernandez JF, et al. Comparison of preference for rizatriptan 10-mg wafer versus sumatriptan 50mg tablet in migraine. Eur Neurol 2001; 45 (4): 275-83
22. Ferrari MD, Goadsby PJ, Roon KI, et al. Triptans (serotonin, 5-HT1B/1D agonists) in migraine: detailed results and methods of a meta-analysis of 53 trials. Cephalalgia 2002 Oct; 22 (8): 633-58
23. The Multinational Oral Sumatriptan and Cafergot Comparative Study Group. A randomized, double-blind comparison of sumatriptan and Cafergot in the acute treatment of migraine. The Multinational Oral Sumatriptan and Cafergot Comparative Study Group. Eur Neurol 1991; 31 (5): 314-22
24. Gerth WC, Carides GW, Dasbach EJ, et al. The multinational impact of migraine symptoms on healthcare utilisation and work loss. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (2): 197-206
25. Brown JS, Papadopoulos G, Neumann PJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of migraine prevention: results from a model of topiramate treatment [abstract]. Value Health 2004; 7 (3): 273
26. Christie S, Gobel H, Mateos V, et al. Crossover comparison of efficacy and preference for rizatriptan 10mg versus ergotamine/caffeine in migraine. Eur Neurol 2003; 49 (1): 20-9
27. Hartmaier SL, Santanello NC, Epstein RS, et al. Development of a brief 24-hour migraine-specific quality of life questionnaire. Headache 1995 Jun; 35 (6): 320-9
28. Becker WJ. Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with migraine. Can J Neurol Sci 2002 Jun; 29 Suppl. 2: S16-22
29. Kaplan R, Anderson JP. A general health policy model: update and applications. Health Serv Res 1988 Jun; 23 (2): 203-35
30. Payne K, Kozma CM, Lawrence BJ. Comparing dihydroergotamine and sumatriptan in the management of acute migraine. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10 (1): 59-71
31. Drug topics 2003 Red Book. Montvale (NJ): Thomson PDR, 2003
32. Linbo L, Bartleson JD, Morgan D, et al. Acute treatment of periodic severe headache: comparison of three outpatient care facilities. Headache 1998; 38: 105-11
33. Joish VN, Cady PS, Shaw JW. Health care utilization by migraine patients: a 1998 Medicaid population study. Clin Ther 2000; 22 (11): 1346-56
34. US Department of Labour, Bureau of Labour Statistics. Civilian, all workers, total compensation: employer cost for employee compensation [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.bls.gov/data/ [Accessed 2005 Apr 15]
35. Hay JW. Evaluation and review of pharmacoeconomic models. Expert Opin Pharmacother 2004; 5 (9): 1867-80