Oral sumatriptan: effect of a second dose, and incidence and treatment of headache recurrences

International Headache Society global practice recommendations for the acute pharmacological treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

In an effort to improve migraine management around the world, the International Headache Society (IHS) has here developed a list of practical recommendations for the acute pharmacological treatment of migraine. The recommendations are categorized into optimal and essential, in order to provide treatment options for all possible settings, including those with limited access to migraine medications.

METHODS

An IHS steering committee developed a list of clinical questions based on practical issues in the management of migraine. A selected group of international senior and junior headache experts developed the recommendations, following expert consensus and the review of available national and international headache guidelines and guidance documents. Following the initial search, a bibliography of twenty-one national and international guidelines was created and reviewed by the working group.

RESULTS

A total of seventeen questions addressing different aspects of acute migraine treatment have been outlined. For each of them we provide an optimal recommendation, to be used whenever possible, and an essential recommendation to be used when the optimal level cannot be attained.

CONCLUSION

Adoption of these international recommendations will improve the quality of acute migraine treatment around the world, even where pharmacological options remain limited.

Variability in recurrence rates with acute treatments for migraine: why recurrence is not an appropriate outcome measure

BACKGROUND

Headache recurrence is a common feature of acute therapies, whether approved or still in development, and continues to be a significant problem for both the patient and the clinician. Further complicating this issue is lack of standardization in definitions of recurrence used in clinical trials, as well as disparity in patient characteristics, rendering a comparison of different acute medications challenging. Recurrence has serious clinical implications, which can include an increased risk for new-onset chronic migraine and/or development of medication overuse headache. The aim of this review is to illustrate variability of recurrence rates depending on prevailing definitions in the literature for widely used acute treatments for migraine and to emphasize sustained response as a clinically relevant endpoint for measuring prolonged efficacy. BODY: A literature search of PubMed for articles of approved acute therapies for migraine that reported recurrence rates was performed. Study drugs of interest included select triptans, gepants, lasmiditan, and dihydroergotamine mesylate. An unpublished post hoc analysis of an investigational dihydroergotamine mesylate product that evaluated recurrence rates using several different definitions of recurrence common in the literature is also included. Depending on the criteria established by the clinical trial and the definition of recurrence used, rates of recurrence vary considerably across different acute therapies for migraine, making it difficult to compare results of different trials to assess the sustained (i.e., over a single attack) and the prolonged (i.e., over multiple attacks) efficacy of a particular study medication.

CONCLUSION

A standardized definition of recurrence is necessary to help physicians evaluate recurrence rates of different abortive agents for migraine. Sustained pain relief or freedom may be more comprehensive efficacy outcome measures than recurrence. Future efficacy studies should be encouraged to use the recommended definition of sustained pain freedom set by the International Headache Society.

Low adherence to the guideline for the acute treatment of migraine

The real-world use of triptans in the treatment of migraine is disappointing. Only 12% of the Danish migraine population purchased a triptan between 2014 and 2019, and only 43% repurchased a triptan after first prescription. The aim of the present study was to assess whether physicians and patients adhere to the therapeutic guideline on acute migraine treatment. We interviewed 299 triptan experienced participants with migraine and 101 triptan naïve participants with migraine from the Danish Migraine Population Cohort, using a semi-structured questionnaire. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to study the association with triptan use and the assessed factors. Among triptan naïve participants with migraine, 64% had consulted their general practitioner about their migraine, of whom only 23% received information about the possibility of triptan treatment. Among triptan experienced participants, 77% had only tried one type of triptan. Only 12% could recall they had been informed by their general practitioner to try each triptan three times before giving up. Twenty percent were informed to try three different triptans in total, if the first did not work. In disagreement with the guideline, participants who reported a low pain reduction by a triptan had only tried one type of triptan. Our study shows a low adherence to therapeutic guideline for the attack treatment of migraine. There is a need for better education of general practitioners regarding treatment of migraine. Future campaigns should aim to inform both the public and the general practitioner about antimigraine treatments.

New Generation Gepants: Migraine Acute and Preventive Medications

Migraine is a debilitating disease whose clinical and social impact is out of debate. Tolerability issues, interactions, contraindications, and inefficacy of the available medications make new options necessary. The calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway has shown its importance in migraine pathophysiology and specific medications targeting this have become available. The first-generation CGRP receptor antagonists or gepants, have undergone clinical trials but their development was stopped because of hepatotoxicity. The new generation of gepants, however, are efficacious, safe, and well tolerated as per recent clinical trials. This led to the FDA-approval of rimegepant, ubrogepant, and atogepant. The clinical trials of the available gepants and some of the newer CGRP-antagonists are reviewed in this article.

Comparison between metamizole and triptans for migraine treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of metamizole and triptans for the treatment of migraine. MethodsRandomized controlled trials including people who received metamizole or triptan by multiple routes of administration and at all doses as treatment compared to subjects who received another treatment or placebo were included in the systematic review. The primary outcomes were freedom from pain at 2 hours; pain relief at 2 hours; sustained headache response at 24 hours; sustained freedom from pain at 24 hours. The statistical analysis of all interventions of interest were based on random effect models compared through a network meta-analysis. Results 209 studies meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed. Of these, 130 had data that could be analyzed statistically. Only 3.0% provided enough information and were judged to have a low overall risk of bias for all categories evaluated; approximately 50% of the studies presented a low risk of selection bias. More than 75% of the studies presented a low risk of performance bias, and around 75% showed a low risk of detection and attrition bias. ConclusionThere is no evidence of a difference between dipyrone and any triptan for pain freedom after 2 hours of medication. Our study suggests that metamizole may be equally effective as triptans in acute migraine treatment.

New Oral Drugs for Migraine

Migraine is a common and disabling neurological disorder, with several manifestations, of which pain is just one. Despite its worldwide prevalence, there remains a paucity of targeted and effective treatments for the condition, leaving many of those affected underserved by available treatments. Work over the last 30+ years has recently led to the emergence of the first targeted acute and preventive treatments in our practice since the triptan era in the early 1990s, which are changing the landscape of migraine treatment. These include the monoclonal antibodies targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide or its receptor. Evolving work on novel therapeutic targets, as well as continuing to exploit drugs used in other disorders that may also have a therapeutic effect in migraine, is likely to lead to more and more treatments being able to be offered to migraineurs. Future work involves the development of agents that lack vasoconstrictive effects, such as lasmiditan, do not contribute to medication overuse, such as the gepants, and do not interact with other drugs that may be used for the disorder, as well as agents that can act both acutely and preventively, thereby utilising the quantum between acute and preventive drug effects which has been demonstrated with different migraine drugs before. Here we discuss the evolution of oral migraine treatments over the last 5 years, including those that have gained regulatory approval and reached clinical practice, those in development and potential other targets for the future.

