The cost effectiveness of Erenumab in migraine therapy: A systematic literature review
Keywords:
Cost, cost effectiveness analysis, ErenumabAbstract
Background and aim: Migraine is a common neurological condition that affects millions of people worldwide. Newly approved treatments for the prevention of migraine including calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies such Erenumab, might help in case of the failure of other medications. Therefore, it was decided to conduct a systematic literature review of cost effectiveness of Erenumab which is the first and most common medication among its group.
Methods: Pharmacoecnomics studies which were written in English and published between 2015 and 2025 were included. Several databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, OVID Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Dimensions were searched independently.
Results: Six published studies, and 2 reports were selected from an initial pool of 974 based on predefined inclusion criteria. They were conducted across different countries settings including the United States, United Kingdom, Sweeden and Greece and, Spain. These studies adapted decision-analytic models, using either standalone Markov models or decision trees in combination with Markov models, adapted with country-specific data to evaluate the cost effectiveness of Erenumab.
Conclusions: Erenumab’s cost-effectiveness is context-dependent, varying according to local drug pricing, healthcare system structures, and patient populations. Evidence suggests that Erenumab is a cost-effective option for individuals with chronic or episodic migraine who have not responded to previous treatments. However, it was not cost effectiveness in countries such as Iran and Greece unless a significant discount in price was applied. Future research should prioritize pharmacoeconomics evaluations comparing Erenumab with newer agents, such as fremanezumab and galcanezumab, to support more informed policy and reimbursement decisions.
References
1. Hareendran A, Mannix S. Outcome measures for migraine: Measuring the impact of migraine and results of migraine treatment. In: Handbook of Clinical Neurology. 2024. 303–28. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-823357-3.00022-7.
2. Pellesi L, Do TP, Hougaard A. Pharmacological management of migraine: current strategies and future directions. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2024;25(6):673–83. doi:10.1080/14656566.2024.2349791.
3. Porreca F, Navratilova E, Hirman J, van den Brink AM, Lipton RB, Dodick DW. Evaluation of outcomes of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP)-targeting therapies for acute and preventive migraine treatment based on patient sex. Cephalalgia. 2024;44(3). doi:10.1177/03331024241238153.
4. Pozo-Rosich P, Dolezil D, Paemeleire K, et al. Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2024;81(5):461–70. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.0368.
5. Tepper S, Ashina M, Reuter U, et al. Safety and efficacy of erenumab for preventive treatment of chronic migraine: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(6):425–34. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30083-2.
6. McCafferty EH, Lyseng-Williamson KA. Erenumab in the prophylaxis of migraine: a profile of its use. Drugs Ther Perspect. 2019;35:13–20. doi:10.1007/s40267-018-0589-9.
7. Goadsby PJ, Reuter U, Hallström Y, et al. A controlled trial of erenumab for episodic migraine. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(22):2123–32. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1705848.
8. Barbanti P, Aurilia C, Egeo G, et al. Erenumab in the prevention of high-frequency episodic and chronic migraine: Erenumab in Real Life in Italy (EARLY), the first Italian multicenter, prospective real-life study. Headache. 2021;61(2):363–72. doi:10.1111/head.14032.
9. Mistry H, Naghdi S, Underwood M, et al. Competing treatments for migraine: a headache for decision-makers. J Headache Pain. 2023;24(1):162. doi:10.1186/s10194-023-01686-y.
10. Mahon R, Huels J, Hacking V, et al. Economic evaluations in migraine: systematic literature review and a novel approach. J Med Econ. 2020;23(8):864–76. doi:10.1080/13696998.2020.1754840.
11. Khanal S, Underwood M, Naghdi S, et al. A systematic review of economic evaluations of pharmacological treatments for adults with chronic migraine. J Headache Pain. 2022;23:122. doi:10.1186/s10194-022-01492-y.
12. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 6.5. Cochrane; 2024. Available from: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
13. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71.
14. Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160. doi:10.1136/bmj.n160.
15. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):210. doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.
16. Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919. doi:10.1136/bmj.i4919.
17. Pozo-Rosich P, Poveda JL, Crespo C, et al. Is erenumab an efficient alternative for the prevention of episodic and chronic migraine in Spain? Results of a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Headache Pain. 2024;25:40. doi:10.1186/s10194-024-01747-w.
