Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oral eletriptan for treatment of acute migraine: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted in the United States

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.

A randomized study of IV prochlorperazine plus diphenhydramine versus IV hydromorphone for migraine-associated symptoms: A post hoc analysis

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a randomized trial among emergency department patients with migraine to determine the relative impact on migraine-associated symptoms of hydromorphone, an opioid, versus prochlorperazine, an antidopaminergic antiemetic.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of data from a double-blind study registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02389829). Patients who met International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition criteria for migraine without aura or for probable migraine without aura were eligible for participation. Participants received either hydromorphone 1 mg IV or prochlorperazine 10 mg IV plus diphenhydramine 25 mg IV and could receive a second dose of the same medication 1 h later if needed. The outcomes were sustained relief of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia.

RESULTS

A total of 127 patients were enrolled, of whom 63 received prochlorperazine and 64 received hydromorphone. Of 49 patients in the prochlorperazine arm who reported nausea at baseline, 34 (69.4%) reported complete resolution without relapse versus 15/49 (30.6%) in the hydromorphone arm (absolute risk reduction [ARR] = 38.8%, 95% CI: 20.5%-57.0%, p < 0.001). Of 55 patients in the prochlorperazine arm who reported photophobia at baseline, 23 (41.8%) reported complete resolution without relapse versus 13/62 (20.9%) patients treated with hydromorphone (ARR = 20.8%, 95% CI: 4.3%-37.3%, p = 0.014). Of 56 patients in the prochlorperazine arm who reported phonophobia at baseline, 25 (44.6%) reported complete resolution without relapse versus 16/59 (27.1%) in the hydromorphone arm (ARR = 17.5%, 95% CI: 0.3%-34.8%, p = 0.049). For adverse events, three patients in the prochlorperazine arm reported anxiety or restlessness, and nine patients in the hydromorphone arm reported dizziness or weakness.

CONCLUSIONS

Prochlorperazine plus diphenhydramine is more efficacious than hydromorphone for the treatment of migraine-associated symptoms.

Onset of action in placebo-controlled migraine attacks trials: A literature review and recommendation

BACKGROUND

Migraine patients want acute treatment to provide complete relief of the migraine attack within 30 minutes. Traditionally, "speed of onset of effect" is evaluated by estimating the time-point for first statistical separation of drug and placebo. The estimated onset of effect can be a few percent difference of patients being pain free in very large randomised, controlled trials. This difference, however, can be clinically irrelevant.

METHODS

Placebo-controlled randomised, controlled trials with pain freedom results from 30 min to 2-4 hours were retrieved from the literature. For each time-point, the therapeutic gain (drug minus placebo) (TG) was calculated. Therapeutic gain for being pain free of 5% was chosen for the definition of "onset of action", since this is approximately 1/3 of the 16% TG and 1/4 of 21% of TG for sumatriptan 50 mg and 100 mg, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 22 time-effect curves based on randomised, controlled trials were analysed. Based on the "onset of action" of 5% pain freedom, the evaluated drugs and administration forms can be classified as follows: i) Early time to onset, ≤30 min (three randomised, controlled trials); ii) medium time to onset, 60 min (nine randomised, controlled trials); iii) delayed time to onset, 90-120 min (10 randomised, controlled trials).

CONCLUSION

Only three non-oral administration forms with a triptan (subcutaneous sumatriptan and nasal zolmitriptan) resulted in an "onset of action" at ≥30 min; in the future, early onset of action should be a priority in the development of new drugs or new administration-forms for the treatment of acute migraine attacks.

Why is the therapeutic effect of acute antimigraine drugs delayed? A review of controlled trials and hypotheses about the delay of effect

In randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of oral drug treatment of migraine attacks, efficacy is evaluated after 2 hours. The effect of oral naratriptan 2.5 mg with a maximum blood concentration (Tmax ) at 2 hours increases from 2 to 4 hours in RCTs. To check whether such a delayed effect is also present for other oral antimigraine drugs, we hand-searched the literature for publications on RCTs reporting efficacy. Two triptans, 3 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), a triptan combined with an NSAID and a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist were evaluated for their therapeutic gain with determination of time to maximum effect (Emax ). Emax was compared with known Tmax from pharmacokinetic studies to estimate the delay to pain-free. The delay in therapeutic gain varied from 1-2 hours for zolmitriptan 5 mg to 7 hours for naproxen 500 mg. An increase in effect from 2 to 4 hours was observed after eletriptan 40 mg, frovatriptan 2.5 mg and lasmiditan 200 mg, and after rizatriptan 10 mg (Tmax  = 1 h) from 1 to 2 hours. This strongly indicates a general delay of effect in oral antimigraine drugs. A review of 5 possible effects of triptans on the trigemino-vascular system did not yield a simple explanation for the delay. In addition, Emax for triptans probably depends partly on the rise in plasma levels and not only on its maximum. The most likely explanation for the delay in effect is that a complex antimigraine system with more than 1 site of action is involved.

Onset of Efficacy Following Oral Treatment With Lasmiditan for the Acute Treatment of Migraine: Integrated Results From 2 Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Clinical Studies

Objective

To expand on available information on the efficacy of oral lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine with particular focus on the timing of the effect and on its impact on migraine‐associated symptoms.

