Advances in pharmacological treatment of migraine

QuEChERS-assisted ion pair chromatography/fluorescence detection method for determination of antimigraine combination therapy in rabbit plasma samples: Application to a pharmacokinetic study

Antimigraine combination therapy has shown significant effectiveness in relieving pain, as well as reducing the frequency, duration, and severity of migraine attacks if compared to a single migraine medication. This work represents the first analytical investigation for emphasizing the synergistic effect of combining ophthalmic beta blockers with triptans in migraine treatment. The presented study was conducted to investigate the pharmacokinetic profile of almotriptan (ALM), a serotonin (5-HT1B/1D) receptor agonist used to treat migraine, when coadministered with timolol (TIM) or verapamil (VER) which are considered as an adjuvant therapy in migraine prevention. Ion pair chromatography (IPC) with online fluorescence detection was applied to simultaneously detect and quantify the binary mixtures of ALM/TIM and ALM/VER in rabbit plasma samples. The separation was achieved using a Platinum C18 analytical column with a mobile phase composed of methanol: 35 mmol L-1 phosphate buffer solution containing 10 mmol L-1 SDS at pH = 6.8 (60:40 v/v). Several parameters were evaluated during the optimization of separation conditions including mobile phase composition, buffer concentration, buffer pH and concentration of ion pair reagent. A thorough investigation of the retention mechanism was performed, and the results showed that Coulomb forces were the main contributors to the overall retention mechanism, which may be hydrophobically assisted. QuEChERS extraction technique was utilized to extract the investigated drugs from plasma samples and a detailed study was carried out to optimize partition/extraction solvents, pH, extraction salts, sample volume and clean-up step. The method had a limit of detection and quantitation of 5.6 and 16.9 ng mL-1 for ALM in ALM/TIM mixture and 2.5 and 7.6 ng mL-1 for ALM in ALM/VER mixture, with an overall recovery not less than 95.22%. This newly proposed method offers a faster alternative to existing chromatographic methods for extraction and determination of ALM in binary mixtures with TIM or VER in rabbit plasma and provides a platform for studying pharmacokinetic parameters. The coadministration of either TIM or VER with ALM resulted in a notable rise in Cmax (maximum plasma concentration) and AUC (area under the plasma concentration-time curve) of ALM, implying possible alterations in the absorption and overall exposure of ALM.

European Headache Federation (EHF) consensus on the definition of effective treatment of a migraine attack and of triptan failure

Background

Triptans are migraine-specific acute treatments. A well-accepted definition of triptan failure is needed in clinical practice and for research. The primary aim of the present Consensus was to provide a definition of triptan failure. To develop this definition, we deemed necessary to develop as first a consensus definition of effective treatment of an acute migraine attack and of triptan-responder.

Main body

The Consensus process included a preliminary literature review, a Delphi round and a subsequent open discussion. According to the Consensus Panel, effective treatment of a migraine attack is to be defined on patient well-being featured by a) improvement of headache, b) relief of non-pain symptoms and c) absence of adverse events. An attack is considered effectively treated if patient’s well-being, as defined above, is restored within 2 hours and for at least 24 hours. An individual with migraine is considered as triptan-responder when the given triptan leads to effective acute attack treatment in at least three out of four migraine attacks. On the other hand, an individual with migraine is considered triptan non-responder in the presence of failure of a single triptan (not matching the definition of triptan-responder). The Consensus Panel defined an individual with migraine as triptan-resistant in the presence of failure of at least 2 triptans; triptan refractory, in the presence of failure to at least 3 triptans, including subcutaneous formulation; triptan ineligibile in the presence of an acknowledged contraindication to triptan use, as specified in the summary of product characteristics.

Conclusions

The novel definitions can be useful in clinical practice for the assessment of acute attack treatments patients with migraine. They may be helpful in identifying people not responding to triptans and in need for novel acute migraine treatments. The definitions will also be of help in standardizing research on migraine acute care.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s10194-022-01502-z.

Budget impact of lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine in the United States

