Comparison of indirect treatment methods in migraine prevention to address differences in mode of administration

AIM: Indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) are anchored on a placebo comparator, and the placebo response may vary according to drug administration route. Migraine preventive treatment studies were used to evaluate ITCs and determine whether mode of administration influences placebo response and the overall study findings. MATERIALS & METHODS: Change from baseline in monthly migraine days produced by monoclonal antibody treatments (subcutaneous, intravenous) was compared using fixed-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), network meta-regression (NMR), and unanchored simulated treatment comparison (STC). RESULTS: NMA and NMR provide mixed, rarely differentiated results between treatments, whereas unanchored STC strongly favors eptinezumab over other preventive treatments. CONCLUSION: Further investigations are needed to determine which ITC best reflects the impact of mode of administration on placebo.