Background

Lasmiditan is a novel selective 5‐hydroxytryptamine 1F receptor agonist that lacks vasoconstrictive activity. In 2 phase 3 studies, SAMURAI and SPARTAN, lasmiditan met primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints at 2 hours following initial dose.

Methods

Integrated analyses were completed from 2 phase 3 clinical trials, SPARTAN and SAMURAI. Baseline data and data collected every 30 minutes up to 2 hours after taking lasmiditan (50, 100, or 200 mg) or placebo were analyzed to determine the onset of efficacy. A total of 5236 patients were randomized to be treated with placebo (N = 1493), lasmiditan 50 mg (N = 750), lasmiditan 100 mg (N = 1498), or lasmiditan 200 mg (N = 1495). Data were analyzed to determine the onset of improvement for the following efficacy measures: pain freedom, most bothersome symptom freedom, pain relief, freedom from associated individual symptoms (photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea), total migraine freedom (defined as pain freedom and freedom from associated symptoms), and freedom from migraine‐related functional disability. Time to meaningful headache relief and time to first become pain free were also analyzed.

Results

Significantly higher rates of pain freedom (100 mg, 10.0%, P = .012; 200 mg, 15.5%, P < .001; Placebo, 7.0%) and total migraine freedom (100 mg, 8.9%, P = .017; 200 mg, 12.4%, P < .001; Placebo, 6.1%) were achieved starting at 60 minutes in 100‐ and 200‐mg lasmiditan‐treated groups compared with placebo group. Rates of freedom from most bothersome symptom (100 mg, 11.1%, P = .015; 200 mg, 13.0%, P < .001; Placebo, 7.9%), and pain relief (100 mg, 17.5%, P = .007; 200 mg, 19.1%, P < .001; Placebo, 13.4%) were significantly higher starting as early as 30 minutes in lasmiditan 100‐ and 200‐mg lasmiditan‐treated groups. A significantly higher percentage of patients in the 200‐mg lasmiditan‐treated group achieved freedom from photophobia (13.7%, P = .005; Placebo, 9.2%) and phonophobia (17.4%, P = .042; Placebo, 13.4%) starting at 30 minutes. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the 200‐mg lasmiditan‐treated group achieved freedom from migraine‐related functional disability starting at 60 minutes (16.4%, P < .001; Placebo, 11.1%). All efficacy measures, except for freedom from nausea, were statistically significant after lasmiditan treatment (50, 100, or 200 mg) compared with placebo at 90 and 120 minutes. Finally, patients taking lasmiditan had a higher likelihood of achieving meaningful headache relief and becoming headache pain free within 24 hours compared with those taking placebo (P < .001).

Conclusions

Patients treated with lasmiditan for a migraine attack reported an earlier onset of efficacy compared with those treated with placebo. Some of the efficacy measures such as pain relief demonstrated improvement as early as the first assessment at 30 minutes after 100‐ or 200‐mg lasmiditan treatment.

Guidelines of the International Headache Society for controlled trials of acute treatment of migraine attacks in adults: Fourth edition

The quality of clinical trials is an essential part of the evidence base for the treatment of headache disorders. In 1991, the International Headache Society Clinical Trials Standing Committee developed and published the first edition of the Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine. Scientific and clinical developments in headache medicine led to second and third editions in 2000 and 2012, respectively. The current, fourth edition of the Guidelines retains the structure and much content from previous editions. However, it also incorporates evidence from clinical trials published after the third edition as well as feedback from meetings with regulators, pharmaceutical and device manufacturers, and patient associations. Its final form reflects the collective expertise and judgement of the Committee. These updated recommendations and commentary are intended to meet the Society's continuing objective of providing a contemporary, standardized, and evidence-based approach to the conduct and reporting of randomised controlled trials for the acute treatment of migraine attacks.

Evaluating the reporting of adverse events in controlled clinical trials conducted in 2010–2015 on migraine drug treatments

Background

In 2008, the International Headache Society published guidelines on the “evaluation and registration of adverse events in clinical drug trials on migraine”. They listed seven recommendations for reporting adverse events in randomized controlled trials on migraine. The present study aimed to evaluate adherence to these recommendations, and based on the results, to recommend improvements.

Methods

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE database to identify controlled trials on migraine drugs published from 2010 to 2015. For each trial, we noted whether five of the recommended parameters were presented. In addition, we noted whether adverse events were reported in abstracts.

Results

We identified 73 trials; 51 studied acutely administered drugs and 22 studied prophylactic drugs for migraine. The number of patients with any adverse events were reported in 74% of acute-administration and 86% of prophylactic drug trials. Only 30 (41%) of the 73 studies reported adverse events with data in the abstracts, and 27 (37%) abstracts did not mention adverse events.

Conclusion

Adverse events, both frequency and symptoms, should be reported to allow a fair judgement of benefit/tolerability ratio when randomized controlled trials in migraine treatment are published. Clinically significant adverse events should be included in the abstract of every randomized controlled trial in migraine treatment.