Doubtful use of placebo following placebo in recent controlled trials of lasmiditan and ubrogepant for the treatment of migraine attacks

PURPOSE

In four large controlled trials with lasmiditan and ubrogepant placebo was administered in the first step to demonstrate an effect on migraine attack. In the same trials the investigators also asked the question: is a second dose of the drug effective in non-responders to the first dose? In this phase patients who received placebo in the first phase of the trial again after 2 hours received another dose of placebo.

CONCLUSION

To be ethical, clinical research requires balancing rigorous science with the protection of human subjects; and it is, in our view, questionable whether placebo was used with "scientific rigor" in the second step of these trials, and this design is not recommended.

Gepants, calcitonin-gene-related peptide receptor antagonists: what could be their role in migraine treatment?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Migraine is the second leading cause of years lived with disability after back pain. Poor tolerability, contraindications, drug-drug interactions and efficacy limited to a subpopulation make new approaches necessary for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. The study of the calcitonin-gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway over the last decades is a good example of translational medicine leading to directed therapies for patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

After some of the first-generation CGRP receptor antagonists, gepants, were not fully developed because of hepatotoxicity, the second generation of gepants have shown efficacy, safety and tolerability in recent clinical trials.

SUMMARY

Both rimegepant and ubrogepant have published positive randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials data. Vazegepant is the first intranasal gepant for the acute treatment of migraine and has announced a positive phase II/III study. Daily rimegepant use has preliminary data to suggest efficacy. Atogepant has shown efficacy in migraine prevention in a phase II/III study. Most importantly, hepatotoxicity has not been reported in specifically designed phase I studies or long-term extension studies, with rimegepant or ubrogepant, or in a preventive study with atogepant. Given the preventive effect, it seems likely that gepants will not lead to medication overuse headache. They will likely have no cardiovascular warnings. Because of the particular benefit gepants may represent for these groups of patients, specific studies in patients with medication overuse headache, as well as those with comorbid cardiovascular diseases, would be of considerable interest.

Pharmacological strategies to treat attacks of episodic migraine in adults

INTRODUCTION

Migraine patients prioritize early complete relief of headache and associated symptoms, sustained freedom of pain, and good tolerability. One major obstacle for the successful use of drug treatment of migraine attack is that the speed of action of triptans, 5-HT_1B/1D receptor agonists, is delayed.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the author discusses the following features of acute migraine drugs: pharmacology; pharmacokinetics, and absorption of drugs during migraine attacks. Next, dose-response curves for effect; and the delayed onset of action is reviewed. In the more clinical part of the review, the following items are discussed: overall clinical judgments; comparison of triptans; comparison of triptans with NSAIDs; early intervention with triptans; medication-overuse headache; comments on the effect of gepants; and the general principle of acute migraine therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

The delay in the onset of effect of acute migraine drugs is likely due to a complex antimigraine system involving more than one site of action. Investigations into the mechanisms of the delay should have a high priority, both in studies with animals, migraine models, and in migraine patients during attacks. Non-oral administration of antimigraine drugs resulting in early absorption of drugs should be developed as they possibly also can increase E_max.

Consensus of the Hellenic Headache Society on the diagnosis and treatment of migraine

More than 0.6 million people suffer from disabling migraines in Greece causing a dramatic work loss, but only a small proportion of migraineurs attend headache centres, most of them being treated by non-experts. On behalf of the Hellenic Headache Society, we report here a consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of adult migraine that is based on the recent guidelines of the European Headache Federation, on the principles of Good Clinical Practice and on the Greek regulatory affairs. The purposes are three-fold: (1) to increase awareness for migraine in Greece; (2) to support Greek practitioners who are treating migraineurs; and (3) to help Greek migraineurs to get the most appropriate treatment. For mild migraine, symptomatic treatment with high dose simple analgesics is suggested, while for moderate to severe migraines triptans or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or both, should be administered following an individually tailored therapeutic strategy. A rescue acute treatment option should always be advised. For episodic migraine prevention, metoprolol (50–200 mg/d), propranolol (40–240 mg/d), flunarizine (5–10 mg/d), valproate (500–1800 mg/d), topiramate (25–100 mg/d) and candesartan (16–32 mg/d) are the drugs of first choice. For chronic migraine prevention topiramate (100-200 mg/d), valproate (500–1800 mg/d), flunarizine (5–10 mg/d) and venlafaxine (150 mg/d) may be used, but the evidence is very limited. Botulinum toxin type A and monoclonal antibodies targeting the CGRP pathway (anti-CGRP mAbs) are recommended for patients suffering from chronic migraine (with or without medication overuse) who failed or did not tolerate two previous treatments. Anti-CGRP mAbs are also suggested for patients suffering from high frequency episodic migraine (≥8 migraine days per month and less than 14) who failed or did not tolerate two previous treatments.

Practice guideline update summary: Acute treatment of migraine in children and adolescents

Objective

To provide evidence-based recommendations for the acute symptomatic treatment of children and adolescents with migraine.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of the literature and rated risk of bias of included studies according to the American Academy of Neurology classification of evidence criteria. A multidisciplinary panel developed practice recommendations, integrating findings from the systematic review and following an Institute of Medicine–compliant process to ensure transparency and patient engagement. Recommendations were supported by structured rationales, integrating evidence from the systematic review, related evidence, principles of care, and inferences from evidence.

Results

There is evidence to support the efficacy of the use of ibuprofen, acetaminophen (in children and adolescents), and triptans (mainly in adolescents) for the relief of migraine pain, although confidence in the evidence varies between agents. There is high confidence that adolescents receiving oral sumatriptan/naproxen and zolmitriptan nasal spray are more likely to be headache-free at 2 hours than those receiving placebo. No acute treatments were effective for migraine-related nausea or vomiting; some triptans were effective for migraine-related phonophobia and photophobia.

Recommendations

Recommendations for the treatment of acute migraine in children and adolescents focus on the importance of early treatment, choosing the route of administration best suited to the characteristics of the individual migraine attack, and providing counseling on lifestyle factors that can exacerbate migraine, including trigger avoidance and medication overuse.

