Cost-effectiveness for KTE-X19 CAR T therapy for adult patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma in the United States.

AIMS: The objective of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of KTE-X19 versus standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients from a US healthcare perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-state partitioned-survival model (pre-progression, post-progression, and death) with a cycle length of 1 month was used to extrapolate progression-free and overall survival (OS) over a lifetime horizon. Due to the long tail of the OS curve, OS was modeled applying a mixture-cure methodology, using the assumption that patients whose disease had not progressed after 5 years experienced long-term remission. Population inputs were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial. This was also the source of KTE-X19 efficacy and safety data, while this data was obtained from the literature for SoC. Costs and resource use inputs were derived from the published literature and publicly available data sources. Health state utilities were derived from the ZUMA-2 trial (NCT02601313), applying the US tariff. Adverse event disutilities were derived from the published literature. Costs and health outcomes were discounted at 3% per year. The model estimated expected life years (LY), quality-adjusted life years (QALY), and total costs for KTE-X19 vs SoC. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Median survival was 9.71 years for KTE-X19 and 2.13 for SoC. Discounted LYs, QALYs, and lifetime costs were 8.99, 7.39, and $693,832 for KTE-X19 vs 4.47, 3.65, and $574,263 for SoC, respectively. The KTE-X19 vs SoC cost per QALY was $31,985. The most influential model parameter was the utility for patients with long-term remission. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability that KTE-X19 was cost-effective was 99%. CONCLUSION: The treatment of R/R MCL with KTE-X19 presents a potentially cost-effective alternative to the current SoC, deriving its value from incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life benefits.

Developing real-world comparators for clinical trials in chemotherapy-refractory patients with gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

BACKGROUND: There are few third-line or later (3L+) treatment options for advanced/metastatic (adv/met) gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancers (GC/GEJC). 3L+ Nivolumab demonstrated encouraging results in Asian patients in the ATTRACTION-2 study compared with placebo (12-month survival, 26% vs 11%), and in Western patients in the single-arm CheckMate 032 study (12-month survival, 44%). This analysis aimed to establish comparator cohorts of US patients receiving routine care in real-world (RW) clinical practice. METHODS: A 2-step matching process generated RW cohorts from Flatiron Health's oncology database (January 1, 2011-April 30, 2017), for comparison with each trial: (1) clinical trial eligibility criteria were applied; (2) patients were frequency-matched with trial arms for baseline variables significantly associated with survival. Median overall survival (OS) was calculated by Kaplan-Meier analysis from last treatment until death. RESULTS: Of 742 adv/met GC/GEJC patients with at least 2 prior lines of therapy, matching generated 90 US RW ATTRACTION-2-matched patients (median OS: 3.5 months) versus 163 ATTRACTION-2 placebo patients (median OS: 4.1 months), and 100 US RW CheckMate 032-matched patients (median OS: 2.9 months) versus 42 CheckMate 032 nivolumab-treated patients (median OS: 8.5 months). Baseline characteristics were generally similar between clinical trial arms and RW-matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully developed RW cohorts for comparison with data from clinical trials, with comparable baseline characteristics. Survival in US patients receiving RW care was similar to that seen in Asian patients receiving placebo in ATTRACTION-2; survival with nivolumab in CheckMate 032 appeared favorable compared with US RW clinical practice.

Correction to: Developing real-world comparators for clinical trials in chemotherapy-refractory patients with gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

ping real-world comparators for.

Real-world Treatment Patterns and Clinical Outcomes Across Lines of Therapy in Patients With Advanced/Metastatic Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer.