Comparative tolerability of treatments for acute migraine: A network meta-analysis

Introduction

Migraine headache is a neurological disorder whose attacks are associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia. Treatments for migraine aim to either prevent attacks before they have started or relieve attacks (abort) after onset of symptoms and range from complementary therapies to pharmacological interventions. A number of treatment-related adverse events such as somnolence, fatigue, and chest discomfort have previously been reported in association with triptans. The comparative tolerability of available agents for the abortive treatment of migraine attacks has not yet been systematically reviewed and quantified.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis for comparative tolerability of treatments for migraine. The literature search targeted all randomized controlled trials evaluating oral abortive treatments for acute migraine over a range of available doses in adults. The primary outcomes of interest were any adverse event, treatment-related adverse events, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, dizziness, chest discomfort, somnolence, nausea, and vomiting.

Results

Our search yielded 141 trials covering 15 distinct treatments. Of the triptans, sumatriptan, eletriptan, rizatriptan, zolmitriptan, and the combination treatment of sumatriptan and naproxen were associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring compared with placebo. Of the non-triptans, only acetaminophen was associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of an adverse event occurring when compared with placebo. Overall, triptans were not associated with increased odds of serious adverse events occurring and the same was the case for non-triptans. For the secondary outcomes, with the exception of vomiting, all triptans except for almotriptan and frovatriptan were significantly associated with increased risk for all outcomes. Almotriptan was significantly associated with an increased risk of vomiting, whereas all other triptans yielded non-significant lower odds compared with placebo. Generally, the non-triptans were not associated with decreased tolerability for the secondary outcomes.

Discussion

In summary, triptans were associated with higher odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring when compared to placebo and non-triptans. Non-significant results for non-triptans indicate that these treatments are comparable with one another and placebo regarding tolerability outcomes.

Therapeutic Benefit of Eletriptan Compared to Sumatriptan for the Acute Relief of Migraine Pain — Results of a Model-Based Meta-Analysis that Accounts for Encapsulation

A novel model-based meta-analysis was used to quantify the dose-response relationship of sumatriptan and eletriptan for the proportion of patients that achieve migraine pain relief up to 4h after treatment. The proportion of patients that became pain free was also evaluated. This analysis includes some unique features, allowing comparison of sumatriptan and eletriptan doses that have not been directly compared in a head to head study and also permitting comparison between the two drugs at multiple time points up to 4 h after treatment. Because the analysis allows comparison of response to blinded sumatriptan with that to marketed sumatriptan and contains timepoints as early as 0.5 h, it is especially suited to detection of possible effects of encapsulation on sumatriptan's therapeutic effectiveness and thus was employed to assess this also. Data from 19 randomized placebo controlled clinical trials were jointly analysed using a random-effects logistic regression model. The results of this analysis show a significant clinical benefit of eletriptan 40 mg compared to sumatriptan 100 mg at any point in time up to 4 h after treatment. The benefit of eletriptan 40 mg is greatest around 1.5-2 h after treatment with an absolute difference at 2 h of 9.1% (7.4-11.5%) more patients achieving pain relief and 7.3% (5.8-8.6%) more patient achieving pain free when compared to sumatriptan 100 mg. An absolute benefit of more than 5% of patients is maintained from 45 min up to 4 h after treatment for pain relief and from 1.5 h up to 4 h for pain free. Eletriptan 20 mg was superior to sumatriptan 50 mg and similar to sumatriptan 100 mg for pain relief while it was similar to sumatriptan 50 mg for pain free. The benefit of eletriptan 20 mg when compared to sumatriptan 50 mg is greatest around 1.5-2 h after treatment with an absolute difference at 2 h of 5.0% (2.9-8.1%) more patients achieving pain relief. An absolute benefit of more than 3% of patients was maintained from 1 h up to 3 h after treatment. No significant difference was found between eletriptan 20 mg and sumatriptan 50 mg for the fraction of patients that became pain free. No significant effect of encapsulation of sumatriptan was found on the time course of response up to 4 h after treatment when compared to commercial sumatriptan.

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.

The acute treatment of migraine in adults: the american headache society evidence assessment of migraine pharmacotherapies

The study aims to provide an updated assessment of the evidence for individual pharmacological therapies for acute migraine treatment. Pharmacological therapy is frequently required for acutely treating migraine attacks. The American Academy of Neurology Guidelines published in 2000 summarized the available evidence relating to the efficacy of acute migraine medications. This review, conducted by the members of the Guidelines Section of the American Headache Society, is an updated assessment of evidence for the migraine acute medications. A standardized literature search was performed to identify articles related to acute migraine treatment that were published between 1998 and 2013. The American Academy of Neurology Guidelines Development procedures were followed. Two authors reviewed each abstract resulting from the search and determined whether the full manuscript qualified for review. Two reviewers studied each qualifying full manuscript for its level of evidence. Level A evidence requires at least 2 Class I studies, and Level B evidence requires 1 Class I or 2 Class II studies. The specific medications - triptans (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan [oral, nasal spray, injectable, transcutaneous patch], zolmitriptan [oral and nasal spray]) and dihydroergotamine (nasal spray, inhaler) are effective (Level A). Ergotamine and other forms of dihydroergotamine are probably effective (Level B). Effective nonspecific medications include acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen), opioids (butorphanol nasal spray), sumatriptan/naproxen, and the combination of acetaminophen/aspirin/caffeine (Level A). Ketoprofen, intravenous and intramuscular ketorolac, flurbiprofen, intravenous magnesium (in migraine with aura), and the combination of isometheptene compounds, codeine/acetaminophen and tramadol/acetaminophen are probably effective (Level B). The antiemetics prochlorperazine, droperidol, chlorpromazine, and metoclopramide are probably effective (Level B). There is inadequate evidence for butalbital and butalbital combinations, phenazone, intravenous tramadol, methadone, butorphanol or meperidine injections, intranasal lidocaine, and corticosteroids, including dexamethasone (Level C). Octreotide is probably not effective (Level B). There is inadequate evidence to refute the efficacy of ketorolac nasal spray, intravenous acetaminophen, chlorpromazine injection, and intravenous granisetron (Level C). There are many acute migraine treatments for which evidence supports efficacy. Clinicians must consider medication efficacy, potential side effects, and potential medication-related adverse events when prescribing acute medications for migraine. Although opioids, such as butorphanol, codeine/acetaminophen, and tramadol/acetaminophen, are probably effective, they are not recommended for regular use.

