Abstract
BACKGROUND: Migraine is a prevalent, chronic neurovascular disorder that incurs significant indirect costs due to productivity loss. Preventive therapy is an effective way to alleviate the societal and healthcare burden of migraine. Approximately 14% of both the global and Iranian populations are affected by migraine, which has substantial economic implications. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of Erenumab compared to Topiramate for migraine treatment in Iran. METHODS: A three-state Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Erenumab. The model considered both direct and indirect costs from a societal perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated by determining the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Costs and QALYs were discounted annually at 5.8% and 5%, respectively. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The average cost for patients using the Erenumab strategy was 16,836 USD over five years, whereas the average cost for the Topiramate strategy was estimated to be 2,660 USD. Additionally, the average QALYs for the Erenumab and Topiramate strategies were 3.64 and 3.46, respectively. The ICER for the Erenumab strategy was 78,923 USD/QALY. This ICER is significantly higher than the fixed Iranian willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of 2,456 USD. CONCLUSIONS: The study concludes that preventive treatment of migraine with Erenumab, compared to Topiramate, is not cost-effective in Iran based on current prices. Therefore, for Erenumab to be considered cost-effective, a significant price reduction is necessary for its entry into the Iranian pharmaceutical market.