Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Headache and Pain Research : Headache and Pain Research

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search
Advanced Search
mobile menu button

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Headache Pain Res > Ahead of print > Article
Original Article
 The Impact of Limited Insurance Coverage on Long-Term Persistence with Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy: A Multicenter Real-World Study in Korea
Mi-Kyoung Kang1orcid, Jong-Hee Sohn2orcid, Myoung-Jin Cha3orcid, Yoo Hwan Kim4orcid, Yooha Hong1orcid, Hee-Jin Im1orcid, Soo-Jin Cho1orcid

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62087/hpr.2026.0007
Published online: June 4, 2026

1Department of Neurology, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Hwaseong, Republic of Korea

2Department of Neurology, Chuncheon Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea

3Department of Neurology, National Police Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

4Department of Neurology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Correspondence: Soo-Jin Cho, M.D., Ph.D. Department of Neurology, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 7 Keunjaebong-gil, Hwaseong 18450, Republic of Korea Tel: +82-31-8086-2310, Fax: +82-31-8086-2317, E-mail: dowonc@naver.com
• Received: February 14, 2026   • Revised: March 26, 2026   • Accepted: April 23, 2026

© 2026 The Korean Headache Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 62 Views
  • 2 Download
Full Article

Download PDF Download PDF

  • Purpose
    Anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP mAbs) are effective preventive therapies for migraine. However, their high cost limits long-term use. In Korea, coverage of anti-CGRP mAbs by the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) is highly restricted. This study aimed to evaluate the association between NHIS coverage and treatment persistence in a real-world setting.
  • Methods
    This retrospective multicenter study included adult patients with migraine (≥18 years) who received anti-CGRP mAb therapy at four tertiary hospitals in Korea. Treatment compliance was assessed using persistence, defined as continuous treatment duration; persistence rates; and adherence, defined as the proportion of days covered. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were also analyzed. Treatment compliance was compared according to NHIS coverage, and treatment effectiveness was compared according to NHIS coverage and treatment continuation.
  • Results
    Among 140 patients treated with anti-CGRP mAbs, only 12 (8.6%) received NHIS-covered therapy. Compared with the non-covered group, the NHIS-covered group had a lower discontinuation rate (50.0% [6/12] vs. 73.4% [94/128]; p=0.101) and higher persistence rates at 6 months (80.0% vs. 66.0%; p=0.493) and 12 months (66.7% vs. 47.2%; p=0.312). However, these differences were not statistically significant. Treatment effectiveness, assessed by changes in monthly headache days, did not differ significantly according to NHIS coverage or treatment continuation.
  • Conclusion
    Treatment persistence appears to be influenced by multiple factors in real-world practice. NHIS coverage may support treatment continuation by improving access and reducing the financial burden. These findings highlight the importance of healthcare-system factors in optimizing long-term preventive treatment strategies for migraine.
  • Keywords: Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies, Migraine, National health programs, Patient persistence, Real-world study
Migraine is a common and debilitating neurological disorder. Globally, migraines impose a significant burden on individuals and healthcare systems, leading to decreased productivity and reduced quality of life.1,2 Effective management is crucial for patients with migraines to minimize this burden.
Anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies (anti-CGRP mAbs) have emerged as a promising treatment option for migraine prevention.3 Treatments such as erenumab, galcanezumab, fremanezumab, and eptinezumab target CGRP or its receptor, thereby interrupting the pathophysiological mechanisms of migraine.4 Clinical trials have demonstrated that these medications effectively reduce migraine frequency and improve patient-reported outcomes, making them an attractive option for patients unresponsive to traditional therapies.5
Despite the proven efficacy of anti-CGRP mAbs, compliance including persistence and adherence remains significant challenges in real-world clinical settings.6 Compliance is important to achieve effectiveness with anti-CGRP mAbs.7 Anti-CGRP mAbs are considerably more expensive than conventional migraine preventive treatments.8 The impact of National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) coverage on real-world treatment compliance is not well understood. In countries like South Korea, where the NHIS offers limited coverage for migraine,9 it is important to explore how reimbursement policies affect patient behavior. While some studies have mentioned economic barriers,6 few have examined this issue in detail using real-world data within NHIS systems.
This study aims to analyze the proportion of patients receiving NHIS coverage and to compare treatment compliance between those receiving anti-CGRP mAbs with NHIS-covered and non-covered. By examining the impact of coverage status on treatment continuation, the study aims to provide insights for optimizing healthcare policy and enhancing the long-term management of migraine.
1. Study design and participants
This retrospective, multicenter observational study was conducted at four centers (two tertiary referral university hospitals, one secondary referral university hospital, one general hospital) and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Dongtan Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, Republic of Korea (approval number: HDT 2024-08-010-001). The study adhered to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki.