Effect of a rescue or recurrence dose of lasmiditan on efficacy and safety in the acute treatment of migraine: findings from the phase 3 trials (SAMURAI and SPARTAN)

BACKGROUND

We studied the efficacy and safety of a second dose of lasmiditan for acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

SAMURAI and SPARTAN were double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 studies in which individuals with migraine were randomized to oral lasmiditan 50 mg (SPARTAN only), 100 mg, 200 mg, or placebo. Study drug was to be taken within 4 h (h) of onset of a migraine attack (moderate or severe pain). A second dose of study drug was provided for rescue (patient not pain-free at 2 h and took a second dose 2-24 h post-first dose) or recurrence (patient pain-free at 2 h, but experienced recurrence of mild, moderate, or severe migraine pain and took a second dose 2-24 h after first dose). Randomization to second dose occurred at baseline; patients originally assigned lasmiditan were randomized to the same lasmiditan dose or placebo (2:1 ratio), and those originally assigned placebo received placebo. Data from SAMURAI and SPARTAN were pooled for efficacy and safety assessment of a second dose of lasmiditan.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients taking a second dose was lower with lasmiditan versus placebo, and decreased with increasing lasmiditan dose; the majority who took a second dose did so for rescue. In patients taking lasmiditan as first dose, outcomes (pain free, most bothersome symptom [MBS] free) at 2 h after a second dose for rescue were similar whether the second dose was lasmiditan or placebo (p > 0.05 in all cases). In patients taking lasmiditan for first dose, outcomes at 2 h after a second dose for recurrence were as follows: lasmiditan pooled versus placebo - pain free, 50% vs 32% (p > 0.05); MBS free, 71% vs 41% (p = 0.02); pain relief, 77% vs 52% (p = 0.03). In patients whose first dose was lasmiditan, the incidence of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported after the second dose was similar whether second dose was lasmiditan or placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

A second dose of lasmiditan showed some evidence of efficacy when taken for headache recurrence. There was no clear benefit of a second dose of lasmiditan for rescue treatment. The incidences of TEAEs were similar whether the second dose was lasmiditan or placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

SAMURAI ( NCT02439320 ) [April 2015]. SPARTAN ( NCT02605174 ) [May 2016].

Treatment of migraine attacks and prevention of migraine: Guidelines by the German Migraine and Headache Society and the German Society of Neurology

In collaboration with some of the leading headache centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, we have established new guidelines for the treatment of migraine attacks and the prevention of migraine. A thorough literature research of the last 10 years has been the basis of the current recommendations. At the beginning, we present therapeutic novelties, followed by a summary of all recommendations. After an introduction, we cover topics like drug therapy and practical experience, non-effective medication, migraine prevention, interventional methods, non-medicational and psychological methods for prevention and therapies without proof of efficacy.

Migraine Treatment: Current Acute Medications and Their Potential Mechanisms of Action

Migraine is a common and disabling primary headache disorder with a significant socioeconomic burden. The management of migraine is multifaceted and is generally dichotomized into acute and preventive strategies, with several treatment modalities. The aims of acute pharmacological treatment are to rapidly restore function with minimal recurrence, with the avoidance of side effects. The choice of pharmacological treatment is individualized, and is based on the consideration of the characteristics of the migraine attack, the patient's concomitant medical problems, and treatment preferences. Notwithstanding, a good understanding of the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of the various drug options is essential to guide therapy. The current approach and concepts relevant to the acute pharmacological treatment of migraine will be explored in this review.

Eletriptan in the management of acute migraine: an update on the evidence for efficacy, safety, and consistent response

Migraine is a multifactorial, neurological and disabling disorder, also characterized by several autonomic symptoms. Triptans, selective serotonin 5-HT1B/1D agonists, are the first-line treatment option for moderate-to-severe headache attacks. In this paper, we review the recent data on eletriptan clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability, and potential clinically relevant interactions with other drugs. Among triptans, eletriptan shows a consistent and significant clinical efficacy and a good tolerability profile in the treatment of migraine, especially for patients with cardiovascular risk factors without coronary artery disease. It shows the most favorable clinical response, together with sumatriptan injections, zolmitriptan and rizatriptan. Additionally, eletriptan shows the most complex pharmacokinetic/dynamic profile compared with the other triptans. It is metabolized primarily by the CYP3A4 hepatic enzyme and therefore the concomitant administration of CYP3A4-potent inhibitors should be carefully evaluated. A relatively low risk of serotonin syndrome is given by the co-administration with serotoninergic drugs. No clinically relevant interaction has been found with drugs used for migraine prophylactic treatment or other acute drugs, with the exception of ergot derivatives that should not be co-administered with eletriptan.

Pharmacological Acute Migraine Treatment Strategies: Choosing the Right Drug for a Specific Patient

Background:

In our targeted review (Section 2), 12 acute medications received a strong recommendation for use in acute migraine therapy while four received a weak recommendation for use. Strong recommendations were made to avoid use of two other medications, except for exceptional circumstances. Two anti-emetics received strong recommendations for use as needed.

Objective:

To organize the available acute migraine medications into acute migraine treatment strategies in order to assist the practitioner in choosing a specific medication(s) for an individual patient.

Methods:

Acute migraine treatment strategies were developed based on the targeted literature review used for the development of this guideline (Section 2), and a general literature review. Expert consensus groups were used to refine and validate these strategies.

Results:

Based on evidence for drug efficacy, drug side effects, migraine severity, and coexistent medical disorders, our analysis resulted in the formulation of eight general acute migraine treatment strategies. These could be grouped into four categories: 1) two mild-moderate attack strategies, 2) two moderate-severe attack or NSAID failure strategies, 3) three refractory migraine strategies, and 4) a vasoconstrictor unresponsive-contraindicated strategy. In addition, strategies were developed for menstrual migraine, migraine during pregnancy, and migraine during lactation. The eight general treatment strategies were coordinated with a “combined acute medication approach” to therapy which used features of both the “stratified” and the “step care across attacks” approaches to acute migraine management.

Conclusions:

The available medications for acute migraine treatment can be organized into a series of strategies based on patient clinical features. These strategies may help practitioners make appropriate acute medication choices for patients with migraine.