BACKGROUND: Three novel acute treatments for migraine-lasmiditan, ubrogepant, and rimegepant-were approved by the FDA in 2019 and 2020 for adults with migraine with and without aura. American Headache Society guidance recommends that these novel acute treatments be considered for patients who are contraindicated to or fail to respond or tolerate oral triptans, the current standard of acute care. OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from a US commercial plan perspective, the budget impact of adding lasmiditan as an option to a formulary that already includes ubrogepant and rimegepant. METHODS: Epidemiologic data were drawn from US Census data, the American Migraine Prevalence and Preventive study, and the first wave of the OVERCOME US survey, a web-based survey that included 21,000 patients with migraine. A model with a 3-year time horizon was built assuming that demand for the novel acute treatments would not vary based on whether lasmiditan is included in the formulary. The model examined a variety of populations, in particular beneficiaries with previous use of 1 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to triptans and beneficiaries with previous use of 2 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to triptans. Primary outcomes were the incremental differences in total cost and average cost per member per month (PMPM) between scenarios with and without lasmiditan. One-way sensitivity analyses with model parameters that were varied by plus or minus 15% were conducted to assess the effect of key parameters on the incremental total cost over 3 years. RESULTS: The addition of lasmiditan to a formulary that already includes ubrogepant and rimegepant resulted in a total savings of -$927,657 (-1.5% compared with the scenario without lasmiditan) over a 3-year time horizon in the population with previous history of using 1 or more oral triptans or contraindicated to a triptan. In the population with previous history of using 2 or more oral triptans or contraindicated, the addition of lasmiditan resulted in a total budget impact of -$466,518 (-1.3%) over a 3-year time horizon. Most of the cost savings was attributable to reductions in drug acquisition cost. Savings in total costs resulted in average incremental cost per PMPM of -0.03 and -$0.01, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of lasmiditan to the formulary as a novel acute treatment option for migraine alongside ubrogepant and rimegepant resulted in lower budget impact on a 3-year time horizon from a US commercial payer's perspective. This result is important to US commercial payers as they seek to incorporate the emerging novel acute treatments for migraine into their benefit designs. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by Eli Lilly and Company. Milev and Sun are employed by Evidera, which received funding from Eli Lilly and Company for work on this project. Pohl, Mason, Njuguna, and Loo are employees and stockholders of Eli Lilly and Company.

The locus of Action of CGRPergic Monoclonal Antibodies Against Migraine: Peripheral Over Central Mechanisms

Migraine is a complex neurovascular disorder characterized by attacks of moderate to severe unilateral headache, accompanied by photophobia among other neurological signs. Although an arsenal of antimigraine agents is currently available in the market, not all patients respond to them. As Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide (CGRP) plays a key role in the pathophysiology of migraine, CGRP receptor antagonists (gepants) have been developed. Unfortunately, further pharmaceutical development (for olcegepant and telcagepant) was interrupted due to pharmacokinetic issues observed during the Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT). On this basis, the use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs; immunoglobulins) against CGRP or its receptor has recently emerged as a novel pharmacotherapy to treat migraines. RCT showed that these mAbs are effective against migraines producing fewer adverse events. Presently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved four mAbs, namely: (i) erenumab; (ii) fremanezumab; (iii) galcanezumab; and (iv) eptinezumab. In general, specific antimigraine compounds exert their action in the trigeminovascular system, but the locus of action (peripheral vs. central) of the mAbs remains elusive. Since these mAbs have a molecular weight of ∼150 kDa, some studies rule out the relevance of their central actions as they seem unlikely to cross the Blood-Brain Barrier (BBB). Considering the therapeutic relevance of this new class of antimigraine compounds, the present review has attempted to summarize and discuss the current evidence on the probable sites of action of these mAbs.

Efficacy and Safety of Lasmiditan for Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adults: A Meta-Analysis

Monotherapy with triptans in acute migraine is ineffective in many patients and contraindicated in certain cardiovascular diseases where alternative therapeutic options are necessary to explore. This meta-analysis has evaluated the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan for the treatment of acute migraine in adults. After performing a literature search on MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane databases, and International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, reviewers assessed eligibility and extracted data from 4 relevant articles. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed in the selection, analysis, and reporting of findings. A random-effects model was used to estimate effect size. Quality assessment was done using the risk of bias assessment tool and meta-regression for probable variables affecting effect size. Subgroup analysis was done depending on the dose of lasmiditan. Lasmiditan use was associated with a significantly higher percentage of patients with pain freedom (odds ratio [OR], 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.72-2.39; P < .00001), sustained pain freedom (OR, 1.93; 95%CI, 1.55-2.39; P <.00001), headache response (OR, 2.05; 95%CI, 1.77-2.36; P < .00001), clinical disability level (OR, 1.36; 95%CI, 1.20-1.55; P < .00001), patients' global impression (OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.69-2.10; P < .00001), and significantly lower use of rescue medication (OR, 0.49; 95%CI, 0.38-0.63; P < .00001) compared to placebo. Lasmiditan use was also associated with a higher likelihood of adverse effects like dizziness (OR, 6.54; 95%CI, 4.24-10.07; P < .00001), paresthesia (OR, 4.28; 95%CI, 2.97-6.17; P < .00001), and fatigue (OR, 5.67; 95%CI, 3.78-8.52; P < .00001) compared to placebo. Subgroup analysis showed a dose-dependent effect of lasmiditan on pain freedom, sustained pain freedom, patient's global impression, and occurrence of adverse drug reactions. Prediction probability for effect estimate favoring placebo was calculated to be 0.0017%. Lasmiditan has shown a favorable effect in terms of efficacy and safety in the treatment of an acute attack of migraine in comparison to placebo. Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term safety, efficacy, and use in specific subgroups of patients. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42020177838.

Drug interactions and risks associated with the use of triptans, ditans and monoclonal antibodies in migraine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to review current evidence concerning potential risks and interactions associated with concomitant use of drugs indicated for the abortive treatment of migraine, namely triptans and ditans, and more recently developed drugs used for the preventive treatment. The latter drug class encompasses monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), which target either calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) or its receptor.