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.

Review of dose-response curves for acute antimigraine drugs: triptans, 5-HT1F agonists and CGRP antagonists

INTRODUCTION

Dose-response curves for efficacy and tolerability are the important determinants for the choice of doses of acute migraine drugs.

AREAS COVERED

Dose-response curves for the efficacy of seven triptans (5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists), a 5-HT1F receptor agonist (lasmiditan) and four oral calcitonin-gene related peptide receptor antagonists (telcagepant, MK-3207, BI 44370 TA and BMS-927711) in placebo-controlled trials were reviewed. In addition, dose-response curves for adverse events (AEs) were reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

For most triptans, the dose-response curve for efficacy is flat, whereas AEs often increase with increasing doses. The two other groups of drugs also have flat dose-response curves for efficacy. Overall, the triptans still have the most favorable efficacy-tolerability profile. Current acute antimigraine drugs do not fulfill the expectations of the patients, and thus, there are many unmet needs. Although upcoming drugs may not be superior to triptans, migraine patients will potentially benefit greatly from these, especially patients who are triptan non-responders and patients with cardiovascular disease.

Outcome for headache and pain-free nonresponders to treatment of the first attack: a pooled post-hoc analysis of four randomized trials of eletriptan 40 mg

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to evaluate, in first attack eletriptan headache and pain-free nonresponders, the efficacy of treating a second and third attack with the same dose of eletriptan 40 mg (ELE-40).

METHODS

Data were pooled from four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple attack studies of eletriptan in the treatment of migraine. The first-attack eletriptan headache (HNR) and pain-free (PFNR) nonresponder samples consisted of patients who did not achieve headache or pain-free responses at two hours, or sustained headache or pain-free responses at 24 hours. The efficacy of the same dose of eletriptan (vs placebo; PBO) in treating the second and third attacks was evaluated using a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Among Attack 1 eletriptan HNRs, treatment with ELE-40 (vs PBO) was associated with significantly higher two-hour headache response and pain-free rates, respectively, on both Attack 2 (48.8% vs 20.2%; 17.0% vs 3.9%; P  < 0.0001 for both comparisons) and Attack 3 (37.4% vs 15.5%; 18.8% vs 3.2%; P  < 0.0001 for both comparisons). Significantly higher sustained headache response and pain-free rates at 24 hours were also observed on both Attack 2 and Attack 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pooled analysis suggest that patients who have HNR or PFNR to an initial dose of eletriptan may respond when a second and third attack is treated with the same dose.

Consistency of eletriptan in treating migraine: Results of a randomized, within-patient multiple-dose study

OBJECTIVE

The current study evaluated the consistency of eletriptan response.

METHODS

Using a within-patient crossover design, patients with migraine completed a three-attack, open-label, lead-in period, before being treated, double-blind for four attacks, with either eletriptan 40 mg (ELE-40; N = 539) or eletriptan 80 mg (ELE-80; N = 432); placebo was randomly substituted for the treatment of one attack.

RESULTS

On an A PRIORI analysis of within-patient consistency, double-blind treatment was associated with similar 2 hour headache response rates using a ≥2/3 response criterion for ELE-40 (77%) and ELE-80 (73%), and using a 3/3 response criterion for ELE-40 (46%) and ELE-80 (47%). Within-patient consistency in achieving pain-free status at 2 hours using a ≥2/3 criterion was slightly higher on ELE-40 (42%) compared with ELE-80 (38%), and was similar using the 3/3 criterion (18% on ELE-40, 17% on ELE-80). On a repeated measures logistic regression analysis across all treated attacks, the probability of achieving a headache response at 2 hours ranged from 71% to 74% on ELE-40 vs. 17% to 28% on placebo ( P < 0.0001), and from 66% to 74% on ELE-80 vs. 21% to 27% on placebo ( P < 0.0001). The incidence, per attack, of adverse events was low for both ELE-40 and ELE-80. Few adverse events occurred with incidence ≥10% on ELE-40 (asthenia, 5.0%) or ELE-80 (asthenia, 10%; nausea, 5.8%). Discontinuations because of adverse events were 0.2% on ELE-40, and 1.6% on ELE-80 CONCLUSION: In this multiple attack study, eletriptan was well-tolerated and demonstrated consistent and significant efficacy in the treatment of migraine.