BACKGROUND: First-line (1L) and second-line (2L) therapies for advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (GC) and gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC) have modest efficacy, and therapeutic options in subsequent lines are limited as disease progresses. We assessed real-world treatment patterns and outcomes for advanced/metastatic GC/GEJC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients diagnosed with advanced/metastatic GC/GEJC between January 1, 2011 and April 30, 2018 were identified using the Flatiron Health database. Median overall survival (OS) from start of each line of therapy until death was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Duration of therapy (DoT) was time from start date until end date of each line. RESULTS: We identified 3291 patients with advanced/metastatic GC/GEJC adenocarcinoma. At diagnosis, the median age was 68 years, 60% were white, 53% had initial stage IV disease, and 57% had GC. Of these 3291 patients, most (75%) received at least 1 therapy; 32% received 2L, 14% received third-line (3L) therapy, and 6% received at least 4 lines of therapy (4L+). The median OS from start of 1L was 10.7 months (2L, 7.6 months; 3L, 6.1 months; 4L+, 2.8 months). The median DoT in 1L was 2.2 months (2L, 2.1 months; 3L, 1.7 months; 4L+, 3.0 months). Use of targeted and immunotherapies generally increased progressively with each subsequent line of therapy. CONCLUSION: One-quarter of patients with advanced/metastatic GC/GEJC remained untreated, and only approximately one-half of patients receiving 1L therapy received subsequent treatment. In all lines of therapy, OS was generally poor and DoT was short. More effective treatment options are needed across all lines of therapy for this highly burdensome disease.

Nivolumab in patients with metastatic DNA mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer (CheckMate 142): an open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic DNA mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) colorectal cancer has a poor prognosis after treatment with conventional chemotherapy and exhibits high levels of tumour neoantigens, tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes, and checkpoint regulators. All of these features are associated with the response to PD-1 blockade in other tumour types. Therefore, we aimed to study nivolumab, a PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, in patients with dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer. METHODS: In this ongoing, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial, we enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic colorectal cancer locally assessed as dMMR/MSI-H from 31 sites (academic centres and hospitals) in eight countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and the USA). Eligible patients had progressed on or after, or been intolerant of, at least one previous line of treatment, including a fluoropyrimidine and oxaliplatin or irinotecan. Patients were given 3 mg/kg nivolumab every 2 weeks until disease progression, death, unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal from study. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (version 1.1). All patients who received at least one dose of study drug were included in all analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02060188. FINDINGS: Of the 74 patients who were enrolled between March 12, 2014, and March 16, 2016, 40 (54%) had received three or more previous treatments. At a median follow-up of 12·0 months (IQR 8·6-18·0), 23 (31·1%, 95% CI 20·8-42·9) of 74 patients achieved an investigator-assessed objective response and 51 (69%, 57-79) patients had disease control for 12 weeks or longer. Median duration of response was not yet reached; all responders were alive, and eight had responses lasting 12 months or longer (Kaplan-Meier 12-month estimate 86%, 95% CI 62-95). The most common grade 3 or 4 drug-related adverse events were increased concentrations of lipase (six [8%]) and amylase (two [3%]). 23 (31%) patients died during the study; none of these deaths were deemed to be treatment related by the investigator. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab provided durable responses and disease control in pre-treated patients with dMMR/MSI-H metastatic colorectal cancer, and could be a new treatment option for these patients. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Economic Analysis of Panitumumab Compared With Cetuximab in Patients With Wild-type KRAS Metastatic Colorectal Cancer That Progressed After Standard Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: In this analysis, we compared costs and explored the cost-effectiveness of subsequent-line treatment with cetuximab or panitumumab in patients with wild-type KRAS (exon 2) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) after previous chemotherapy treatment failure. Data were used from ASPECCT (A Study of Panitumumab Efficacy and Safety Compared to Cetuximab in Patients With KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), a Phase III, head-to-head randomized noninferiority study comparing the efficacy and safety of panitumumab and cetuximab in this population. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed to perform a cost-minimization analysis and a semi-Markov model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of panitumumab monotherapy versus cetuximab monotherapy in chemotherapy-resistant wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC. The cost-minimization model assumed equivalent efficacy (progression-free survival) based on data from ASPECCT. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted with the full information (uncertainty) from ASPECCT. Both analyses were conducted from a US third-party payer perspective and calculated average anti-epidermal growth factor receptor doses from ASPECCT. Costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions were estimated in both models. The cost-effectiveness model also included physician visits, disease progression monitoring, best supportive care, and end-of-life costs and utility weights estimated from EuroQol 5-Dimension questionnaire responses from ASPECCT. FINDINGS: The cost-minimization model results demonstrated lower projected costs for patients who received panitumumab versus cetuximab, with a projected cost savings of $9468 (16.5%) per panitumumab-treated patient. In the cost-effectiveness model, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained revealed panitumumab to be less costly, with marginally better outcomes than cetuximab. IMPLICATIONS: These economic analyses comparing panitumumab and cetuximab in chemorefractory wild-type KRAS (exon 2) mCRC suggest benefits in favor of panitumumab. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01001377.