RECENT FINDINGS

To date, no pharmacokinetic interactions between these drug classes have been reported. However, patients who suffer from triptan- (or ditan-) induced medication overuse headache or those who are nonresponders to triptans might respond less effectively to mAbs. Caution is warranted when coadministrating these drugs in migraine patients with comorbid cardiovascular disease or with an increased cardiovascular risk profile.

SUMMARY

In this review, the main mechanisms of action of triptans, ditans and mAbs targeting CGRP or its receptor are summarized as well as the current evidence on their individual risks. Studies on risks and interactions in case of concomitant use of triptans, ditans and mAbs in migraine patients are relatively scarce. Therefore, these aspects have been considered from a theoretical and hypothetical point of view by taking both their overlapping target, CGRP, and contraindications into account.

Rational Use of Lasmiditan for Acute Migraine Treatment in Adults: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

This narrative review provides an update on the research that led to the development of ditans and lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine in adults and discusses the potential advantages and disadvantages of lasmiditan in clinical use.

METHODS

The electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception through January 9, 2021, to identify relevant studies. Search results were assessed for their overall relevance to this review.

FINDINGS

Because part of the effect of the triptans is mediated by the serotonin 1F receptors, which are not present in the smooth muscle, a pure agonist of these receptors, lasmiditan, was developed. Lasmiditan is hypothesized to act on antinociceptive pathways and inhibit the calcitonin gene-related peptide release. Lasmiditan was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2019 based on the results of 2 pivotal trials that found a significant difference from placebo in the percentage of patients who achieved freedom from pain and most bothersome symptom at 2 h. The main concern of lasmiditan derives from its central nervous system-related adverse effects, mainly dizziness and paraesthesia, probably attributable to its high blood brain barrier penetration. These central nervous system adverse effects impair driving performance for hours and might be suboptimal for individuals with migraine who want to quickly stop the migraine attack to resume their activities as soon as possible.

IMPLICATIONS

Despite the advantage of being beneficial in the acute treatment of migraine without vasocostrictive action, lasmiditan also presents limitations, in particular the central nervous system adverse effects. Moreover, head-to-head trials against triptans and gepants are indispensable to determine the better option for patients.

Experience of migraine, its severity, and perceived efficacy of treatments among cannabis users

OBJECTIVES

As the legal and cultural landscape surrounding cannabis use in the United States continues to evolve, more Americans are turning to cannabis to self-medicate a number of ailments, including migraines. The purpose of the present study was to examine patterns of cannabis use and its associated relief among migraineurs.

DESIGN

Participants were N = 589 adult cannabis users living in states with full legal access. Using a cross-sectional design, participants completed an online survey assessing their cannabis use profiles, migraine experience, and self-reported relief from cannabis and non-cannabis treatments.

RESULTS

161 participants (27.3 %) reported experiencing migraines. 76.4 % of migraineurs (N = 123) endorsed using cannabis to treat their migraines. 69.9 % (N = 86) of migraineurs using cannabis for migraine relief also endorsed using non-cannabis products (e.g., over-the-counter pain medication, triptans) to treat their migraines. Although their subjective health was similar (p = .17), migraineurs who endorsed using cannabis to treat their migraines reported more severe migraines compared to those who did not (p = .02). Migraineurs reported significantly more migraine relief from cannabis compared to non-cannabis products, even after controlling for migraine severity (p = .03). The majority of migraineurs using cannabis to treat their migraines were not medical cardholders (65.0 %), suggesting that these individuals were self-medicating in lieu of physician guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study provides insight into the prevalence of cannabis use for migraine relief in a sample of cannabis users, and suggests that these migraineurs experience a high level of migraine relief from cannabis. Future studies are needed to determine the cannabis forms, potencies, and dosages that are most effective at treating migraine pain.

Lasmiditan mechanism of action - review of a selective 5-HT1F agonist

Migraine is a leading cause of disability worldwide, but it is still underdiagnosed and undertreated. Research on the pathophysiology of this neurological disease led to the discovery that calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) is a key neuropeptide involved in pain signaling during a migraine attack. CGRP-mediated neuronal sensitization and glutamate-based second- and third-order neuronal signaling may be an important component involved in migraine pain. The activation of several serotonergic receptor subtypes can block the release of CGRP, other neuropeptides, and neurotransmitters, and can relieve the symptoms of migraine. Triptans were the first therapeutics developed for the treatment of migraine, working through serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptors. The discovery that the serotonin 1F (5-HT1F) receptor was expressed in the human trigeminal ganglion suggested that this receptor subtype may have a role in the treatment of migraine. The 5-HT1F receptor is found on terminals and cell bodies of trigeminal ganglion neurons and can modulate the release of CGRP from these nerves. Unlike 5-HT1B receptors, the activation of 5-HT1F receptors does not cause vasoconstriction.The potency of different serotonergic agonists towards 5-HT1F was correlated in an animal model of migraine (dural plasma protein extravasation model) leading to the development of lasmiditan. Lasmiditan is a newly approved acute treatment for migraine in the United States and is a lipophilic, highly selective 5-HT1F agonist that can cross the blood-brain barrier and act at peripheral nervous system (PNS) and central nervous system (CNS) sites.Lasmiditan activation of CNS-located 5-HT1F receptors (e.g., in the trigeminal nucleus caudalis) could potentially block the release of CGRP and the neurotransmitter glutamate, thus preventing and possibly reversing the development of central sensitization. Activation of 5-HT1F receptors in the thalamus can block secondary central sensitization of this region, which is associated with progression of migraine and extracephalic cutaneous allodynia. The 5-HT1F receptors are also elements of descending pain modulation, presenting another site where lasmiditan may alleviate migraine. There is emerging evidence that mitochondrial dysfunction might be implicated in the pathophysiology of migraine, and that 5-HT1F receptors can promote mitochondrial biogenesis. While the exact mechanism is unknown, evidence suggests that lasmiditan can alleviate migraine through 5-HT1F agonist activity that leads to inhibition of neuropeptide and neurotransmitter release and inhibition of PNS trigeminovascular and CNS pain signaling pathways.

