Observational studyThe journal of headache and pain2025
Associations between good days per month and migraine-related disease impact in the real-world: a post hoc analysis from the REVIEW study of eptinezumab in chronic migraine.
Observational study in The journal of headache and pain, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData from the real-world REVIEW (Real-world EVidence and Insights into Experiences With eptinezumab) study demonstrated that, after starting treatment with eptinezumab, individuals with chronic migraine (CM) experienced double the number of good days per month and high rates of satisfaction with eptinezumab. This post-hoc analysis explored the associations between self-reported changes in good days per month and other health-related outcome measures and the utility of good days per month as a patient-centric measure of the composite impact of migraine and migraine treatment on an individual.
methodsREVIEW was an observational, multi-site study designed to evaluate real-world experiences of patients treated with eptinezumab. A survey was administered to adults with CM who had completed ≥ 2 treatment cycles with eptinezumab. These post hoc analyses evaluated the impact of eptinezumab treatment on the ability to achieve a ≥ 50% and ≥ 75% increase in self-reported good days per month, and the association between these improvements and migraine symptoms, elements of daily living, overall well-being, and brain fog. Results are reported for the subgroups defined by the percentage change in self-reported good days per month after initiating eptinezumab treatment relative to before initiation (≥ 75% increase vs. < 75% and ≥ 50% increase vs. < 50%).
resultsFollowing eptinezumab initiation, ≥ 75% and ≥ 50% increases in good days per month were reported by 59/92 (64%) and 70/92 (76%) evaluable participants, respectively. Participants with ≥ 75% increase in good days per month also reported a greater positive impact on multiple migraine symptom domains (68%–90%), as well as select aspects of daily living and overall well-being (73%–90%) compared with participants with < 75% increase (27%–61% and 18%–39%, respectively). Moderate to complete improvement in brain fog after eptinezumab was reported by 77% of participants in the ≥ 75% increase subgroup versus 42% in the < 75% subgroup. Results were consistent for the ≥ 50% increase versus < 50% subgroups.
conclusionsFollowing eptinezumab treatment, most participants reported substantial increases in good days per month, with those experiencing ≥ 75% improvement also reporting greater improvements across multiple migraine symptom domains, daily functioning, overall well-being, and brain fog. These real-world data underscore the importance of novel, patient-centered approaches to understand how preventive therapies can reduce multiple aspects of migraine burden.
trial registrationN/A.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.