18. Mollaee H, Nadimi Parashkouhi S, Fatemi B, et al. Cost-Utility Analysis of Erenumab Compared to Topiramate for Preventive Therapy of Migraine in Iran. Iran J Pharm Res. 2024;23(1):e146026. doi:10.5812/ijpr-146026.
19. Mahon R, Lang A, Vo P, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of Erenumab for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine in Patients with Prior Treatment Failures in Sweden. Pharmacoeconomics. 2021;39(3):357–72. doi:10.1007/s40273-020-00996-2.
20. Giannouchos TV, Mitsikostas DD, Ohsfeldt RL, et al. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Erenumab Versus OnabotulinumtoxinA for Patients with Chronic Migraine Attacks in Greece. Clin Drug Investig. 2019;39(10):979–90. doi:10.1007/s40261-019-00827-z.
21. Lipton RB, Brennan A, Palmer S, et al. Estimating the clinical effectiveness and value-based price range of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in patients with prior treatment failures: a US societal perspective. J Med Econ. 2018;21(7):666–75. doi:10.1080/13696998.2018.1457533.
22. Sussman M, Benner J, Neumann P, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of erenumab for the preventive treatment of episodic and chronic migraine: Results from the US societal and payer perspectives. Cephalalgia. 2018;38(10):1644–57. doi:10.1177/0333102418796842.
23. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. CADTH Common Drug Review: Pharmacoeconomic Review Report for Erenumab (Aimovig). Ottawa: CADTH; 2019.
24. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Single technology appraisal: Erenumab for preventing migraine [ID1188] – committee papers. London: NICE; 2019.
25. Alshayban DM. Predictors of knowledge level and awareness towards the principles and methodology evaluation of pharmacoeconomics in Saudi Arabia. J Pharm Policy Pract. 2025;18(1):2442496. doi:10.1080/20523211.2024.2442496.
26. Dagash Alaklobi AA, Alaklabi SM, Alkurbi ZA, et al. Pharmacoeconomics and Health Policy: Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmaceutical Interventions and its Insinuations for Policy Decision-Making Strategy. Azerb Pharm Pharmather J. 2024;23(3):1–19.
27. Dong W, Zhang Z, Wang X, et al. A systematic review of the current application status of decision-analytical models in the pharmacoeconomic evaluation of targeted therapies for pulmonary arterial hypertension. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2025;23(1):13. doi:10.1186/s12962-025-00621-z.
28. Bravo-Rodrigo J, et al. Real-world effectiveness and safety of erenumab for the treatment of migraine: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Pharmacol. 2024;976:176702. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2024.176702.
29. Pozo-Rosich P, Dolezil D, Paemeleire K, et al. Early Use of Erenumab vs Nonspecific Oral Migraine Preventives: The APPRAISE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2024;81(5):461–70. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2024.0368.
30. Autio H, Purmonen T, Kurki S, et al. Erenumab Decreases Headache-Related Sick Leave Days and Health Care Visits: A Retrospective Real-World Study in Working Patients with Migraine. Neurol Ther. 2022;11:223–35. doi:10.1007/s40120-021-00303-x.
31. Pelliciari DHS, Reis CRA, Bordini CA. Should anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies always be the drug of first choice for migraine prophylaxis in Brazil? A pharmacoeconomic study. Headache Med. 2024;15(3):170–4.
32. Nayak SK, Singh PK, Panda AK, et al. Cost-Effective and Cost-Minimisation Analysis of AntiEpileptic Drugs in Migraine Patients at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Bhubaneswar. Int Res J Multidiscip Scope. 2024;5(4):1006–13. doi:10.47857/irjms.2024.v05i04.01582.
33. Gaviria E, Hamid AHE. Comparative Long-Term Effectiveness Of OnabotulinumtoxinA (Botox) And Anti CGRP In Migraine Prevention: A Systematic Review [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]. F1000Res. 2024;13:665. doi:10.12688/f1000research.151605.1.
34. Sittimart M, Rattanavipapong W, Mirelman AJ, et al. An overview of the perspectives used in health economic evaluations. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2024;22:41. doi:10.1186/s12962-024-00552-1.
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Transfer of Copyright and Permission to Reproduce Parts of Published Papers.
Authors retain the copyright for their published work. No formal permission will be required to reproduce parts (tables or illustrations) of published papers, provided the source is quoted appropriately and reproduction has no commercial intent. Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.
How to Cite