The inclusion criteria specified adult patients aged 18 years or older with a confirmed diagnosis of migraine, based on the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition,10 who received anti-CGRP mAbs therapy between July 2022 and June 2023.
2. Data collection
Patient demographics, including age, sex distribution, body mass index, migraine subtypes (such as migraine with or without aura, chronic migraine, pure menstrual migraine, and menstrual-related migraine), baseline headache characteristics including monthly headache days (MHD), monthly medication days and severity were collected. Age at migraine onset and disease duration before anti-CGRP mAbs therapy initiation were also collected. Patients completed a questionnaires including Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Data on anti-CGRP mAbs type (galcanezumab or fremanezumab), number of injections, and injection intervals were also collected. In addition, these factors were compared between patients with and without NHIS coverage.
3. Compliance analysis
Participants who received their first anti-CGRP mAbs injection between July 2022 and June 2023 were monitored for up to 1 year. Treatment compliance was evaluated using two complementary measures: persistence and adherence.
Persistence was defined as the duration of continuous treatment with anti-CGRP mAbs, representing treatment continuation over time. Discontinuation was defined as cessation of treatment during the follow-up period. A maximum interval of 60 days between doses, referred to as the “60-day allowable gap,” was permitted. The persistence rate, representing the percentage of patients who remained on treatment at specific time points, was calculated at 6 and 12 months.
Adherence was assessed using the Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) method, a widely recognized approach in retrospective studies for evaluating medication adherence.11,12 PDC was calculated as the ratio of the total number of days the medication was available to the patient to the total number of days in the follow-up period. Each injection of anti-CGRP mAbs was considered to provide 30 days of coverage for monthly regimens and 90 days for quarterly regimens, starting from the prescription date. Patients with a PDC of ≥80% were classified as adherent, as this threshold is widely accepted as an indicator of good medication adherence in adherence studies.
To examine the impact of coverage status, participants were categorized into two groups: those with and without NHIS coverage. Persistence, persistence rates, and adherence were compared between the groups. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were also analyzed.
4. Assessment of treatment response
Treatment response was evaluated in terms of both effectiveness and safety. Treatment effectiveness was assessed using MHD at baseline and during follow-up visits (1, 3, 6, and 12 months). To evaluate the potential relationship between treatment effectiveness and treatment discontinuation, MHD during follow-up were compared according to insurance coverage and treatment discontinuation. Safety was assessed by analyzing adverse events reported during treatment.
5. Statistical analysis
All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 29.0.2.0 (IBM Corp.). Descriptive statistics included demographic data and baseline disease characteristics. Continuous data are presented as mean and standard deviation or median and interquartile range (IQR), and categorical data are presented as frequencies and percentages. Group comparisons for categorical variables were conducted using the chi-square test. Fisher’s exact test was used for categorical comparisons when the sample size in some categories was small and did not meet the assumptions required for the chi-square test. For continuous variables that were not normally distributed, the Mann-Whitney U-test was applied. Statistical significance was set at a p-value of less than 0.05. Missing data were handled using an available-case analysis approach. Analyses were performed using all available observations for each outcome variable. Due to the retrospective nature of the study, follow-up data was not available for all patients at each time point.
1. Patient demographics
A total of 140 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 12 (8.6%) received anti-CGRP mAbs therapy covered by NHIS. A comparison was made between patients who received NHIS-covered treatment and those who did not, with detailed results presented in Table 1. Patients in the NHIS-covered group had a significantly higher number of MHD compared to those without coverage (25.5 [IQR, 14.0–28.0] vs. 15.0 [IQR, 10.0–20.0], p=0.027). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of age, age of onset, sex distribution, migraine subtype, disease duration before anti-CGRP mAbs therapy (Table 1).
2. Compliance analysis
The treatment discontinuation rate was lower in the NHIS-covered group compared to the non-covered group (50.0% [6/12] vs. 73.4% [94/128], p=0.101) (Table 2). The distribution of the total number of injections is shown in Figure 1. Compared to NHIS-covered group, non-covered group had a relatively higher proportion of those receiving fewer than six injections (Figure 1). Among patients who discontinued treatment in the NHIS-covered group, lack of effectiveness was the most common reason (4/6, 66.7%), followed by headache improvement (2/6, 33.3%). In the non-covered group, discontinuation occurred for various reasons, including headache improvement (30/94, 31.9%), loss to follow-up (33/94, 35.1%), lack of effectiveness (17/94, 18.1%), adverse events (7/94, 7.4%), financial reasons (3/94, 3.2%), and other reasons (4/94, 4.3%) (Table 2).