Acute Migraine Treatment in Adults

There are many options for acute migraine attack treatment, but none is ideal for all patients. This study aims to review current medical office-based acute migraine therapy in adults and provides readers with an organized approach to this important facet of migraine treatment. A general literature review includes a review of several recent published guidelines. Acetaminophen, 4 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (ibuprofen, acetylsalicylic acid [ASA], naproxen sodium, and diclofenac potassium), and 7 triptans (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, and zolmitriptan) have good evidence for efficacy and form the core of acute migraine treatment. NSAID-triptan combinations, dihydroergotamine, non-opioid combination analgesics (acetaminophen, ASA, and caffeine), and several anti-emetics (metoclopramide, domperidone, and prochlorperazine) are additional evidence-based options. Opioid containing combination analgesics may be helpful in specific patients, but should not be used routinely. Clinical features to be considered when choosing an acute migraine medication include usual headache intensity, usual rapidity of pain intensity increase, nausea, vomiting, degree of disability, patient response to previously used medications, history of headache recurrence with previous attacks, and the presence of contraindications to specific acute medications. Available acute medications can be organized into 4 treatment strategies, including a strategy for attacks of mild to moderate severity (strategy one: acetaminophen and/or NSAIDs), a triptan strategy for patients with severe attacks and for attacks not responding to strategy one, a refractory attack strategy, and a strategy for patients with contraindications to vasoconstricting drugs. Acute treatment of migraine attacks during pregnancy, lactation, and for patients with chronic migraine is also discussed. In chronic migraine, it is particularly important that medication overuse is eliminated or avoided. Migraine treatment is complex, and treatment must be individualized and tailored to the patient's clinical features. Clinicians should make full use of available medications and formulations in an organized approach.

Acute Treatment of Migraine

Migraine is one of the most frequent disabling neurological conditions with a major impact on the patient's quality of life. Migraine has been described as a chronic disorder that characterized with attacks. Attacks are characterized by moderate-severe, often unilateral, pulsating headache attacks, typically lasting 4 to 72 hours. Migraine remains underdiagnosed and undertreated despite advances in the understanding of its pathophysiology. This article reviews management of migraine acute pharmacological treatment. Currently, for the acute treatment of migraine attacks, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and triptans (serotonin 5HT1B/1D receptor agonists) are recommended. Before intake of NSAID and triptans, metoclopramide or domperidone is useful. In very severe attacks, subcutaneous sumatriptan is first choice. The patient should be treated early in the attack, use an adequate dose and formulation of a medication. Ideally, acute therapy should be restricted to no more than 2 to 3 days per week to avoid medication overuse.

Overview of migraine treatment

SUMMARY Migraine is ranked as the 19th top cause of disability worldwide by WHO. Despite advancements in migraine-specific acute treatment, only a minority of patients utilize these medications. Specific pharmacologic treatments consist of the ergot alkaloids and triptans (serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists). Both classes are regarded as relatively safe and effective; however, there is a greater concern for vasoconstrictive effects with the ergots, which limits their use. Triptans transformed migraine therapy, setting in motion revolutionary research that heightened our understanding of migraine mechanisms. However, one in three migraineurs may be triptan nonresponders and there is a group of migraine patients that remains ‘refractory’ to conventional pharmacologic migraine therapy. This article discusses the approach to migraine management, reviews currently available acute and preventive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment options for migraine headache, as well as briefly focuses on novel and upcoming medicines presently under investigation.

A Neurologist's Guide to Acute Migraine Therapy in the Emergency Room

Migraine is a common reason for visits to the emergency room. Attacks that lead patients to come to the emergency room are often more severe, refractory to home rescue medication, and have been going on for longer. All of these features make these attacks more challenging to treat. The purpose of this article is to review available evidence pertinent to the treatment of acute migraine in adults in the emergency department setting in order to provide neurologists with a rational approach to management. Drug classes and agents reviewed include opioids, dopamine receptor antagonists, triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, and sodium valproate.

Sumatriptan (oral route of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a highly disabling condition for the individual and also has wide-reaching implications for society, healthcare services, and the economy. Sumatriptan is an abortive medication for migraine attacks, belonging to the triptan family.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of oral sumatriptan compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine attacks in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, online databases, and reference lists for studies through 13 October 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- and/or active-controlled studies using oral sumatriptan to treat a migraine headache episode, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate relative risk (or 'risk ratio') and numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or a different active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-one studies (37,250 participants) compared oral sumatriptan with placebo or an active comparator. Most of the data were for the 50 mg and 100 mg doses. Sumatriptan surpassed placebo for all efficacy outcomes. For sumatriptan 50 mg versus placebo the NNTs were 6.1, 7.5, and 4.0 for pain-free at two hours and headache relief at one and two hours, respectively. NNTs for sustained pain-free and sustained headache relief during the 24 hours postdose were 9.5 and 6.0, respectively. For sumatriptan 100 mg versus placebo the NNTs were 4.7, 6.8, 3.5, 6.5, and 5.2, respectively, for the same outcomes. Results for the 25 mg dose were similar to the 50 mg dose, while sumatriptan 100 mg was significantly better than 50 mg for pain-free and headache relief at two hours, and for sustained pain-free during 24 hours. Treating early, during the mild pain phase, gave significantly better NNTs for pain-free at two hours and sustained pain-free during 24 hours than did treating established attacks with moderate or severe pain intensity.Relief of associated symptoms, including nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia, was greater with sumatriptan than with placebo, and use of rescue medication was lower with sumatriptan than with placebo. For the most part, adverse events were transient and mild and were more common with the sumatriptan than with placebo, with a clear dose response relationship (25 mg to 100 mg).Sumatriptan was compared directly with a number of active treatments, including other triptans, paracetamol (acetaminophen), acetylsalicylic acid, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and ergotamine combinations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral sumatriptan is effective as an abortive treatment for migraine attacks, relieving pain, nausea, photophobia, phonophobia, and functional disability, but is associated with increased adverse events.

WITHDRAWN: Oral sumatriptan for acute migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common neurovascular disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of disabling headache, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, and, in some patients, neurological aura symptoms. Sumatriptan is one of a class of selective serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT1B/1D) agonists (triptans) thought to relieve migraine attacks by several mechanisms, including cranial vasoconstriction and peripheral and central neural inhibition.

