Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30519007›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018

Patient satisfaction, health care resource utilization, and acute headache medication use with galcanezumab: results from a 12-month open-label study in patients with migraine.

Janet H Ford, Shonda A Foster, Virginia L Stauffer, Dustin D Ruff, Sheena K Aurora, Jan Versijpt

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Janet H FordEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA, ford_janet@lilly.com.
Shonda A FosterEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA, ford_janet@lilly.com.
Virginia L StaufferEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA, ford_janet@lilly.com.
Dustin D RuffEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA, ford_janet@lilly.com.
Sheena K AuroraEli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46225, USA, ford_janet@lilly.com.
Jan VersijptDepartment of Neurology - Headache and Facial Pain Clinic, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), 1090 Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffects of galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody against calcitonin gene-related peptide, on patient satisfaction, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and acute medication use were evaluated in a long-term, open-label study in patients with migraine.

methodsPatients with episodic (78.9%) or chronic migraine (21.1%) were evaluated in the CGAJ study, an open-label study with 12-month treatment period. Galcanezumab 120 mg (with a loading dose of 240 mg) or 240 mg was administered subcutaneously once a month during treatment period. A self-rated scale, Patient Satisfaction with Medication Questionnaire-Modified (PSMQ-M), was used to measure satisfaction levels. Participants reported HCRU for the previous 6 months at baseline and that which occurred since the patient's last study visit during treatment period. Acute headache medication use for migraine or headache for the past month was self-reported by participants at baseline and at each monthly visit during treatment period.

resultsAt Months 1, 6, and 12, at least 69% of patients treated with galcanezumab responded positively for overall satisfaction, preference over prior treatments, and less impact from side effects. There were within-group reductions from baseline in migraine-specific HCRU (per 100 person-years) with galcanezumab for health care professional visits (173.4 to 59.6), emergency room visits (20.2 to 4.7), and hospital admissions (3.7 to 0.4) during treatment period. Statistically significant reductions in HCRU were observed for some events. There were significant within-group reductions from baseline in mean number of days/month with acute headache medication use for migraine or headache at each monthly visit during treatment period (overall change: -5.1 for galcanezumab 120 mg/240 mg;

conclusionResults from this long-term, open-label study suggest that treatment with galcanezumab is likely to lead to high patient satisfaction with treatment as well as meaningful reductions in migraine-specific HCRU and acute headache medication use in people with migraine.

Indexed as

acute medicationgalcanezumabHCRUmigraineopen-labelsatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID30519007
PMCPMC6239121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.