Optimal balance of efficacy and tolerability of oral triptans and telcagepant: a review and a clinical comment

Dose–response curves for headaches relief and adverse events (AEs) are presented for five triptans: sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, naratriptan, almotriptan, and frovatriptan, and the CGRP antagonist telcagepant. The upper part of the efficacy curve of the triptans is generally flat, the so-called ceiling effect; and none of the oral triptans, even in high doses, are as effective as subcutaneous sumatriptan, In contrast, AEs increases with increasing dose without a ceiling effect. The optimal dose for the triptans is mainly determined by tolerability. Telcagepant has an excellent tolerability and can be used in migraine patients with cardiovascular co-morbidity. Based on the literature the triptans and telcagepant are rated in a table for efficacy and tolerability.

Triptans for the management of migraine

Migraine is a chronic, recurrent, disabling condition that affects millions of people in the US and worldwide. Proper acute care treatment for migraineurs is essential for a full return of function and productivity. Triptans are serotonin (5-HT)(1B/1D) receptor agonists that are generally effective, well tolerated and safe. Seven triptans are available worldwide, although not all are available in every country, with multiple routes of administration, giving doctors and patients a wide choice. Despite the similarities of the available triptans, pharmacological heterogeneity offers slightly different efficacy profiles. All triptans are superior to placebo in clinical trials, and some, such as rizatriptan 10 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, almotriptan 12.5 mg, and zolmitriptan 2.5 and 5 mg are very similar to each other and to the prototype triptan, sumatriptan 100 mg. These five are known as the fast-acting triptans. Increased dosing can offer increased efficacy but may confer a higher risk of adverse events, which are usually mild to moderate and transient in nature. This paper critically reviews efficacy, safety and tolerability for the different formulations of sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, rizatriptan, naratriptan, almotriptan, eletriptan and frovatriptan.

Are the current IHS guidelines for migraine drug trials being followed?

In 2000, the Clinical Trials Subcommittee of the International Headache Society (IHS) published the second edition of its guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine. The purpose of this publication was to improve the quality of such trials by increasing the awareness amongst investigators of the methodological issues specific to this particular illness. Until now the adherence to these guidelines has not been systematically assessed. We reviewed all published controlled trials of drugs in migraine from 2002 to 2008. Eligible trials were scored for compliance with the IHS guidelines by using grading scales based on the most essential recommendations of the guidelines. The primary efficacy measure of each trial was also recorded. A total of 145 trials of acute treatment and 52 trials of prophylactic treatment were eligible for review. Of the randomized, double-blind trials, acute trials scored an average of 4.7 out of 7 while prophylactic trials scored an average of 5.6 out of 9 for compliance. Thirty-one percent of acute trials and 72% of prophylactic trials used the recommended primary efficacy measure. Fourteen percent of the reviewed trials were either not randomized or not double-blinded. Adherence to international guidelines like these of IHS is important to ensure that only high-quality trials are performed, and to provide the consensus that is required for meta analyses. The primary efficacy measure for trials of acute treatment should be “pain free” and not “headache relief”. Open-label or non-randomized trials generally have no place in the study of migraine drugs.

Eletriptan

Migraine is a multifactorial chronic central nervous system disorder, characterized by recurrent disabling attacks of moderate-to-severe headache. Symptomatic acute treatment of migraine should provide rapid and effective relief of the headache pain. The introduction of the 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists (triptans) expanded the armamentarium for acute migraine pain treatment. Eletriptan is a second-generation triptan with favorable bioavailability and half-life, a high affinity for 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors and selectivity for cranial arteries. Eletriptan (40 and 80 mg) has been shown to be effective as early as 30 min after administration and well tolerated when compared to placebo. In comparative clinical trials, eletriptan 40 and 80 mg were superior or equivalent to other triptans and have shown a very high safety and tolerability profile across the studies performed. Eletriptan showed the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when compared with other agents in its class.

The triptans

The migraine-specific triptans have revolutionized the treatment of migraine and are currently the drugs of choice to treat a migraine attack in progress. Over the past 15 years, triptans were released in rapid succession, with each one demonstrating some specific pharmacokinetic properties that may be translated into clinical advantages. Triptans share many similarities, but also have important differences from one another. Accordingly, herein we discuss the class of the triptans. We first define the trigeminovascular system and its importance in migraine pain, then discuss the mechanism of action of the triptans and contrast the evidence supporting the use of different triptans. We close with our view of the future and hopes for the next generation of antimigraine therapies.

Managing Migraines: Options for Acute Abortive Treatment

Introduction

Triptans, ergotamine derivatives and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are front-line agents used in the acute abortive therapy of migraines. In this article, these medications are reviewed and a treatment algorithm suggested.

Methods

A comprehensive review of the literature from 1990 to 2008 was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library to explore the underlying pathophysiology of migraines and comparatively assess the acute and chronic treatment options available in their management. The information obtained from all literature searches was further categorized as level 1, 2 or 3 based on pre-defined peer-reviewed criteria.

Conclusion:

This review is able to present a relatively preliminary but practical migraine treatment algorithm. Although there is no standard universal treatment strategy to manage migraine headaches in all patients, this review has been put forth to serve as a clinical guideline to assist health professionals in deciding the most appropriate treatment for migraine headaches.