Q-TWiST analysis of panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 versus FOLFOX4 alone in patients with previously untreated wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Panitumumab plus infusional 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX4) significantly improved overall survival versus FOLFOX4 alone in patients with previously untreated wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We applied a quality-adjusted time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (Q-TWiST) analysis to provide an integrated measure of clinical benefit, with the objective of comparing quality-adjusted survival between the two arms. We acknowledge that there are limitations associated with Q-TWIST methodology for crossover trials. METHODS: For each treatment arm, the truncated mean times spent in the toxicity (TOX: grade 3 or 4 adverse events), time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (TWiST), and relapse (REL: after disease progression) states were estimated by the product-limit method, and adjusted using utility weights derived from patient-reported EuroQol 5-dimension measures. Sensitivity analyses were performed in which utility weights (varying from 0 to 1) were applied to time in the TOX and REL health states. RESULTS: Quality-adjusted overall survival time was statistically significantly longer with panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 (20.5 months) than with FOLFOX4 alone (18.2 months) (P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: In patients with previously untreated wild-type RAS mCRC, panitumumab plus FOLFOX4 significantly improved quality-adjusted survival compared with FOLFOX4 alone.

The Daily Activity Report (DAR) a Novel Measure of Functional Outcome for Serious Mental Illness.

The assessment of real-world functional outcomes in clinical trials for medications targeting negative symptoms and cognitive impairment is extremely important. We tested the psychometric properties of the Daily Activity Report (DAR), a novel assessment of productive daily activity. We administered the DAR and additional assessments of functional outcome, functional capacity, cognition and symptomatology to 50 individuals with schizophrenia at 2 time points, 1 month apart and to 25 healthy controls. The DAR records a person's daily activity for 7 consecutive days based upon phone calls made 3 times a day. A total score and scores in 3 domains; instrumental activities (ie, independent living), social and work or school related activities are generated for the DAR. Inter-item consistency was high 0.89-0.94 for each domain and 0.88 overall. Test-retest reliability across 1 month for the total DAR score was 0.67,P< .0001. The total DAR score as well as scores for social activity and nondomestic work/school differed significantly between control and patient participants (P< .0001). DAR domain scores were associated with negative symptoms and functional outcomes, but the primary score related to these measures was the work/school dimension of the DAR. DAR scores were only weakly and nonsignificantly related to positive symptoms. This study provides preliminary support for the reliability and validity of the DAR using interviewer administration. The development of a patient reported version of the DAR using smart phone technology with automatic scoring is the next step.