Characterization of binding, functional activity, and contractile responses of the selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist lasmiditan

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Triptans are 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists (that also display 5-HT1F receptor affinity) with antimigraine action, contraindicated in patients with coronary artery disease due to their vasoconstrictor properties. Conversely, lasmiditan was developed as an antimigraine 5-HT1F receptor agonist. To assess the selectivity and cardiovascular effects of lasmiditan, we investigated the binding, functional activity, and in vitro/in vivo vascular effects of lasmiditan and compared it to sumatriptan.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

Binding and second messenger activity assays of lasmiditan and other serotoninergic agonists were performed for human 5-HT1A , 5-HT1B , 5-HT1D , 5-ht1E , 5-HT1F , 5-HT2A , 5-HT2B , and 5-HT7 receptors, and the results were correlated with their potency to constrict isolated human coronary arteries (HCAs). Furthermore, concentration-response curves to lasmiditan and sumatriptan were performed in proximal and distal HCA, internal mammary, and middle meningeal arteries. Finally, anaesthetized female beagle dogs received i.v. infusions of lasmiditan or sumatriptan in escalating cumulative doses, and carotid and coronary artery diameters were measured.

KEY RESULTS

Lasmiditan showed high selectivity for 5-HT1F receptors. Moreover, the functional potency of the analysed compounds to inhibit cAMP increase through 5-HT1B receptor activation positively correlated with their potency to contract HCA. In isolated human arteries, sumatriptan, but not lasmiditan, induced contractions. Likewise, in vivo, sumatriptan decreased coronary and carotid artery diameters at clinically relevant doses, while lasmiditan was devoid of vasoconstrictor activity at all doses tested.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Lasmiditan is a selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist devoid of vasoconstrictor activity. This may represent a cardiovascular safety advantage when compared to the triptans.

Migraine polygenic risk score associates with efficacy of migraine-specific drugs

Objective

To assess whether the polygenic risk score (PRS) for migraine is associated with acute and/or prophylactic migraine treatment response.

Methods

We interviewed 2,219 unrelated patients at the Danish Headache Center using a semistructured interview to diagnose migraine and assess acute and prophylactic drug response. All patients were genotyped. A PRS was calculated with the linkage disequilibrium pred algorithm using summary statistics from the most recent migraine genome-wide association study comprising ∼375,000 cases and controls. The PRS was scaled to a unit corresponding to a twofold increase in migraine risk, using 929 unrelated Danish controls as reference. The association of the PRS with treatment response was assessed by logistic regression, and the predictive power of the model by area under the curve using a case-control design with treatment response as outcome.

Results

A twofold increase in migraine risk associates with positive response to migraine-specific acute treatment (odds ratio [OR] = 1.25 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.05–1.49]). The association between migraine risk and migraine-specific acute treatment was replicated in an independent cohort consisting of 5,616 triptan users with prescription history (OR = 3.20 [95% CI = 1.26–8.14]). No association was found for acute treatment with non–migraine-specific weak analgesics and prophylactic treatment response.

Conclusions

The migraine PRS can significantly identify subgroups of patients with a higher-than-average likelihood of a positive response to triptans, which provides a first step toward genetics-based precision medicine in migraine.

Medicinal Properties of Cannabinoids, Terpenes, and Flavonoids in Cannabis, and Benefits in Migraine, Headache, and Pain: An Update on Current Evidence and Cannabis Science

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive literature reviews of historical perspectives and evidence supporting cannabis/cannabinoids in the treatment of pain, including migraine and headache, with associated neurobiological mechanisms of pain modulation have been well described. Most of the existing literature reports on the cannabinoids Δ⁹ -tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), or cannabis in general. There are many cannabis strains that vary widely in the composition of cannabinoids, terpenes, flavonoids, and other compounds. These components work synergistically to produce wide variations in benefits, side effects, and strain characteristics. Knowledge of the individual medicinal properties of the cannabinoids, terpenes, and flavonoids is necessary to cross-breed strains to obtain optimal standardized synergistic compositions. This will enable targeting individual symptoms and/or diseases, including migraine, headache, and pain.

OBJECTIVE

Review the medical literature for the use of cannabis/cannabinoids in the treatment of migraine, headache, facial pain, and other chronic pain syndromes, and for supporting evidence of a potential role in combatting the opioid epidemic. Review the medical literature involving major and minor cannabinoids, primary and secondary terpenes, and flavonoids that underlie the synergistic entourage effects of cannabis. Summarize the individual medicinal benefits of these substances, including analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties.