Predictors of migraine headache recurrence: a pooled analysis from the eletriptan database

OBJECTIVE

To identify clinical variables associated with risk of headache recurrence within 22 hours of initial successful treatment of a migraine attack (2-hour headache response), and to analyze the effect of eletriptan in reducing the incidence of recurrence.

METHODS

Data were pooled from 10 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating eletriptan 40 mg (E40), eletriptan 80 mg (E80), and sumatriptan 100 mg (S100) for acute migraine treatment. Patients who achieved a headache response (improvement from moderate/severe pain at baseline to mild/no pain at 2 hours postdose) were evaluable. A multivariable logistic regression analysis identified significant predictors of headache recurrence (return to moderate/severe pain intensity within 22 hours of initial headache response). Treatment response was assessed in two high-risk subgroups, defined by the presence of significant recurrence predictors.

RESULTS

Of 4312 patients responding to acute treatment within 2 hours postdose, 1232 (29%) experienced recurrence. Initial headache response within 2 hours was significantly higher for E40 (62.0%), E80 (67.4%), and S100 (57.9%) compared to placebo (25.1%; all P < .0001). Three clinical variables were significant predictors of recurrence: female gender, age > or = 35 years, and severe baseline headache pain. Among patients with all 3 risk factors (n = 742; 17% of total population), recurrence rates were lower with E40 (35.6%) and E80 (32.9%) than placebo (47.8% P < .01). The same result was observed in the subgroup of patients with 2 risk factors (female gender and age > or = 35 years; P < .0001 vs placebo). Sustained headache and pain-free response rates (a headache/pain-free response at 2 hours postdose with no headache recurrence and no rescue medication use in the subsequent 22 hours) were significantly higher with E40 and E80 than placebo in both high-risk subgroups (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Female gender, age > or = 35 years, and severe baseline headache pain are significant predictors of headache recurrence during a migraine attack. Eletriptan is effective at reducing the incidence of headache recurrence in high-risk subgroups.

Marketed oral triptans in the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review on efficacy and tolerability

BACKGROUND

In the current literature, there is neither a reported systematic review comparing the efficacy of triptans at 30 minutes and 1 hour after the migraine treatment, nor data related to efficacy of new marketed triptans.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this analysis was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of currently marketed oral, non-reencapsulated triptan formulations vs placebo in the treatment of moderate-to-severe migraine attacks.

METHODS

A systematic review of double-blind, randomized clinical trials reporting data after a single migraine attack was conducted. Efficacy results are shown using relative risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

After reviewing 221 publications, 38 studies were included. All marketed triptans provided significant relief and/or absence of pain at 2 hours, and relief at 1 hour when compared with placebo. After 30 minutes, fast-dissolving sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg, sumatriptan 50 mg, and rizatriptan 10 mg showed significant relief when compared to placebo, whereas the fast-dissolving formulation of sumatriptan 100 mg was the only oral triptan that was superior to placebo in meeting the pain-free endpoint. On the other hand, fast-dissolving sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and eletriptan 40 mg showed a lower rate of recurrence than placebo, whereas rizatriptan 10 mg was the only triptan with a recurrence rate greater than that of placebo. Adverse events associated with treatment with tablet formulations of sumatriptan and zolmitriptan were significantly more frequent than those of the placebo group. The inclusion of trials with reencapsulated triptans in the analysis introduced minor specific changes in these results.

CONCLUSION

This analysis updates the comparative data available for the 7 currently marketed oral triptans and clearly demonstrates their efficacy when compared to placebo, even with stricter endpoints, such as efficacy at 30 minutes. No triptan exhibited better tolerability than placebo. Results are diverse, depending on the triptan, which probably is a reflection of heterogeneous pharmacokinetics.

Identification of negative predictors of pain-free response to triptans: analysis of the eletriptan database

Thirty to forty percent of migraineurs do not respond to any given triptan treatment. We identified clinical variables that significantly predict therapeutic non-response and evaluated the efficacy of eletriptan (20, 40 and 80 mg) and sumatriptan (100 mg) vs. placebo in a subgroup of patients with all predictor variables. First-attack data were pooled from 10 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled migraine trials (n = 8473). Multivariate regression analyses identified three significant baseline predictors of failure to achieve 2-h pain-free response: severe headache pain, presence of photophobia/phonophobia and presence of nausea. Time of dosing following headache onset did not influence 2-h pain-free response. Among patients with all three risk factors (n = 2010; 24% of total sample), 2-h pain-free response was significantly higher in patients receiving all three doses of eletriptan or sumatriptan vs. placebo (all P < 0.01). Thus, eletriptan and sumatriptan are efficacious in difficult-to-treat patients at high risk for non-response to triptans.