Cost-minimization analysis of panitumumab compared with cetuximab for first-line treatment of patients with wild-type RAS metastatic colorectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of first-line treatment with panitumumab + FOLFOX in comparison to cetuximab + FOLFIRI among patients with wild-type (WT) RAS metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the US. METHODS: A cost-minimization model was developed assuming similar treatment efficacy between both regimens. The model estimated the costs associated with drug acquisition, treatment administration frequency (every 2 weeks for panitumumab, weekly for cetuximab), and incidence of infusion reactions. Average anti-EGFR doses were calculated from the ASPECCT clinical trial, and average doses of chemotherapy regimens were based on product labels. Using the medical component of the consumer price index, adverse event costs were inflated to 2014 US dollars, and all other costs were reported in 2014 US dollars. The time horizon for the model was based on average first-line progression-free survival of a WT RAS patient, estimated from parametric survival analyses of PRIME clinical trial data. RESULTS: Relative to cetuximab + FOLFIRI in the first-line treatment of WT RAS mCRC, the cost-minimization model demonstrated lower projected drug acquisition, administration, and adverse event costs for patients who received panitumumab + FOLFOX. The overall cost per patient for first-line treatment was $179,219 for panitumumab + FOLFOX vs $202,344 for cetuximab + FOLFIRI, resulting in a per-patient saving of $23,125 (11.4%) in favor of panitumumab + FOLFOX. CONCLUSIONS: From a value perspective, the cost-minimization model supports panitumumab + FOLFOX instead of cetuximab + FOLFIRI as the preferred first-line treatment of WT RAS mCRC patients requiring systemic therapy.

Anemia management trends in hospital-based dialysis centers (HBDCs), 2010 to 2013.

BACKGROUND: Few data have been reported on anemia management practices in hospital-based dialysis centers (HBDCs), which are uniquely different from other freestanding dialysis centers. Examining data from HBDCs would help determine if HBDCs and the general US dialysis population have similar trends related to how anemia is managed in dialysis patients. OBJECTIVE: Given recent changes in the prescribing information of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and in end-stage renal disease-related health policy and reimbursement, this study describes trends in anemia management practices in HBDCs from January 2010 through March 2013. METHODS: Electronic medical records of 5404 adult hemodialysis patients in 50 US-based HBDCs were analyzed retrospectively. Patients included in the study cohort were aged ≥18 years and had at least 1 hemoglobin (Hb) measurement and 1 dose of an ESA between January 2010 and March 2013. End points included Hb concentration, darbepoetin alfa dosing, epoetin alfa dosing, and iron biomarkers (transferrin saturation and ferritin) and dosing. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2013, mean monthly Hb levels declined from 11.4 to 10.7 g/dL; the percentage of patients with mean monthly Hb levels <10 g/dL increased from 11.3% to 24.4%; and the percentage of patients with mean monthly Hb levels >12 g/dL declined from 30.1% to 11.2%. The median darbepoetin alfa cumulative 4-week dose also declined 38.8%, and the weekly epoetin alfa dose declined 24%. From January 2010 to March 2013, the percentage of patients with transferrin saturation >30% increased from 35.8% to 43.6%, the percentage of patients with ferritin levels >500 ng/mL increased from 62.0% to 77.9%, the percentage of patients with ferritin levels ≥800 ng/mL increased from 28.9% to 47.3%, and the median cumulative 4-week intravenous iron dose increased 50%. CONCLUSIONS: These study results support growing evidence that meaningful changes have occurred over the last 3 years in how anemia is clinically managed in US hemodialysis patients. Study limitations include that changes in patient clinical/demographic characteristics over time were not controlled for and that study findings may not be applicable to HBDCs that have different patient populations and/or do not use an electronic medical record system. Continuing to evaluate anemia management practices in HBDCs would provide additional information on the risks and benefits of anemia care. Consistent with national data, the findings from this study indicate that from 2010 to 2013, HBDCs modified anemia management practices for dialysis patients, as evidenced by reductions in mean monthly Hb levels and ESA dosing and by increases in iron biomarkers and dosing.

TSAT is a better predictor than ferritin of hemoglobin response to Epoetin alfa in US dialysis patients.