At 6 months, 83.8% (10/12) of patients in the NHIS-covered group and 78.1% (100/128) in the non-covered group remained in follow-up. Among them, the persistence rate was higher in the NHIS-covered group (80.0% [8/10]) than in the non-covered group (66.0% [66/100], p=0.493). At 12 months, 75.0% (9/12) of patients in the NHIS-covered group and 56.2% (72/128) in the non-covered group remained in follow-up. Among them, the persistence rate remained higher in the NHIS-covered group (66.7% [6/9]) than in the non-covered group (47.2% [34/72]), though the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.312) (Table 2).
The median duration of treatment (days, IQR) was longer in the NHIS-covered group (313.0 [120.3–374.0]) compared to the non-covered group (177.0 [91.3–358.7]) (p=0.214). The total number of injections (median, IQR) was slightly higher in the NHIS-covered group (7.5 [4.3–11.0]) than in the non-covered group (5.0 [3.0–9.0]) (p=0.140). The days of coverage (IQR) were greater in the NHIS-covered group (225 [127.5–330.0]) compared to the non-covered group (150 [90–270]) (p=0.140). The adherence (% IQR) was slightly higher in the NHIS-covered group (86.7 [57.5–100]) than in the non-covered group (79.9 [43.3–100]) (p=0.300). The proportion of adherent patients (n, %) was higher in the NHIS-covered group (66.7% [8/12]) than in the non-covered group (50.0% [64/128]) (p=0.369). However, none of these differences were statistically significant (Table 2).
3. Assessment of treatment response
Treatment effectiveness according to insurance coverage showed that patients in the NHIS-covered group had significantly higher baseline MHD compared with those in the non-covered group (21.7±8.0 vs. 15.7±8.3, p=0.026). MHD during early follow-up visits were also higher in the NHIS-covered group (16.4±10.6 vs. 9.1±9.1 at 1 month, p=0.005; 15.3±10.4 vs. 8.1±8.0 at 3 months, p=0.012). However, differences at 6 and 12 months were not statistically significant (14.6±10.6 vs. 7.5±6.9 at 6 months, p=0.071; 10.9±10.4 vs. 7.8±7.4 at 12 months, p=0.407). Despite these differences in absolute MHD values, the magnitude of improvement from baseline did not differ significantly between the two groups at any time point (Table 3).
Treatment effectiveness was also analyzed according to treatment discontinuation. Baseline MHD were similar between patients who continued treatment and those who discontinued therapy (15.6±6.8 vs. 16.5±8.9, p=0.709). During follow-up, MHD consistently tended to be lower in patients who continued treatment compared with those who discontinued therapy; however, these differences did not reach statistical significance at any time point. At 12 months, patients who continued treatment showed numerically lower MHD compared with those who discontinued (6.7±5.3 vs. 10.0±9.9, p=0.469). Similarly, reduction in MHD from baseline were comparable between the continued and discontinued groups throughout follow-up (Table 3).
Adverse events were reported in 19 patients (13.6%) overall, including two patients (16.7%, 2/12) in the NHIS-covered group and 17 patients (13.3%, 17/128) in the non-covered group (p=0.667). Discontinuation due to adverse events was reported in the non-covered group. These adverse events led to treatment discontinuation were reported in seven patients, including allergic reactions (n=3), constipation (n=1), weight gain (n=1), vomiting (n=1), and abnormal uterine bleeding (n=1). No serious adverse events were reported (Table 2).
This study examined the proportion of patients receiving NHIS coverage and its association with treatment compliance. Only a small proportion of patients were covered by NHIS. The NHIS-covered group had a lower discontinuation rate, whereas a larger proportion of non-covered patients discontinued treatment within the first six injections. Treatment persistence rates at 6 and 12 months were numerically higher in the NHIS-covered group; however, these differences were not statistically significant. Importantly, treatment effectiveness, as measured by changes in MHD, did not differ significantly according to NHIS coverage or treatment continuation during follow-up.
Despite the growing evidence supporting the efficacy of anti-CGRP mAbs,13-15 only a small proportion of patients in this study received NHIS coverage. This limited access likely reflects the relatively strict reimbursement criteria of the current NHIS, which may hinder treatment initiation or continuation despite clinical need. The low proportion of NHIS-covered patients highlights the need for better alignment between clinical needs and institutional support. Notably, HIT-6 scores did not differ significantly between the NHIS-covered and non-covered groups (60.9±7.9 vs. 61.4±7.8, p=0.654) (Table 1), indicating comparable levels of migraine-related disability. These findings suggest that the current NHIS coverage criteria may not fully reflect the real-world disability or patient-reported disease burden in migraine.
The NHIS-covered group showed a lower discontinuation rate over 12 months, whereas a higher proportion of patients in the non-covered group discontinued treatment within the first 6 months. Persistence rates at both 6 and 12 months were numerically higher in the NHIS-covered group; however, these differences did not reach statistical significance, possibly due to the small sample size. These findings may suggest that insurance coverage contributes to treatment continuation, particularly during the early phase of therapy.
However, treatment continuation is likely influenced by multiple factors beyond insurance status alone. Previous studies have reported that higher headache frequency is associated with lower persistence, often driven by inadequate perceived efficacy and unmet treatment expectations.16 Beyond the initial treatment period, factors such as perceived efficacy, tolerability, and overall disease burden may further influence patients’ decisions to continue therapy.17 Indeed, lack of perceived efficacy has been consistently reported as one of the most common reasons for discontinuation among patients treated with anti-CGRP mAbs.6,17-19 In the present study, lack of effectiveness was also a common reason for discontinuation.