OBJECTIVES

To describe and assess the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the efficacy and tolerability of oral sumatriptan for the treatment of a single acute attack of migraine in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2001), MEDLINE (1966 through November 2001), and reference lists of articles and books.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included double-blind RCTs comparing oral sumatriptan (100 mg, 50 mg, 25 mg) with placebo, no intervention, other drug treatments, behavioral therapy, or physical therapy for the treatment of an acute attack of migraine in adults. Trials comparing different doses of sumatriptan or dosing regimens were also included. Outcomes considered were: 2-hour pain-free response, headache relief/headache intensity, and functional disability; headache recurrence; and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted by one reviewer and over-read by the other. The two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. Information on adverse events was collected from trial reports.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five trials involving 16,200 participants were included. Methodological quality was generally good. Sixteen trials were placebo comparisons and showed that sumatriptan in doses of 100 mg (14 trials), 50 mg (five trials), and 25 mg (three trials) provided significantly better pain-free response (100 mg and 25 mg only), headache relief, and relief of disability at 2 hours. Numbers-needed-to-treat (NNTs) for pain-free response at 2 hours were 5.1 (3.9 to 7.1) for the 100-mg dose (n = 2221) and 7.5 (2.7 to 142) for the 25-mg dose (n = 131); there was no significant difference between the 50-mg dose and placebo for this outcome (n = 127). For headache relief at 2 hours, NNTs were 3.4 (3.0 to 4.0), 3.2 (2.4 to 5.1), and 3.4 (2.3 to 6.6) for sumatriptan 100 mg (n = 2940), 50 mg (n = 420), and 25 mg (n = 226), respectively. Precise estimates of the efficacy of the 50- and 25-mg doses relative to the 100-mg dose could not be obtained.Adverse events were more common with sumatriptan 100 mg than with placebo (risk difference [RD] = 0.14 [0.09 to 0.20]; number-needed-to-harm [NNH] = 7.1 [5.0 to 11.1]; n = 3172). RDs for the 50- and 25-mg vs. placebo comparisons were not statistically significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral sumatriptan has been shown to be an effective drug for the treatment of a single acute attack of migraine. It is well tolerated, though minor adverse events were not uncommon in the included trials. Other triptans were generally similar in efficacy and adverse events. Among non-triptan drugs, ergotamine + caffeine was significantly less effective than sumatriptan, and other drugs have been insufficiently studied to draw firm conclusions.

Why pharmacokinetic differences among oral triptans have little clinical importance: a comment

Triptans, selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists, are specific drugs for the acute treatment of migraine that have the same mechanism of action. Here, it is discussed why the differences among kinetic parameters of oral triptans have proved not to be very important in clinical practice. There are three main reasons: (1) the differences among the kinetic parameters of oral triptans are smaller than what appears from their average values; (2) there is a large inter-subject, gender-dependent, and intra-subject (outside/during the attack) variability of kinetic parameters related to the rate and extent of absorption, i.e., those which are considered as critical for the response; (3) no dose-concentration–response curves have been defined and it is, therefore, impossible both to compare the kinetics of triptans, and to verify the objective importance of kinetic differences; (4) the importance of kinetic differences is outweighed by non-kinetic factors of variability of response to triptans. If no oral formulations are found that can allow more predictable pharmacokinetics, the same problems will probably also arise with new classes of drugs for the acute treatment of migraine.

Migraine recurrence is not associated with depressive or anxiety symptoms. Results of a randomized controlled trial

In order to investigate the plausible association of migraine recurrence with anxiety and depressive symptoms, a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trial was conducted using sumatriptan as a vehicle drug. Migraineurs were randomly assigned to receive either 50 mg sumatriptan or placebo for three consecutive migraine attacks, and then cross over to the other treatment for three more migraine attacks. The primary measurements were the observed rate of migraine recurrence in relation to (i) patient's mood condition, measured by the Hamilton rating scales for depression and anxiety and (ii) patient's general health and functioning measured by the Symptom Checklist (SCL)-90-R. Migraine recurrence was defined as any migrainous headache that occurred within 24 h post treatment, only when pain free at 2 h was achieved. The analysis of efficacy was performed on 376 migraine attacks treated with sumatriptan and 373 attacks treated with placebo. Recurrence ratio was 14.1% and 5.1%, respectively ( P = 0.045). The number needed to treat for pain free at 2 h post dose was 5.4. Recurrence was not affected by Hamilton scores for depression or anxiety, SCL-90-R scores or treatment. Apparently, depressive or anxiety symptoms do not influence headache recurrence in acute pharmaceutical migraine treatment, but further investigation is required.

Treating headache recurrence after emergency department discharge: a randomized controlled trial of naproxen versus sumatriptan

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Multiple parenteral medications are used to treat migraine and other acute primary headaches in the emergency department (ED). Regardless of specific headache diagnosis, no medication eliminates the frequent recurrence of primary headache after ED discharge. It is uncertain which medication primary headache patients should be given on discharge from an ED. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of oral sumatriptan with naproxen for treatment of post-ED recurrent primary headache.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind efficacy trial. We randomized patients to either naproxen 500 mg or sumatriptan 100 mg for headache recurrence after ED discharge. Patients were eligible if they received parenteral therapy for an acute exacerbation of a primary headache in the ED. Patients who met established criteria for migraine without aura were designated a priori as a homogenous subgroup of interest. We followed all patients by telephone 48 hours after ED discharge. The primary endpoint was the between-group difference in change in pain intensity during the 2-hour period after ingestion of either 500 mg naproxen or 100 mg sumatriptan. This difference was measured on a validated 11-point (0 to 10) verbal numeric rating scale (NRS). Satisfaction with the medication and adverse effects were also assessed. Patients who met criteria for migraine without aura were analyzed twice according to a priori design: once as a homogenous subgroup and then again combined with all other primary headaches.

RESULTS

Of 410 patients randomized, 383 (93%) had outcome data available for analysis. Two hundred eighty (73%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 68% to 77%) reported headache post-ED discharge and 196 (51%; 95% CI 44% to 58%), including 88 with migraine, took the investigational medication provided to them. The naproxen group improved by a mean of 4.3 NRS points, whereas the sumatriptan group improved by 4.1 points (95% CI for difference of 0.2 points: -0.7 to 1.1 points). Findings were virtually identical among the migraine subset (4.3 versus 4.2 NRS points; 95% CI for difference of 0.1 points: -1.3 to 1.5 points). Seventy-one percent (95% CI 62% to 80%) of naproxen patients and 75% (95% CI 66% to 84%) of sumatriptan patients would want to take the same medication the next time. Adverse effect profiles were also comparable.