Clinical guidelines recommend concurrent treatment of anemia in end-stage renal disease with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and iron. However, there are mixed data about optimal iron supplementation. To help address this gap, the relationship between iron markers and hemoglobin (Hb) response to ESA (Epoetin alfa) dose was examined. Electronic medical records of 1902 US chronic hemodialysis patients were analyzed over a 12-month period between June 2009 and June 2010. The analysis included patients who had at least one Hb value during each 4-week interval for four consecutive intervals (k - 2, k - 1, k, and k + 1; k is the index interval), received at least one ESA dose during intervals k - 1 or k, had at least one transferrin saturation (TSAT) value at interval k, and at least one ferritin value during intervals k - 2, k - 1, or k. Effect modification by TSAT and ferritin on Hb response was evaluated using the generalized estimating equations approach. Patients had a mean (standard deviation) age of 62 (15) years; 41% were Caucasian, 34% African American, 65% had hypertension, and 39% diabetes. Transferrin saturation, but not ferritin, had a statistically significant (P < 0.05) modifying effect on Hb response. Maximum Hb response was achieved when TSAT was 34%, with minimal incremental effect beyond these levels. Of the two standard clinical iron markers, TSAT should be used as the primary marker of the modifying effect of iron on Hb response to ESA. Long-term safety of iron use to improve Hb response to ESA warrants further study.

Patterns of use and reasons for discontinuation of prophylactic medications for episodic migraine and chronic migraine: results from the second international burden of migraine study (IBMS-II).

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to characterize patterns of preventive medication use in persons with episodic migraine (EM) and chronic migraine (CM). BACKGROUND: Several classes of medications are used both on- and off-label for the prevention of migraine, including ß-blockers (eg, propranolol, timolol), tricyclic antidepressants (eg, amitriptyline), anti-epileptic drugs (eg, topiramate, valproic acid), and neurotoxins (eg, onabotulinumtoxinA). METHODS: Preventive medication use and reasons for discontinuation were collected in an international, Web-based, cross-sectional survey of adults with migraine during 2010. Descriptive analyses were conducted on demographics and headache-related disability as measured by the Migraine Disability Assessment Scale, stratified by use of preventive medication, and EM or CM. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to assess predictors of preventive medication use. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and sixty-five respondents completed the survey. Only 28.3% of EM and 44.8% of CM respondents were currently using preventive medication; any use of prophylaxis (prior or current) was reported by 43.4% of those with EM and 65.9% with CM. The mean number of prophylactic medications ever used was 2.92 for EM and 3.94 for CM. Antidepressants were used most frequently (EM 60.9%; CM 54.7%), followed by ß-blockers (EM 35.4%; CM 36.8%) and anti-epileptics (EM 28.6%; CM 36.3%). Odds of preventive medication use were higher among CM than EM, adjusting for age, gender, race, years of daily headache, and country (odds ratio 2.72; 95% confidence interval 2.15 to 3.57). Greater headache-related disability and older age were also associated with greater odds of ever having used prophylaxis, regardless of headache frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half the persons with EM and CM were currently using preventive medication for migraine, with treatment rates being higher for CM, as expected. Those with CM tried more medications than those with EM, possibly reflecting higher levels of treatment need.

The psychometric properties of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ) in chronic migraine patients.

OBJECTIVE: The Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQ) has been shown to have good psychometric performance in measuring headache impact in migraine patients, but its properties specifically in chronic migraine (CM) patients are unknown. The objective of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the MSQ in a group of CM patients undergoing prophylactic treatment. METHODS: Measurement properties of the MSQ were examined using two international, multicenter, randomized clinical trials evaluating onabotulinumtoxinA as headache prophylaxis in CM patients (N = 1,376). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to test the latent structure of the MSQ in CM patients. The reliability, convergent and discriminant validity, and responsiveness of the MSQ were assessed. RESULTS: CFA confirmed the currently proposed three-factor MSQ latent structure across the two studies. Good reliability was observed for all three MSQ scales, across studies and time points. MSQ scale scores strongly correlated with the scores of the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6). Analysis of known-groups validity indicated that MSQ scale scores discriminated between groups of patients differing in their 28-day headache frequency were as follows <10, 10-14, and ≥ 15 days, and the sample-derived quartiles of the total cumulative hours of headache were as follows <140, 140 to <280, 280 to <420, and ≥ 420 h (p < 0.0001), across both studies and time points. MSQ change scores were higher in magnitude in groups experiencing greater decline in headache frequency (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The MSQ is a psychometrically valid tool that can be used to reliably measure the impact of migraine among CM patients.