Despite the lack of significant differences in treatment effectiveness between groups, both NHIS-covered and non-covered patients showed reductions in MHD during follow-up, indicating that anti-CGRP mAbs were clinically effective in real-world practice. However, the magnitude of improvement was comparable between groups, and no significant differences were observed in the reduction in MHD from baseline according to insurance coverage or whether treatment was continued. Notably, despite having higher baseline MHD and consistently higher MHD during follow-up, patients in the NHIS-covered group showed numerically higher persistence rates compared with the non-covered group. This pattern suggests that the higher persistence rate observed in the NHIS-covered group cannot be fully explained by differences in treatment effectiveness.
Taken together, these findings suggest that treatment continuation was not solely explained by differences in treatment effectiveness. Instead, the numerically higher persistence observed in the NHIS-covered group indicates that insurance coverage may facilitate treatment continuation independent of clinical response, likely by reducing financial barriers and improving access to therapy. In addition, factors such as perceived efficacy, tolerability, overall disease burden, and patient expectations may further influence patients’ decisions to continue treatment in real-world practice.
Sustained treatment persistence may be particularly important in the context of anti-CGRP mAbs therapy, as some patients demonstrate delayed or late treatment responses that may not be apparent during the early treatment period.20 Several real-world studies have reported continued improvements in headache frequency, disability, and quality of life beyond the initial treatment phase.21,22 In line with these findings, our results also showed a consistent trend toward greater reductions in MHD among patients who continued treatment compared with those who discontinued, although these differences did not reach statistical significance.
Early treatment discontinuation may limit the opportunity to achieve the full therapeutic and functional benefits of preventive treatment. From an economic perspective, early discontinuation may also reduce cost-effectiveness by limiting potential long-term benefits, including reduced healthcare utilization, improved productivity, and decreased disability.23 Therefore, factors that support sustained treatment may play an important role in optimizing both clinical and economic outcomes in routine practice.
Several limitations should be considered. First, the small sample size of the NHIS-covered group (n=12) may have limited the statistical power to detect significant effects. Therefore, the findings should be interpreted with caution, and larger studies are needed to confirm these results. Second, although this study evaluated treatment discontinuation and included reasons for discontinuation, treatment decisions in real-world practice are influenced by multiple factors that were not fully captured. These include patient expectations, perceived effectiveness, psychological factors (e.g., anxiety and depression), and interactions with healthcare providers. Third, due to the retrospective design, for patients who were lost to follow-up, the reasons for treatment discontinuation may not have been fully captured, which could have introduced bias. Fourth, although treatment effectiveness was assessed using reduction in MHD, other clinically relevant outcomes— such as quality of life, functional disability, and ≥50% responder rates—were not evaluated. In addition, factors related to healthcare access—such as private insurance coverage, out-of-pocket costs, and availability of follow-up care—may have influenced treatment continuation but were not assessed.
In this real-world study, only a small proportion of migraine patients receiving anti-CGRP mAbs therapy were covered by the NHIS. Treatment persistence may be influenced by multiple factors beyond clinical response, including non-clinical factors such as access to therapy and financial burden. These findings highlight the potential importance of healthcare system factors, such as NHIS coverage, in supporting sustained preventive treatment in routine clinical practice.
Figure 1.
Distribution of the number of injections by insurance coverage (National Health Insurance Service [NHIS]-covered vs. non-covered). (A) NHIS-covered patients. (B) Non-covered patients.
hpr-2026-0007f1.jpg
Table 1.
Comparison of clinical characteristics and treatment by insurance coverage status for anti-CGRP mAb therapy (n=140)
NHIS-covered (n=12) Non-covered (n=128) p-value
Age (yr) 43.6±15.7 44.7±11.8 0.902
Sex, female 10 (83.3) 106 (82.8) 0.662
BMI (kg/m2) 22.7±4.2 22.2±3.3 0.783
Hypertension 4 (33.3) 13 (10.2) 0.060
DM 0 3 (2.3) 0.637
Migraine subtype
 Chronic migraine 11 (91.7) 80 (62.5) 0.057
 Episodic migraine 1 (8.3) 48 (37.5)
 Without aura 11 (91.7) 120 (93.8) 0.565
 With aura 1 (8.3) 8 (6.3)
 PMM 0 7/123 (5.7) 0.540
 MRM 0 12/123 (9.8)*
Baseline headache characteristics
 Monthly headache days 25.5 (14.0–28.0) 15.0 (10.0–20.0) 0.027
 Monthly medication days 13.0 (3.0–25.0) 10.0 (6.0–20.0) 0.856
Monthly headache days more than 26 6 (50.0) 23 (18.0) 0.018
Age of onset (yr) 20.9±10.3 27.1±12.7 0.152
Disease duration before CGRP (yr) 19.2±20.0 15.9±11.2 0.876
Questionnaires
 HIT-6 60.9±7.9 61.4±7.8 0.654
 GAD-7 5.5 (2.8‒9.8) 5.0 (2.0‒8.8) 0.436
 PHQ-9 8.5 (5.0‒13.3) 7.0 (4.0‒9.0) 0.150
Anti-CGRP mAb type
 Galcanezumab 6 (50.0) 53 (41.4) 0.792
 Fremanezumab 6 (50.0) 75 (58.6)
Prior anti-CGRP mAb treatment 3 (25.0) 23 (18.0) 0.391