CONCLUSION

There is accumulating evidence for various therapeutic benefits of cannabis/cannabinoids, especially in the treatment of pain, which may also apply to the treatment of migraine and headache. There is also supporting evidence that cannabis may assist in opioid detoxification and weaning, thus making it a potential weapon in battling the opioid epidemic. Cannabis science is a rapidly evolving medical sector and industry with increasingly regulated production standards. Further research is anticipated to optimize breeding of strain-specific synergistic ratios of cannabinoids, terpenes, and other phytochemicals for predictable user effects, characteristics, and improved symptom and disease-targeted therapies.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of new acute treatments for migraine

INTRODUCTION

Recommended medications for the acute treatment of migraine encompass triptans, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and analgesics. While it is true that triptans have been the first successful mechanism-driven treatment in the field, recently, new targets involved in migraine pathogenesis have emerged and new drug classes have been studied for migraine attack therapy. Areas covered: Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of the new acute treatments of migraine (i.e. ditans, gepants, and glutamate receptor antagonists), considering also marketed drugs in new formulations and administration routes. Expert opinion: Research on the administration routes of marketed drugs was performed in order to improve, in accordance with basic pharmacokinetics parameters, the speed of action of these medications. Similar to the triptans, the new acute treatments are migraine-specific medications, acting on the trigeminovascular system, albeit with different mechanisms. Although available data do not conclusively indicate the superiority of a class over the others, the pharmacodynamics explains the peculiar tolerability and safety profile of different drug classes emerging from clinical trials. Further studies are needed to investigate the possibility of combining different drug classes to optimize the clinical response and the potential role of the novel drugs in medication-overuse headache.

Emerging drugs for migraine treatment: an update

Introduction: Migraine is a very frequent and disabling neurological disorder. The current treatment options are old, generally poorly tolerated and not migraine-specific, reflecting the low priority of migraine research and highlighting the vast unmet need in its management. Areas covered: Advancement in the understanding of migraine pathophysiological mechanisms and identification of novel potentially meaningful targets have resulted in a multitude of emerging acute and preventive treatments. Here we review the known putative migraine pathophysiological mechanisms in order to understand the rationale of the most promising novel treatments targeting the Calcitonin-Gene-Related Peptide receptor and ligand and the 5 hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)1F receptor. Key findings on the phase II and phase III clinical trials on these treatments will be summarized. Furthermore, a critical analysis on failed trials of potentially meaningful targets such the nitric oxide and the orexinergic pathways will be conducted. Future perspective will be outlined. Expert opinion: The recent approval of Erenumab and Fremanezumab is a major milestone in the therapy of migraine since the approval of triptans. Several more studies are needed to fully understand the clinical potential, long-term safety and cost-effectiveness of these therapies. This paramount achievement should stimulate the development of further research in the migraine field.

Using a Genetic Risk Score Approach to Predict Headache Response to Triptans in Migraine Without Aura

A large meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies has recently identified a number of risk loci for migraine without aura (MwoA). In this study, we tested the hypothesis that a genetic risk score based on single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), previously reported to be associated with MwoA at genome-wide significance, may influence headache response to triptans in patients with migraine without aura. Genotyping of rs9349379, rs2078371, rs6478241, rs11172113, rs1024905, and rs6724624 was conducted with a real-time PCR allelic discrimination assay in 172 MwoA patients, of whom 36.6% were inconsistent responders to triptans. Each genetic risk score model was constructed as an unweighted score, calculated by adding the number of risk alleles for MwoA across each SNP at selected loci. The association with headache response to triptans was evaluated by logistic regression analysis adjusted for triptan, and the P values were corrected for the false discovery rate. The genetic risk score including susceptibility risk alleles at TRPM8 rs6724624 and FGF6 rs1024905 was found to be inversely associated with risk of inconsistent response to triptans (OR, 0.62; 95%CI, 0.43-0.89; false discovery rate q value, 0.045). In addition, adding this genetic risk score to the triptan-adjusted logistic regression model significantly improved (P = .037) the discrimination accuracy, from 0.57 (95%CI, 0.50-0.65) to 0.64 (95%CI, 0.57-0.72). A modest but significant effect on risk of inconsistent response to triptans was identified for a genetic risk score model composed of 2 known risk alleles for MwoA, suggesting its potential utility in predicting headache response to triptan therapy.

Orally inhaled migraine therapy: Where are we now?

Migraine is a debilitating disease that affects 9% of men and 19% of women worldwide with high socio-economic and personal impact. Surveys indicate that migraineurs are among the most dissatisfied with available therapeutic options, predominantly given via oral or injectable routes, citing side effects as the primary complaint. Orally inhaled therapies have the potential to offer faster onset of action with fewer side effects compared to existing therapies, yet development has stalled. Despite emerging therapies such as calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists, there are still good opportunities for repositioning migraine drugs via the inhaled route.

Is selective 5-HT1F receptor agonism an entity apart from that of the triptans in antimigraine therapy?