CONCLUSION

In this trial, nearly three quarters of patients reported headache recurrence within 48 hours of ED discharge. Naproxen 500 mg and sumatriptan 100 mg taken orally relieve post-ED recurrent primary headache and migraine comparably. Clinicians should be guided by medication costs, contraindications, and a patient's previous experience with the medication.

What can be learned from the history of recurrence in migraine? A comment

Recurrence was first recognised as a clinical problem in 1989 with the advent of sumatriptan. The history of recurrence in early sumatriptan randomised clinical trials is described. Recurrence has been ascribed to patient-dependent factors but experience with ergot alkaloids suggested that recurrence can also be treatment-dependent. Possible mechanisms for recurrence are discussed.

A Unique Iontophoretic Patch for Optimal Transdermal Delivery of Sumatriptan

PURPOSE

Migraines affect approximately 10% of the adult population worldwide. The purpose of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetic and safety profile of a novel iontophoretic sumatriptan delivery system, NP101, which uses an electrical current to propel sumatriptan across intact skin and into underlying tissue. Four unique prototype iontophoretic sumatriptan patch conditions were compared to a 6 mg subcutaneous injection and an oral 50 mg tablet of sumatriptan succinate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a randomized, single-center, single-dose, six-period Phase I study.

RESULTS

Patches were well tolerated with fewer adverse events than the subcutaneous injection. Adverse events that were more prevalent for NP101 than other formulations included localized sensations and reactions at the patch site. A linear relationship was observed between total applied current and sumatriptan delivery. Patches delivering 6 and 12 mA per h yielded favorable sumatriptan systemic profiles, delivering drug at a rate that maintained plasma levels above the target level (> or = 10 ng/ml) for greater than 7 h.

CONCLUSIONS

This study met the initial objective to define the dose-current relationship in humans as well as delimiting specific current and current density targets for a well tolerated patch design that can deliver therapeutic drug levels for longer periods than currently possible.

EFNS guideline on the drug treatment of migraine - report of an EFNS task force

Migraine is one of the most frequent disabling neurological conditions with a major impact on the patients' quality of life. To give evidence-based or expert recommendations for the different drug treatment procedures of the different migraine syndromes based on a literature search and an consensus in an expert panel. All available medical reference systems were screened for all kinds of clinical studies on migraine with and without aura and on migraine-like syndromes. The findings in these studies were evaluated according to the recommendations of the EFNS resulting in level A,B, or C recommendations and good practice points. For the acute treatment of migraine attacks, oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and triptans are recommended. The administration should follow the concept of stratified treatment. Before intake of NSAIDs and triptans, oral metoclopramide or domperidon is recommended. In very severe attacks, intravenous acetylsalicylic acid or subcutaneous sumatriptan are drugs of first choice. A status migrainosus can probably be treated by steroids. For the prophylaxis of migraine, betablockers (propranolol and metoprolol), flunarizine, valproic acid, and topiramate are drugs of first choice. Drugs of second choice for migraine prophylaxis are amitriptyline, naproxen, petasites, and bisoprolol.

Polytherapy in the preventive and acute treatment of migraine: fundamentals for changing the approach

The pathophysiology of migraine is complex and involves multiple neurophysiological pathways. Monotherapeutic approaches for migraine are the rule but many patients discontinue their medications owing to lack of efficacy. Polytherapy may provide a rational strategy for some of these individuals. Herein, we review the basis of polytherapy treatment for migraine. We suggest that refractory patients, with previous failure to single agents, may benefit from the use of a two- or three-drug regimen combining medications that target different neurotransmitter systems. In addition, those patients with high recurrence rates or not presenting pain free at 2 h and/or sustained pain free at 24 h may also respond better to combination therapy suited to their individual profile, which must include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents plus a triptan or a gastrokinetic drug. The three-drug regimen may also be considered. Finally, changing the time medicine is taken (before the development of central sensitization and allodynia cutanea) and switching the choice of formulations to non-oral potentially achieves a better response and can be determined individually. Although highly speculative, these hypotheses could stimulate further controlled studies to support changing the current paradigm of monotherapeutic migraine treatment in some patients.

Rofecoxib in migraine

Migraine is a highly prevalent primary headache. The disability of migraine attacks results in considerable economic and social losses. The acute treatment of migraine aims to rapidly and consistently alleviate the head pain and associated symptoms, therefore reducing the headache-related disability, ideally without side effects and recurrence of the attack within 24 h. Although several drug options and different formulations are available, the choice of a specific medication should depend on an individual patients characteristics. Among the available drugs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs still represent effective options and a new class of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs known as selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors may represent an even better-tolerated therapy with regard to gastrointestinal side effects. This article aims to discuss the role of rofecoxib in the acute treatment of migraine. Although this drug was recently withdrawn from the market, it provides a good model to understand the role of the cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in migraine therapy overall. The pharmacologic profile and therapeutic use in the acute treatment of migraine of rofecoxib is reviewed. In addition, the limitations of a monotherapeutic orally administered approach and possible ways of raising the efficacy of rofecoxib and other acute migraine treatments are reviewed.

Multiple attack study on the available triptans in Italy versus placebo

The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the five triptans that are commercially available in Italy (zolmitriptan 2.5 mg, rizatriptan 10 mg, sumatriptan 100 mg, almotriptan 12.5 mg and eletriptan 40 mg). The study was conducted in single-blind versus placebo and its duration was 18 months. At the Headache Centre of the 'Agostino Gemelli' Hospital in Rome we selected 42 patients, suffering from headache with and without aura (International Headache Society Committee on Headache Classification, 1988 Cephalalgia 8:1-96), whose headache frequency ranged between 1- and 4-monthly crises. For a total of 25 crises, for every five consecutive crises, a different triptan was taken. The end-points of the study were as follows: response at 2 h, 'pain free' at 2 h and 'sustained pain free' (at 24 h). The intra-patient consistency and the tolerability were also evaluated. Thirty patients completed the study and the statistical analysis was only applied to these patients. No substantial difference in terms of the efficacy of the triptans was noted; all triptans were well tolerated. These results suggest the possibility of testing different triptans in the same patient in order to identify the ideal drug for every patient.