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

anti-CGRP mAb, anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody; NHIS, National Health Insurance Service; BMI, body mass index; DM, diabetes mellitus; PMM, pure menstrual migraine; MRM, menstrual-related migraine; CGRP, calcitonin gene-related peptide; HIT-6, Headache Impact Test-6; GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale; PHQ-9, Patient Health Questionnaire-9.

*PMM and MRM analyses were performed in 123 patients in the non-covered group because data were unavailable for 5 patients.

Table 2.
Comparison of treatment according to NHIS coverage
NHIS-covered (n=12) Non-covered (n=128) p-value
Total number of injections 7.5 (4.3‒11.0) 5.0 (3.0‒9.0) 0.140
Interval between injections (day) 32.1 (30.7‒33.9) 31.9 (30.0‒36.0) 0.867
Anti-CGRP mAb discontinuation 6 (50.0) 94 (73.4) 0.101
Reasons for discontinuation
 Lack of effectiveness 4/6 (66.7) 17/94 (18.1)
 Headache improvement 2/6 (33.3) 30/94 (31.9)
 Loss of follow-up - 33/94 (35.1)
 Adverse events* - 7/94 (7.4)
 Financial reasons - 3/94 (3.2)
 Others - 4/94 (4.3)
Overall adverse events 2/12 (16.7) 17/128 (13.3) 0.667
Adherence 86.7 (57.5‒100) 79.9 (43.3‒100) 0.300
 Days covered 225 (127.5‒330.0) 150 (90.0‒270.0) 0.140
 Adherent 8 (66.7) 64 (50.0) 0.369
Persistence
 Duration of treatment (day) 313.0 (120.3‒374.0) 177.0 (91.3‒358.7) 0.214
 At 6 months
  Follow-up 10 (83.8) 100 (78.1) >0.99
  Persistence rate 8/10 (80.0) 66/100 (66.0) 0.493
 At 12 months
  Follow-up 9 (75.0) 72 (56.2) 0.240
  Persistence rate 6/9 (66.7) 34/72 (47.2) 0.312

Values are presented as median (interquartile range) or number (%).