Migraine is a neurovascular disorder that involves activation of the trigeminovascular system and cranial vasodilation mediated by release of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). The gold standard for acute migraine treatment are the triptans, 5-HT1B/1D/(1F) receptor agonists. Their actions are thought to be mediated through activation of: (i) 5-HT1B receptors in cranial blood vessels with subsequent cranial vasoconstriction; (ii) prejunctional 5-HT1D receptors on trigeminal fibers that inhibit trigeminal CGRP release; and (iii) 5-HT1B/1D/1F receptors in central nervous system involved in (anti)nociceptive modulation. Unfortunately, coronary arteries also express 5-HT1B receptors whose activation would produce coronary vasoconstriction; hence, triptans are contraindicated in patients with cardiovascular disease. In addition, since migraineurs have an increased cardiovascular risk, it is important to develop antimigraine drugs devoid of vascular (side) effects. Ditans, here defined as selective 5-HT1F receptor agonists, were developed on the basis that most of the triptans activate trigeminal 5-HT1F receptors, which may explain part of the triptans' antimigraine action. Amongst the ditans, lasmiditan: (i) fails to constrict human coronary arteries; and (ii) is effective for the acute treatment of migraine in preliminary Phase III clinical trials. Admittedly, the exact site of action is still unknown, but lasmiditan possess a high lipophilicity, which suggests a direct action on the central descending antinociceptive pathways. Furthermore, since 5-HT1F receptors are located on trigeminal fibers, they could modulate CGRP release. This review will be particularly focussed on the similarities and differences between the triptans and the ditans, their proposed sites of action, side effects and their cardiovascular risk profile.

Polygenic risk score: use in migraine research

BACKGROUND

The latest Genome-Wide Association Study identified 38 genetic variants associated with migraine. In this type of studies the significance level is very difficult to achieve (5 × 10^- 8) due to multiple testing. Thus, the identified variants only explain a small fraction of the genetic risk. It is expected that hundreds of thousands of variants also confer an increased risk but do not reach significance levels. One way to capture this information is by constructing a Polygenic Risk Score. Polygenic Risk Score has been widely used with success in genetics studies within neuropsychiatric disorders. The use of polygenic scores is highly relevant as data from a large migraine Genome-Wide Association Study are now available, which will form an excellent basis for Polygenic Risk Score in migraine studies.

RESULTS

Polygenic Risk Score has been used in studies of neuropsychiatric disorders to assess prediction of disease status in case-control studies, shared genetic correlation between co-morbid diseases, and shared genetic correlation between a disease and specific endophenotypes.

CONCLUSION

Polygenic Risk Score provides an opportunity to investigate the shared genetic risk between known and previously unestablished co-morbidities in migraine research, and may lead to better and personalized treatment of migraine if used as a clinical assistant when identifying responders to specific drugs. Polygenic Risk Score can be used to analyze the genetic relationship between different headache types and migraine endophenotypes. Finally, Polygenic Risk Score can be used to assess pharmacogenetic effects, and perhaps help to predict efficacy of the Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide monoclonal antibodies that soon become available as migraine treatment.

Clinical-Biochemical Correlates of Migraine Attacks in Rizatriptan Responders and Non-Responders

The present study was aimed at verifying the clinical characteristics of a typical attack in 20 migraine patients, 10 responders and 10 non-responders to rizatriptan, and at investigating any differences in the levels of neuropeptides of the trigeminovascular or parasympathetic systems [calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), neurokinin A (NKA) and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP) measured by radio-immunoassay methods in external jugular blood] between responders and nonresponders. In all responders to rizatriptan, pain was unilateral, severe, and pulsating, and in five of them at least one sign suggestive of parasympathetic system activation was recorded. Five patients who were non-responders to rizatriptan referred bilateral and non-pulsating pain, even though severe in most of them. CGRP and NKA levels measured before rizatriptan administration were significantly higher in responders than in non-responders ( P < 0.0001 and P < 0.002, respectively). In the five patients with autonomic signs among rizatriptan responders, detectable VIP levels were found at baseline. One hour after rizatriptan administration, a decrease in CGRP and NKA levels was evident in the external jugular venous blood of rizatriptan responders, and this corresponded to a significant pain relief and alleviation of accompanying symptoms. VIP levels were also significantly reduced at the same time in the five patients with autonomic signs. After rizatriptan administration, CGRP and NKA levels in non-responder patients showed less significant variations at all time points after rizatriptan administration compared with rizatriptan responders. The present study, although carried out on a limited number of patients, supports recent clinical evidence of increased trigeminal activation associated with a better triptan response in migraine patients accompanied by parasympathetic activation in a subgroup of patients with autonomic signs. In contrast, the poor response seems to be correlated with a lesser degree of trigeminal activation, lower variations of trigeminal neuropeptides after triptan administration, and no evidence of parasympathetic activation at baseline.