Rizatriptan: a new 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonist for the treatment of migraine

Rizatriptan (MAXALT MK-0462) is a new 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist for the acute treatment of migraine. The marketed 10 mg and 5 mg oral doses are rapidly and consistently effective in relieving headache pain with associated migraine symptoms, and in enabling patients to return to their normal activities of daily living. Rizatriptan 10 mg is more effective than rizatriptan 5 mg. Compared to oral sumatriptan, the established agent in this class, rizatriptan has a shorter Tmax and greater bioavailability. In comparative clinical trials, the probability of having pain relief sooner was higher for rizatriptan 10 mg than for sumatriptan 100 mg or 50 mg. Over the 2 h after dosing, rizatriptan 10 mg was also superior to sumatriptan 100 mg and 50 mg on a range of other outcome measures. Both doses of rizatriptan are well-tolerated. The most common side-effects are dizziness, drowsiness, and asthenia/fatigue, which are short-lasting and of mild or moderate severity. In summary, rizatriptan is an effective and well-tolerated acute treatment for migraine, which may offer some advantages over oral sumatriptan.

Acute treatment of migraine. Breaking the paradigm of monotherapy

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a highly prevalent disorder. The disability provoked by its attacks results in suffering as well as considerable economic and social losses. The objective of migraine acute treatment is to restore the patient to normal function as quickly and consistently as possible. There are numerous drugs available for this purpose and despite recent advances in the understanding of the mechanisms and different biological systems involved in migraine attacks, with the development of specific 5-HT agonists known as triptans, current options for acute migraine still stand below the ideal.

DISCUSSION

Monotherapeutic approaches are the rule but up to one third of all patients discontinue their medications due to lack of efficacy, headache recurrence, cost and/or side effects. In addition, a rationale has been suggested for the development of polytherapeutic approaches, simultaneously aiming at some of the biological systems involved. This paper reviews the fundamentals for this changing approach as well as the evidence of its better efficacy.

CONCLUSION

As a conclusion, most of the patients with a past history of not responding (no pain-free at 2 hours and/or no sustained pain-free at 24 hours) in at least 5 previous attacks should undergo a combination therapy suiting to their individual profile, which must include analgesics or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents plus a triptan or a gastro kinetic drug. The three-drug regimen may also be considered. In addition, changing the right moment to take it and the choice for formulations other than oral has also to be determined individually and clearly posted to the patient.

The triptan formulations : how to match patients and products

The 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists (the 'triptans') are migraine-specific agents that have revolutionised the treatment of migraine. They are usually the drugs of choice to treat a migraine attack in progress. Different triptans are available in various strengths and formulations, including oral tablets, orally disintegrating tablets, nasal sprays and subcutaneous injections. In Europe, sumatriptan is also available as a suppository. Specific differences among the triptans exist, as evidenced by different pharmacological profiles including half-life, time to peak plasma concentrations, peak plasma concentrations, area under the concentration-time curve, metabolism and drug-drug interaction profiles. How or whether these differences translate to clinical efficacy and tolerability advantages for one agent over another is not well differentiated. However, delivery systems may play an important role in onset of action. Given that the clinical distinctions among these agents are subtle, identification of the most appropriate triptan for an individual patient requires consideration of the specific characteristics of the patient and knowledge of patient preference, an accurate history of the efficacy of previous acute-care medications and individual features of the drug being considered. The selection of an acute antimigraine drug also depends upon the stratification of the patient's migraine attack by peak intensity, time to peak intensity, level of associated symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, time to associated symptoms, comorbid diseases and concomitant treatments that might cause drug-drug interactions. Individual patient response to the triptans seems to be idiosyncratic and possibly genetically determined. Therefore, a set of specific questions can be used to determine whether a currently used triptan is optimally effective, whether the dose needs to be increased or whether another triptan should be tried. The clinician has in his/her armamentarium an ever-expanding variety of triptans, available in multiple formulations and dosages, which have good safety and tolerability profiles. Continued clinical use will yield familiarity with the various triptans, and it should become possible for the interested physician to match individual patient needs with the specific characteristics of a triptan to optimise therapeutic benefit. Use of the methods outlined in this review in choosing a triptan for an individual patient is probably more likely to lead to migraine relief than making an educated guess as to which triptan is most appropriate.

Tolerability of the triptans: clinical implications

The triptans represent a relatively new class of compounds effective in the treatment of migraine. The safety and tolerability of these drugs have been extensively investigated since the first triptan (sumatriptan) became commercially available. A report on a very large population of patients tested during clinical trials and in postmarketing studies, confirms that these drugs are safe and well tolerated when correctly used. Adverse events are frequently reported, but are usually mild and only a few patients discontinue therapy because of them. These adverse events include, in particular, the so-called 'triptan symptoms' (tingling, sensation of warmth, etc.). The exact mechanism of chest symptoms reported by 20% of patients with migraine treated with triptans remains unclear, but are exceptionally related to a cardiac mechanism. CNS adverse events (i.e. somnolence) are also reported, but it is a matter of debate whether they are related to the pharmacological properties (i.e. lipophilicity) of the drug or are symptoms of the disease itself. The potential risk for drug overuse must be taken into account when the triptans are given to patients with a high frequency of migraine attacks. Clinical interaction of triptans with other drugs metabolised in the liver may theoretically influence the incidence of adverse events, but there is little evidence to support this assumption. There is no evidence of a teratogenic risk of triptans in pregnant women taking these drugs.

Oral sumatriptan for acute migraine

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common neurovascular disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of disabling headache, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, and, in some patients, neurological aura symptoms. Sumatriptan is one of a class of selective serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT1B/1D) agonists (triptans) thought to relieve migraine attacks by several mechanisms, including cranial vasoconstriction and peripheral and central neural inhibition.