NHIS, National Health Insurance Service; Anti-CGRP mAb, anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody.

*Including allergic reactions (n=3), constipation (n=1), weight gain (n=1), vomiting (n=1), and abnormal uterine bleeding (n=1).

Table 3.
Change in MHD according to insurance coverage and treatment discontinuation
Variable MHD, mean±SD
Baseline After 1 month After 3 months After 6 months After 12 months
NHIS coverage
 Covered (n=12) 21.7±8.0 16.4±10.6 15.3±10.4 14.6±10.6 10.9±10.4
 Non-covered (n=128) 15.7±8.3 9.1±9.1 8.1±8.0 7.5±6.9 7.8±7.4
 p-value 0.026 0.005 0.012 0.071 0.407
 Reduction in MHD from baseline
  Covered 5.3±7.5 6.3±9.8 5.3±12.6 10.6±10.1
  Non-covered 6.0±7.5 6.8±7.8 7.6±7.3 7.7±9.0
  p-value* 0.398 0.631 0.523 0.6
Treatment discontinuation
 Continued (n=40) 15.6±6.8 8.2±7.7 8.9±7.9 8.4±6.9 6.7±5.3
 Discontinued (n=100) 16.5±8.9 10.9±10.3 9.1±9.1 8.1±8.1 10.0±9.9
 p-value 0.709 0.253 0.732 0.381 0.469
 Reduction in MHD from baseline
  Continued 6.9±6.7 6.9±7.3 7.1±8.1 8.9±7.4
  Discontinued 5.4±8.3 6.3±8.5 7.6±7.9 7.0±10.8
  p-value* 0.255 0.724 0.925 0.291

MHD, monthly headache days; SD, standard deviation.

*p-values represent between-group comparisons at each time point.