Treatment-emergent CNS symptoms following triptan therapy are part of the attack

If treatment-emergent central nervous system (CNS) symptoms following triptan therapy represent direct pharmacological effects of the drug, they should occur independent of response to active drug. However, if they represent unmasking of neurological symptoms of the migraine attack after pain is relieved, they should be more common in responders both to active drug and to placebo. To explore this issue, we evaluated the relationship between the CNS adverse events and treatment response following triptan or placebo treatment. We used pooled data from seven double-blind, placebo-controlled trials involving eletriptan 20 mg (E20, n = 402), eletriptan 40 mg (E40, n = 1870), eletriptan 80 mg (E80, n = 1393), sumatriptan 100 mg (S100, n = 275) and placebo (Pbo, n = 1024). Somnolence was more prevalent among 2 h headache responders than non-responders for all treatments, including E80 (8.8% vs. 5.0%; P < 0.05), E40 (6.4% vs. 5.0%; NS), E20 (4.0% vs. 2.0%; NS), S100 (4.7% vs. 3.2%; NS) and Pbo (7.6% vs. 3.0%; P < 0.05). Similarly, the incidence of asthenia was higher among patients who responded to treatment compared with those who did not respond to E80 (15.2% vs. 7.8%; P < 0.05), E40 (6.5% vs. 3.6%; P < 0.05), E20 (6.5% vs. 1.0%; P < 0.05), S100 (10.1% vs. 4.7%; NS) and Pbo (4.4% vs. 2.7%; NS). The generally higher rates of somnolence and asthenia in patients who respond to treatment suggests that these treatment-emergent neurological symptoms may represent the unmasking of CNS symptoms associated with the natural resolution of a migraine attack, rather than simply representing drug-related side-effects. The rate of somnolence in placebo responders is comparable to that in responders to E40 and E80, indicating that somnolence is related, at least in some important part, to headache relief and not treatment.

Eletriptan: a review and new perspectives

Eletriptan is a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine(1B/1D) receptor agonist, or triptan, indicated for the acute treatment of migraine. Eletriptan has a favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile expressed by bioavailability, half-life and high selectivity for cranial arteries. It has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in a wide preapproval development program, which included over 11,000 patients and treated more than 74,000 migraine attacks. In clinical trials, eletriptan has been demonstrated to be one of the most effective oral therapies for the acute treatment of migraine and has shown a very high safety and tolerability profile across the studies performed. Eletriptan showed the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when compared with other agents in its class.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the efficacy and tolerability of a 4-mg dose of subcutaneous sumatriptan for the treatment of acute migraine attacks in adults

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a single 4-mg dose of sumatriptan SC for the acute treatment of adult patients experiencing a migraine attack with moderate to severe pain.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, subjects included men and women aged 18 to 60 years who had migraine with or without aura, as defined by the 1988 International Headache Society criteria. Subjects received either sumatriptan 4 mg SC or placebo SC for a migraine attack with headache pain of moderate to severe intensity. The primary efficacy measurement was pain relief at 2 hours. Secondary efficacy measures included the severity of headache pain at 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, and 90 minutes postadministration. Clinical assessments of pain severity and adverse events were made by way of questioning and observation of subjects and were completed at 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 90, and 120 minutes postadministration.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-seven subjects (87% female and 94% white) participated in this study. Three hundred eighty-four received sumatriptan and 193 received placebo. At 120 minutes postadministration, sumatriptan 4 mg SC was associated with greater proportions of patients who experienced pain relief (70% vs 22%; P<0.001) or were pain free (50% vs 11%; P<0.001). In addition, there were statistically significant differences between sumatriptan 4 mg SC and placebo for multiple secondary end points, including pain relief as early as 10 minutes postadministration (11% vs 6%; P=0.039), pain-free status as early as 30 minutes postadministration (10% vs 3%; P<0.001), nausea as early as 30 minutes postadministration (39% vs 49%; P=0.021), and photophobia as early as 10 minutes postadministration (80% vs 87%; P=0.046). The most common adverse events in the sumatriptan 4-mg SC and placebo groups, respectively, were injection-site reactions (43% and 15%), tingling (12% and 3%), dizziness or vertigo (10% and 5%), and warm or hot sensation (8% and 2%). Treatment groups were not statistically compared for adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Sumatriptan 4 mg SC was effective for the acute treatment of migraine attacks and was generally well tolerated in these patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Eletriptan in the Treatment of Acute Migraine

Eletriptan is a new selective serotonin agonist approved for the treatment of acute migraine headaches. To review the pharmacologic, pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, safety, and clinical efficacy data for eletriptan, we searched the literature in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Science Direct databases to gather all published reports from January 1996-October 2004. All English-language reports (abstract or full trial reports) about the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety of eletriptan were reviewed. Eletriptan's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters translate into a favorable safety and efficacy profile. The drug is rapidly absorbed when administered orally, has good bioavailability and central nervous system penetration due to its lipophilicity, and has a long half-life, which contributes to its ability to prevent recurrent headaches. Compared with other serotonin agonists, eletriptan has a longer duration of action and greater lipophilicity. Eletriptan is metabolized through the cytochrome P450 3A4 system; therefore, it does have the potential for clinically significant drug interactions. In clinical trials, eletriptan demonstrated efficacy superior to that of placebo and similar or superior efficacy to that of other serotonin agonists, with limited adverse effects. With clinical use, headache and pain-free responses and headache recurrence rates were similar to those of other serotonin agonists, but the agent is superior to ergotamine tartrate-caffeine. Based on pharmaco-economic data, eletriptan is more cost-effective than other agents in its class. Eletriptan is a safe and cost-effective option for the treatment of migraine headaches.