OBJECTIVES

To describe and assess the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the efficacy and tolerability of oral sumatriptan for the treatment of a single acute attack of migraine in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2001), MEDLINE (1966 through November 2001), and reference lists of articles and books.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included double-blind RCTs comparing oral sumatriptan (100 mg, 50 mg, 25 mg) with placebo, no intervention, other drug treatments, behavioral therapy, or physical therapy for the treatment of an acute attack of migraine in adults. Trials comparing different doses of sumatriptan or dosing regimens were also included. Outcomes considered were: 2-hour pain-free response, headache relief/headache intensity, and functional disability; headache recurrence; and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were abstracted by one reviewer and over-read by the other. The two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. Information on adverse events was collected from trial reports.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five trials involving 16,200 participants were included. Methodological quality was generally good. Sixteen trials were placebo comparisons and showed that sumatriptan in doses of 100 mg (14 trials), 50 mg (five trials), and 25 mg (three trials) provided significantly better pain-free response (100 mg and 25 mg only), headache relief, and relief of disability at 2 hours. Numbers-needed-to-treat (NNTs) for pain-free response at 2 hours were 5.1 (3.9 to 7.1) for the 100-mg dose (n = 2221) and 7.5 (2.7 to 142) for the 25-mg dose (n = 131); there was no significant difference between the 50-mg dose and placebo for this outcome (n = 127). For headache relief at 2 hours, NNTs were 3.4 (3.0 to 4.0), 3.2 (2.4 to 5.1), and 3.4 (2.3 to 6.6) for sumatriptan 100 mg (n = 2940), 50 mg (n = 420), and 25 mg (n = 226), respectively. Precise estimates of the efficacy of the 50- and 25-mg doses relative to the 100-mg dose could not be obtained. Adverse events were more common with sumatriptan 100 mg than with placebo (risk difference [RD] = 0.14 [0.09 to 0.20]; number-needed-to-harm [NNH] = 7.1 [5.0 to 11.1]; n = 3172). RDs for the 50- and 25-mg vs. placebo comparisons were not statistically significant.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Oral sumatriptan has been shown to be an effective drug for the treatment of a single acute attack of migraine. It is well tolerated, though minor adverse events were not uncommon in the included trials. Other triptans were generally similar in efficacy and adverse events. Among non-triptan drugs, ergotamine + caffeine was significantly less effective than sumatriptan, and other drugs have been insufficiently studied to draw firm conclusions.

Triptans (serotonin, 5-HT1B/1D agonists) in migraine: detailed results and methods of a meta-analysis of 53 trials

The triptans, selective serotonin 5-HT1B/1D agonists, are very effective acute migraine drugs. Soon, seven different triptans will be clinically available at 13 different oral doses, making evidence-based selection guidelines necessary. Triptan trials have similar designs, facilitating meta-analysis. We wished to provide an evidence-based foundation for using triptans in clinical practice, and to review the methodological issues surrounding triptan trials. We asked pharmaceutical companies and the principal investigators of company-independent trials for the 'raw patient data' of all double-blind, randomized, controlled, clinical trials with oral triptans in migraine. All data were cross-checked with published or presented data. We calculated summary estimates across studies for important efficacy and tolerability parameters, and compared these with those from direct, head-to-head, comparator trials. Out of 76 eligible clinical trials, 53 (12 not yet published) involving 24089 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Mean results (and 95% confidence intervals) for sumatriptan 100 mg, the first available and most widely prescribed oral triptan, are 59% (57-60) for 2 h headache response (improvement from moderate or severe to mild or no pain); 29% (27-30) for 2 h pain free (improvement to no pain); 20% (18-21) for sustained pain free (pain free by 2 h and no headache recurrence or use of rescue medication 2-24 h post-dose), and 67% (63-70) for consistency (response in at least two out of three treated attacks); placebo-subtracted proportions for patients with at least one adverse event (AE) are 13% (8-18), for at least one central nervous system AE 6% (3-9), and for at least one chest AE 1.9% (1.0-2.7). Compared with these data: rizatriptan 10 mg shows better efficacy and consistency, and similar tolerability; eletriptan 80 mg shows better efficacy, similar consistency, but lower tolerability; almotriptan 12.5 mg shows similar efficacy at 2 h but better sustained pain-free response, consistency, and tolerability; sumatriptan 25 mg, naratriptan 2.5 mg and eletriptan 20 mg show lower efficacy and better tolerability; zolmitriptan 2.5 mg and 5 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, and rizatriptan 5 mg show very similar results. The results of the 22 trials that directly compared triptans show the same overall pattern. We received no data on frovatriptan, but publicly available data suggest substantially lower efficacy. The major methodological issues involve the choice of the primary endpoint, consistency over multiple attacks, how to evaluate headache recurrence, use of placebo-subtracted proportions to control for across-study differences, and the difference between tolerability and safety. In addition, there are a number of methodological issues specific for direct comparator trials, including encapsulation and patient selection. At marketed doses, all oral triptans are effective and well tolerated. Differences among them are in general relatively small, but clinically relevant for individual patients. Rizatriptan 10 mg, eletriptan 80 mg and almotriptan 12.5 mg provide the highest likelihood of consistent success. Sumatriptan features the longest clinical experience and the widest range of formulations. All triptans are contra-indicated in the presence of cardiovascular disease.

Practical approaches to migraine management

Migraine is a recurrent clinical syndrome characterised by combinations of neurological, gastrointestinal and autonomic manifestations. The exact pathophysiological disturbances that occur with migraine have yet to be elucidated; however, cervico-trigemino-vascular dysfunctions appear to be the primary cause. Despite advances in the understanding of the pathophysiology of migraine and new effective treatment options, migraine remains an under-diagnosed, under-treated and poorly treated health condition. Most patients will unsuccessfully attempt to treat their headaches with over-the-counter medications. Few well designed, placebo-controlled studies are available to guide physicians in medication selection. Recently published evidence-based guidelines advocate migraine-specific drugs, such as serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) agonists (the 'triptans') and dihydroergotamine mesylate, for patients experiencing moderate to severe migraine attacks. Additional headache attack therapy options include other ergotamine derivatives, phenothiazines, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and opioids. Preventative medication therapy is indicated for patients experiencing frequent and/or refractory attacks.

How does almotriptan compare with other triptans? A review of data from placebo-controlled clinical trials

Almotriptan, the new selective 5-HT1B/1D agonist, has a higher oral bioavailability than any other triptan, with more than two thirds of the administered dose absorbed within the first hour both inside and outside of a migraine attack. Gender or the presence of food in the stomach does not affect its pharmacokinetic profile, and the compound has no clinically relevant interactions with other drugs. Among the available triptans, response rates at 2 hours range from 50% to 80%, with 20% to 50% of patients pain-free. Almotriptan 12.5 mg provides similar efficacy, with significant advantage over placebo at 30 minutes and a reliable consistency (75% in two of three attacks). Headache typically recurs in 25% to 45% of patients with most triptans. The recurrence rate with almotriptan 12.5 mg, 18% to 27%, is among the lowest reported. The tolerability of almotriptan 12.5 mg is close to that of placebo with a low incidence of central nervous system side effects and chest symptoms. In conclusion, almotriptan's consistent pharmacokinetics and good efficacy, in combination with excellent tolerability, make it an attractive choice in the acute treatment of migraine attacks.