  • 1. Dong L, Dong W, Jin Y, Jiang Y, Li Z, Yu D. The Global burden of migraine: a 30-year trend review and future projections by age, sex, country, and region. Pain Ther 2025;14:297-315.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 2. Leonardi M, Raggi A. A narrative review on the burden of migraine: when the burden is the impact on people's life. J Headache Pain 2019;20:41.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 3. Kim BS, Chung PW, Chung JM, et al. Evidence-based recommendations on pharmacologic treatment for migraine prevention: a clinical practice guideline from the Korean Headache Society. Headache Pain Res 2025;26:5-20.ArticlePDF
  • 4. Romozzi M, Munafò A, Burgalassi A, et al. Pharmacological differences and switching among anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a narrative review. Headache 2025;65:342-352.ArticlePubMed
  • 5. Oliveira R, Gil-Gouveia R, Puledda F. CGRP-targeted medication in chronic migraine - systematic review. J Headache Pain 2024;25:51.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 6. Kang MK, Sohn JH, Cha MJ, et al. One-year compliance after calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody therapy for migraine patients in a real-world setting: a multicenter cross-sectional study. J Clin Med 2025;14:734.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 7. Ray R, Virk GS, Regmi N, et al. Patient adherence and long-term tolerability of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies in migraine prevention: a systematic review. Cureus 2025;17:e91347.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 8. Nguyen JL, Munshi K, Peasah SK, et al. Trends in utilization and costs of migraine medications, 2017-2020. J Headache Pain 2022;23:111.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 9. Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service. Detailed reimbursement criteria for anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies [Internet]. Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service; 2024 [updated 2024; cited 2026 Jan 27]. Available from: https://www.hira.or.kr/bbsDummy.do?pgmid=HIRAA020002000100&brdScnBltNo=4&brdBltNo=10980#none
  • 10. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS). The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia 2018;38:1-211.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 11. Lee WK, Lee J. Evaluation and improvement of adherence to medication. J Korean Med Assoc 2021;64:130-136.ArticlePDF
  • 12. Prieto-Merino D, Mulick A, Armstrong C, et al. Estimating proportion of days covered (PDC) using real-world online medicine suppliers’ datasets. J Pharm Policy Pract 2021;14:113.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 13. Muddam MR, Obajeun OA, Abaza A, et al. Efficacy and safety of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies in preventing migraines: a systematic review. Cureus 2023;15:e45560.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 14. Soni P, Chawla E. Efficacy and safety of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for treatment of chronic migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2021;209:106893.ArticlePubMed
  • 15. Iannone LF, Fattori D, Benemei S, Chiarugi A, Geppetti P, De Cesaris F. Long-term effectiveness of three anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in resistant chronic migraine patients based on the MIDAS score. CNS Drugs 2022;36:191-202.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 16. Yuan D, Zhang Y, Li Q, et al. Factors affecting preventive treatment outcomes for patients with newly diagnosed chronic migraine and their compliance with treatment recommendations in Chongqing province, China: an open-label prospective study with retrospective baseline. Front Neurol 2020;11:227.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 17. Burgalassi A, Romozzi M, Vigani G, et al. Outcomes, unmet needs, and challenges in the management of patients who withdraw from anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: a prospective cohort study. Cephalalgia 2024;44:3331024241273968.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 18. de Dios A, Pagès-Puigdemont N, Ojeda S, et al. Persistence, effectiveness, and tolerability of anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies in patients with chronic migraine. Headache 2025;65:24-34.ArticlePubMed
  • 19. Barbanti P, Aurilia C, Torelli P, et al. Three-year treatment with anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies modifies migraine course: the prospective, multicenter I-GRAINE study. J Neurol 2025;272:170.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 20. Barbanti P, Aurilia C, Egeo G, et al. Late response to anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine: a multicenter prospective observational study. Neurology 2023;101:482-488.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 21. Fernández-Bravo-Rodrigo J, Pascual-Morena C, Saz-Lara A, et al. Real-world effectiveness and safety of galcanezumab for the treatment of migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Headache 2026;66:262-277.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 22. Orlando B, Egeo G, Aurilia C, Fiorentini G, Barbanti P. Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies: key lessons from real-world evidence. Brain Sci 2024;14:948.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 23. Lazaro-Hernandez C, Caronna E, Rosell-Mirmi J, et al. Early and annual projected savings from anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in migraine prevention: a cost-benefit analysis in the working-age population. J Headache Pain 2024;25:21.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      • PubReader PubReader
      • ePub LinkePub Link
      • Cite this Article
        Cite this Article
        export Copy Download
        Close
        Download Citation
        Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.
        Format:
        • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
        • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
        Include:
        • Citation for the content below
        The Impact of Limited Insurance Coverage on Long-Term Persistence with Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy: A Multicenter Real-World Study in Korea
        Close
      • XML DownloadXML Download
      Figure
      • 0
      The Impact of Limited Insurance Coverage on Long-Term Persistence with Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy: A Multicenter Real-World Study in Korea
      Image
      Figure 1. Distribution of the number of injections by insurance coverage (National Health Insurance Service [NHIS]-covered vs. non-covered). (A) NHIS-covered patients. (B) Non-covered patients.

      Figure 1.