US general population norms for telephone administration of the SF-36v2.

OBJECTIVE: US general population norms for mail administration of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Version 2 (SF-36v2) were established in 1998. This article reports SF-36v2 telephone-administered norms collected in 2005-2006 for adults aged 35-89 years. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The SF-36v2 was administered to 3,844 adults in the National Health Measurement Study (NHMS), a random-digit dial telephone survey. Scale scores and physical and mental component summary (PCS and MCS) scores were computed. RESULTS: When compared with 1998 norms (mean=50.00, standard deviation [SD]=10.00), SF-36v2 scores for the 2005-2006 general population tended to be higher: physical functioning (mean=50.68, SD=14.48); role limitations due to physical health problems (mean=49.47, SD=14.71); bodily pain (mean=50.66, SD=16.28); general health perceptions (mean=50.10, SD=16.87); vitality (mean=53.71, SD=15.35); social functioning (mean=51.37, SD=13.93); role limitations due to emotional problems (mean=51.44, SD=13.93); mental health (mean=54.27, SD=13.28); PCS (mean=49.22, SD=15.13); MCS (mean=53.78, SD=13.14). PCS and MCS factor scoring coefficients were similar to those previously reported for the 1998 norms. SF-36v2 norms for telephone administration were created. CONCLUSION: The higher scores for NHMS data are likely due to the effect of telephone administration. The 2005-2006 norms can be used as a reference to interpret scale and component summary scores for telephone-administered surveys with the SF-36v2.

Validating Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire v2.1 in episodic and chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence for the reliability and validity of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire Version 2.1 (MSQ) for use in chronic migraine (CM) in adults. BACKGROUND: MSQ is one of the most frequently utilized disease-specific tools assessing impact of migraine on health-related quality of life (HRQL). However, evidence for its reliability and validity are based on studies in episodic migraine (EM) populations. Additional studies assessing the reliability and validity of the MSQ in patients with CM are needed. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected via web-based survey in 9 countries/regions. Participants were classified as having CM (≥15 headache days/month) or EM (<15 headache days/month). Three MSQ domains - Role Function-Preventive (RP), Role Function-Restrictive (RR), and Emotional Function (EF) - were rescaled to 0-100, where higher scores indicate better HRQL, and analyzed for internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α), construct validity (correlations between MSQ scales and measures of depression/anxiety [Patient Health Questionnaire; PHQ-4], disability [Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire; MIDAS], and functional impact [Headache Impact Test; HIT-6], where lower scores indicate better HRQL for each measure), as well as discriminant validity across migraine groups. RESULTS: A total of 8726 eligible respondents were classified: 5.7% CM (n = 499) and 94.3% EM (n = 8227). Subjects were mostly female (83.5%) with a mean (±SD) age of 40.3 ± 11.4, and were similar between the 2 groups. MSQ domain scores for CM and EM groups, respectively, were: RP = 61.4 ± 26.1 and 71.7 ± 24.0; RR = 44.4 ± 22.1 and 56.5 ± 24.1; EF = 48.3 ± 28.1 and 67.2 ± 26.7. Internal consistency of the overall sample for RP, RR, and EF was 0.90, 0.96, and 0.87, respectively. Similar values were observed for CM and EM. MSQ scores for the overall sample correlated moderately to highly with scores from the PHQ-4 (r = -0.21 to -0.42), MIDAS (r = -0.38 to -0.39), and HIT-6 (r = -0.60 to -0.71). Similar values were observed for CM and EM. Known-groups validity indicated significant differences (P < .0001) in the hypothesized direction between CM and EM for RP (F = 86.19), RR (F = 119.24), and EF (F = 235.90). CONCLUSION: The MSQ is a reliable and valid questionnaire in the CM population that can differentiate the functional impact between CM and EM. The MSQ can assist researchers in evaluating treatment effectiveness by obtaining input directly from the patients on multidimensional aspects other than frequency of headache days.