Infrequent or Non-Response to Oral Sumatriptan does not Predict Response to Other Triptans—Review of Four Trials

A migraineur can claim to be an infrequent responder (‘non-responder’) to an oral triptan independent of which triptan he or she is presently using. Four trials of an alternative triptan (zolmitriptan/rizatriptan; eletriptan; naratriptan; almotriptan) in patients with a history of infrequent response to oral sumatriptan were compared and contrasted in terms of study design, patient characteristics, and efficacy and tolerability of the triptan under investigation. Unfortunately, none of the reported studies used an appropriate parallel design, which would have had the non-responding triptan (oral sumatriptan) in one arm and without encapsulation. While the four trials differed in terms of study design (open-label vs. placebo-controlled), definition of sumatriptan ‘non-responder’ (retrospective vs. prospective) and pain intensity at baseline (30% severe to 70% severe), all four demonstrated that lack of response to sumatriptan did not predict lack of response to an alternative triptan. Changing triptans resulted in 2-h pain-relief rates of 25–81% in patients with a history of poor response to sumatriptan. It can be concluded that migraine patients who respond infrequently to sumatriptan should be switched to a different triptan, as lack of response to one triptan does not predict likelihood of responsiveness to another. A review of the available evidence suggests that almotriptan may be one of the most appropriate choices for an alternative triptan.

Efficacy, Speed of Action and Tolerability of Almotriptan in the Acute Treatment of Migraine

A meta-analysis of pooled individual patient data from four randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials comparing several doses of almotriptan ( n = 1908) with placebo ( n = 386) was used to investigate the efficacy, speed of onset and tolerability of almotriptan in the acute treatment of migraine. As early as 30 min after dosing, almotriptan 12.5 mg was significantly more effective than placebo for pain relief (14.9% vs. 8.2%; P < 0.05) and pain free (2.5% vs. 0.7%; P < 0.05). At 2 h, pain-relief rates were 56.0%, 63.7% and 66.0% for almotriptan 6.25, 12.5 and 25 mg, respectively, compared with 35% for placebo; 2-h pain-free rates were 26.7%, 36.4% and 43.4% compared with 13.9% for placebo. All almotriptan dosages were significantly more effective than placebo in eliminating migraine-associated symptoms ( P < 0.05) and in achieving sustained pain relief up to 24 h ( P < 0.05). The incidence of adverse events after almotriptan 6.25 mg and 12.5 mg was not significantly different from that of placebo. This meta- analysis confirms the findings of individual clinical trials, while demonstrating for the first time, significant pain-free efficacy at 30 min compared with placebo.

The influence of genetic constitution on migraine drug responses

Objective

Specific acute treatments of migraine are 5HT1B/D receptor agonists; triptans and ergotamine, but only two-thirds of patients respond well without side effects. No migraine-prophylactic drugs are specific to migraine. Prophylactic drugs are selected by time-consuming “trial and error.” Personalized treatment is therefore much needed. The objective of this study was to test the effect of 12 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) significantly associated with migraine on migraine drug responses.

Methods

Semi-structured migraine interviews including questions on drug responses, blood samples and genotyping were performed on 1806 unrelated migraine cases recruited from the Danish Headache Center. Association analyses were carried out using logistic regression, assuming an additive model for the genetic effect. The effect on drug responses was tested for a combined genetic score and for each of the 12 SNPs. Significant findings were subsequently tested in an independent replication sample of 392 unrelated Danish migraine cases.

Results

A single risk variant, rs2651899 in PRDM16, was significantly associated with efficacy of triptans with an odds ratio (OR) of treatment success of 1.3, and a higher combined genetic score was significantly associated with efficacy of triptans with an OR of success of up to 2.6. A number of SNPs showed nominal preferential association with the efficacy of triptans and others with prophylactic drugs. Analyses of triptans and ergotamine complemented each other and gave a stronger signal when analyzed together. The associations between response to triptans and genetic load and rs2651899 were partially confirmed in the independent sample.

Conclusion

We show for the first time an association between genetic constitution and migraine drug response. This is a first step toward future individualized medicine.

[Current state of knowledge and developments in the prophylaxis and acute treatment of migraine]

For the acute treatment of the headache phase of a migraine attack, a variety of different pharmacotherapeutic treatment options exist. These range from nonspecifically acting non-opioid analgesics (e.g., paracetamol) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory substances (e.g., acetylsalicylic acid, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac) to agents specifically interfering with the serotonin system (ergot alkaloids such as ergotamine and its derivatives, triptans). In patients with significant emesis co-occurring during an attack, additional antiemetics such as metoclopramide or domperidone may be administered. In migraine prophylaxis, largely divergent agents, e.g., β-adrenoceptor antagonists, Ca-antagonists, or anticonvulsants, are commonly used. The diversity of these compounds may help the treating physician to tailor prophylactic treatment to the patient's individual needs. The treatment success of the individual patient is difficult to predict both in acute and prophylactic migraine treatment. Apart from contraindications or associated side effects of a particular substance, the individual patient's response to treatment is therefore a major determinant in selecting the suitable medication.