      The Impact of Limited Insurance Coverage on Long-Term Persistence with Anti-CGRP Monoclonal Antibody Therapy: A Multicenter Real-World Study in Korea
      NHIS-covered (n=12) Non-covered (n=128) p-value
      Age (yr) 43.6±15.7 44.7±11.8 0.902
      Sex, female 10 (83.3) 106 (82.8) 0.662
      BMI (kg/m2) 22.7±4.2 22.2±3.3 0.783
      Hypertension 4 (33.3) 13 (10.2) 0.060
      DM 0 3 (2.3) 0.637
      Migraine subtype
       Chronic migraine 11 (91.7) 80 (62.5) 0.057
       Episodic migraine 1 (8.3) 48 (37.5)
       Without aura 11 (91.7) 120 (93.8) 0.565
       With aura 1 (8.3) 8 (6.3)
       PMM 0 7/123 (5.7) 0.540
       MRM 0 12/123 (9.8)*
      Baseline headache characteristics
       Monthly headache days 25.5 (14.0–28.0) 15.0 (10.0–20.0) 0.027
       Monthly medication days 13.0 (3.0–25.0) 10.0 (6.0–20.0) 0.856
      Monthly headache days more than 26 6 (50.0) 23 (18.0) 0.018
      Age of onset (yr) 20.9±10.3 27.1±12.7 0.152
      Disease duration before CGRP (yr) 19.2±20.0 15.9±11.2 0.876
      Questionnaires
       HIT-6 60.9±7.9 61.4±7.8 0.654
       GAD-7 5.5 (2.8‒9.8) 5.0 (2.0‒8.8) 0.436
       PHQ-9 8.5 (5.0‒13.3) 7.0 (4.0‒9.0) 0.150
      Anti-CGRP mAb type
       Galcanezumab 6 (50.0) 53 (41.4) 0.792
       Fremanezumab 6 (50.0) 75 (58.6)
      Prior anti-CGRP mAb treatment 3 (25.0) 23 (18.0) 0.391
      NHIS-covered (n=12) Non-covered (n=128) p-value
      Total number of injections 7.5 (4.3‒11.0) 5.0 (3.0‒9.0) 0.140
      Interval between injections (day) 32.1 (30.7‒33.9) 31.9 (30.0‒36.0) 0.867
      Anti-CGRP mAb discontinuation 6 (50.0) 94 (73.4) 0.101
      Reasons for discontinuation
       Lack of effectiveness 4/6 (66.7) 17/94 (18.1)
       Headache improvement 2/6 (33.3) 30/94 (31.9)
       Loss of follow-up - 33/94 (35.1)
       Adverse events* - 7/94 (7.4)
       Financial reasons - 3/94 (3.2)
       Others - 4/94 (4.3)
      Overall adverse events 2/12 (16.7) 17/128 (13.3) 0.667
      Adherence 86.7 (57.5‒100) 79.9 (43.3‒100) 0.300
       Days covered 225 (127.5‒330.0) 150 (90.0‒270.0) 0.140
       Adherent 8 (66.7) 64 (50.0) 0.369
      Persistence
       Duration of treatment (day) 313.0 (120.3‒374.0) 177.0 (91.3‒358.7) 0.214
       At 6 months
        Follow-up 10 (83.8) 100 (78.1) >0.99
        Persistence rate 8/10 (80.0) 66/100 (66.0) 0.493
       At 12 months
        Follow-up 9 (75.0) 72 (56.2) 0.240
        Persistence rate 6/9 (66.7) 34/72 (47.2) 0.312
      Variable MHD, mean±SD
      Baseline After 1 month After 3 months After 6 months After 12 months
      NHIS coverage
       Covered (n=12) 21.7±8.0 16.4±10.6 15.3±10.4 14.6±10.6 10.9±10.4
       Non-covered (n=128) 15.7±8.3 9.1±9.1 8.1±8.0 7.5±6.9 7.8±7.4
       p-value 0.026 0.005 0.012 0.071 0.407
       Reduction in MHD from baseline
        Covered 5.3±7.5 6.3±9.8 5.3±12.6 10.6±10.1
        Non-covered 6.0±7.5 6.8±7.8 7.6±7.3 7.7±9.0
        p-value* 0.398 0.631 0.523 0.6
      Treatment discontinuation
       Continued (n=40) 15.6±6.8 8.2±7.7 8.9±7.9 8.4±6.9 6.7±5.3
       Discontinued (n=100) 16.5±8.9 10.9±10.3 9.1±9.1 8.1±8.1 10.0±9.9
       p-value 0.709 0.253 0.732 0.381 0.469
       Reduction in MHD from baseline
        Continued 6.9±6.7 6.9±7.3 7.1±8.1 8.9±7.4
        Discontinued 5.4±8.3 6.3±8.5 7.6±7.9 7.0±10.8
        p-value* 0.255 0.724 0.925 0.291
      Table 1. Comparison of clinical characteristics and treatment by insurance coverage status for anti-CGRP mAb therapy (n=140)

      Values are presented as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

      anti-CGRP mAb, anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody; NHIS, National Health Insurance Service; BMI, body mass index; DM, diabetes mellitus; PMM, pure menstrual migraine; MRM, menstrual-related migraine; CGRP, calcitonin gene-related peptide; HIT-6, Headache Impact Test-6; GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale; PHQ-9, Patient Health Questionnaire-9.

      PMM and MRM analyses were performed in 123 patients in the non-covered group because data were unavailable for 5 patients.

      Table 2. Comparison of treatment according to NHIS coverage

      Values are presented as median (interquartile range) or number (%).

      NHIS, National Health Insurance Service; Anti-CGRP mAb, anti-calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody.

      Including allergic reactions (n=3), constipation (n=1), weight gain (n=1), vomiting (n=1), and abnormal uterine bleeding (n=1).

      Table 3. Change in MHD according to insurance coverage and treatment discontinuation

      MHD, monthly headache days; SD, standard deviation.

      p-values represent between-group comparisons at each time point.

      Table 1.

      Table 2.

      Table 3.

      Headache and Pain Research : Headache and Pain Research
      © The Korean Headache Society.
      TOP