Eletriptan

Eletriptan (Relpax) is an orally administered, lipophilic, highly selective serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist ('triptan') that is effective in the acute treatment of moderate to severe migraine attacks in adults. It has a rapid onset of action and demonstrates superiority over placebo as early as 30 minutes after the administration of a single 40 or 80 mg oral dose. The efficacy of eletriptan 20 mg was similar to that of sumatriptan 100 mg, while eletriptan 40 and 80 mg displayed greater efficacy than sumatriptan 50 or 100 mg for most endpoints. Eletriptan 40 mg was generally superior to naratriptan 2.5 mg and equivalent to almotriptan 12.5 mg, rizatriptan 10 mg and zolmitriptan 2.5 mg, while eletriptan 80 mg was superior to zolmitriptan 2.5 mg for most efficacy parameters. Eletriptan 40 and 80 mg were consistently superior to ergotamine/caffeine. Eletriptan is generally well tolerated, reduces time lost from normal activities, improves patients' health-related quality of life and appears to be at least as, if not more, cost effective than sumatriptan. Eletriptan is therefore a useful addition to the triptan family and a first-line treatment option in the acute management of migraine attacks.

Eletriptan review

Eletriptan is a selective, high affinity serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D)-receptor agonist which is rapidly absorbed and has a long half-life in plasma. Eletriptan has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled acute migraine trials and long-term open-label trials. Eletriptan maintains a consistency of response across three attacks and patients continue to respond to eletriptan for at least up to 1 year. Eletriptan has been compared with sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, naratriptan and ergotamine/caffeine in placebo-controlled, randomised, head-to-head trials, and has shown better efficacy with similar adverse events. In a large triptan meta-analysis, including 53 trials and > 24,000 patients, eletriptan 80 mg showed better efficacy, similar consistency but lower tolerability compared with sumatriptan 100 mg. Eletriptan has also shown efficacy in difficult-to-treat patients who were dissatisfied with their previous treatment with sumatriptan, rizatriptan, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or Excedrin.

Evaluating the triptans

The debilitating effect of migraine has fueled the search for more specific agents to treat its characteristic and associated symptoms. Second-generation oral triptans have shown an improved efficacy profile in comparison with the pioneer sumatriptan and with the over-the-counter medications and prescription analgesics that have been staples of migraine treatment. Although all triptans exert effects through the 5-hydroxytryptamine 1B/1D receptors, each triptan has distinctive pharmacokinetic properties that determine its efficacy and tolerability profile. Empirical findings based on clinical trials have led to associations between triptan pharmacology and efficacy. With the expanded treatment choices, the onus is on healthcare providers (especially primary care physicians, who see the majority of patients with migraine) to determine which treatment has an efficacy profile that best suits the individual patient's needs. Patients prefer pharmacotherapy with a rapid onset of action that facilitates complete pain relief and no recurrence. Data from published comparator trials, based on commonly used efficacy end points and pharmacokinetic properties underlying patient-preferred outcomes, are reviewed in this article.

Cost effectiveness of oral triptan therapy: a trans-national comparison based on a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to appraise the relative cost effectiveness of oral triptan therapy in the management of acute migraine, comparing the results obtained using drug cost data from six different countries, USA, UK, Canada, Germany, Italy and The Netherlands.

METHOD

A meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials of single dose oral triptans was carried out in order to calculate aggregate Numbers Needed to Treat (NNT) for each triptan and dose. Cost effectiveness ratios were then derived for each treatment by applying mean drug acquisition costs for each country to these NNTs. Using a graphical plot for each country, incremental cost effectiveness comparisons were then made versus sumatriptan 100 mg, the most commonly used oral triptan.

RESULTS

When analysed in terms of 2-h pain one country to another. When compared to free outcomes, rizatriptan 10 mg and eletriptan 40 and 80 mg were the most effective oral triptans. Rizatriptan 10mg has the most advantageous absolute cost effectiveness ratio in all six countries studied, although levels of statistical significance compared to other agents varied from sumatriptan 100mg, rizatriptan 10 mg and eletriptan 40 mg are most consistently the cost effective treatment choices, both being cost dominant in five out of six countries studied.

CONCLUSIONS

There are systematic differences in triptan efficacy that have an impact on treatment choice. Differences in pricing structure between countries mean that hierarchies of cost effectiveness will vary. Country-specific data should therefore be examined before defining treatment strategies.

Eletriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: results of bridging a Japanese study to Western clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of eletriptan (20, 40 and 80 mg) to placebo when given to Japanese and Western patients for the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial with the aforementioned therapeutic objectives was conducted in Japan (N = 321). By bridging analysis, data from this study were compared to two migraine trials previously conducted in the US (N = 1190) and Europe (N = 563).

RESULTS

The 2-h post-dose headache response rates (i.e., the primary efficacy endpoint) of Japanese migraineurs to eletriptan 20, 40 and 80 mg were 64, 67 and 76%, respectively; European and American migraineurs showed similar trends and, in these studies, eletriptan was significantly superior to placebo (p < 0.05). Japanese patients did demonstrate a higher placebo response than Westerners, possibly due to differences in previous triptan exposure or expectation. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, were comparable in all three studies, and showed a modest dose-response effect.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and tolerability of eletriptan for the acute treatment of migraine is comparable in Japan, Europe and the US.