Looking beyond 5-HT(3) receptors: a review of the wider role of serotonin in the pharmacology of nausea and vomiting

The concept that 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT; serotonin) is involved in the emetic reflex was revealed using drugs that interfere with its synthesis, storage, release and metabolism ahead of the discovery of selective tools to modulate specific subtypes of receptors. This review comprehensively examines the fundamental role of serotonin in emesis control and highlights data indicating association of 5-HT1-4 receptors in the emetic reflex, whilst leaving open the possibility that 5-HT5-7 receptors may also be involved. The fact that each receptor subtype may mediate both emetic and anti-emetic effects is discussed in detail for the first time. These discussions are made in light of known species differences in emesis control, which has sometimes affected the perception of the translational value of data in regard to the development of novel anti-emetic for use in man.

Lasmiditan for acute migraine treatment

Lasmiditan is a new neurally acting antimigraine drug that acts as a highly selective serotonin1F receptor agonist. Its chemical structure is distinctly different from that of triptans. Its dose-dependent clinical efficacy was proven in two clinical Phase II trials using intravenous and oral formulations. Oral lasmiditan showed significant headache relief after 2 h at doses of 50, 100, 200 and 400 mg. Adverse events of lasmiditan were dose-dependent and mainly associated with the CNS. They predominantly included dizziness, paresthesia and fatigue, and were mostly mild-to-moderate in intensity. Preclinical studies showed that, unlike triptans, lasmiditan lacks any vasoconstrictive activity, which makes it a promising drug for patients with contraindications to triptans owing to cardio- or cerebro-vascular diseases, or an elevated vascular risk profile.

Consistency of return to normal function, productivity, and satisfaction following migraine attacks treated with sumatriptan/naproxen sodium combination

OBJECTIVES

To assess the consistency of improved functioning, productivity, and medication satisfaction in migraines treated with a single tablet of sumatriptan 85 mg/naproxen sodium 500 mg (S/NS) using an early intervention approach.

METHODS

Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4-period crossover, multi-attack, multi-center, outpatient studies of moderate to severe adult migraineurs were conducted to compare S/NS with placebo. Participants recorded outcome assessments in a diary during the 24 hours following study medication. Analyses were conducted on the intent-to-treat population who treated at least 1 attack. Statistical significance between treatment groups used analysis of variance repeated measures models and the intent-to-treat population. There were no corrections for multiplicity.

RESULTS

Almost half (48.5%) of migraineurs treated with S/NS returned to normal functioning at 2 hours and 73.3% at 4 hours postdose, compared with 28.7% (2 hours) and 43.3% (4 hours) of placebo-treated attacks. Total productivity loss over the 24 hours postdose was significantly reduced following S/NS treatment (2.5 hours on average) compared with placebo (4.0 hours). Sumatriptan/naproxen treatment resulted in significantly higher medication satisfaction scores on the efficacy, functionality, and total efficacy subscales compared with placebo in all attacks in both studies. Sumatriptan/naproxen treatment also provided significantly greater ease of use in 7 of the 8 attacks. Although tolerability was high in both treatment groups (over 90%), the placebo group was significantly less bothered by side effects in 6 of 8 attacks.

CONCLUSION

Results from these 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-attack, crossover studies demonstrated the rapid and consistent restoration of patients' functioning, the consistent reduction in productivity loss, and high satisfaction ratings from patients treating multiple migraine attacks with S/NS using an early intervention approach.

Triptan nonresponders: do they exist and who are they?

BACKGROUND

Triptans represent the best treatment option for most migraine attacks, although this is not as well studied as it might be in controlled trials. Their efficacy and tolerability vary, both between agents, and from patient to patient, with about 30%-40% of patients not responding adequately to therapy. As yet unexplained, the failure of one triptan does not predict failure with another, and therefore triptan nonresponders cannot be defined as individuals who have failed a single triptan. Five clinical studies provide evidence that switching from a triptan that is ineffective to a second one can result in effective treatment in a proportion of patients. Systematic studies investigating whether there are patients who do not respond to all triptans in all formulations are lacking.

METHODS

Here we discuss the importance of identifying triptan nonresponders, the literature supporting their existence, and the issues to be resolved to design trials to investigate this.

CONCLUSION

So far, no scientific data about the presence of a triptan nonresponder population are available. We propose a pragmatic study design to assess the existence of this subpopulation, recognizing the complexity of the question and the likelihood that more than one issue is at play in nonresponders.

The combined effect of acupuncture and Tanacetum parthenium on quality of life in women with headache: randomised study

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of acupuncture (AC), Tanacetum (TAN) or combined treatment on quality of life in women with chronic migraine (CM).

METHODS

A total of 69 women volunteers were randomly divided into 3 groups: AC, acupuncture administered in 20 sessions over 10 weeks (n=22); TAN, at 150 mg/day (n=23); and AC+TAN (n=23). The primary outcome was Short-Form 36 (SF-36) quality of life assessment score. Secondary outcomes included the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) score experienced after randomisation.

RESULTS

AC+TAN was statistically significantly more effective than AC or TAN alone in overall health-related quality of life (SF-36; p<0.05), on MIDAS score (-35.1 (10.6) AC vs -24.8 (11.7) TAN vs -42.5 (9.8) AC+TAN; p<0.05) and in reducing the mean score of pain on VAS (-5.6 (2.4) AC vs -3.7 (2.1) TAN vs -6.4 (3.1) AC+TAN; p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The present work shows an improvement of the quality of life and better analgesic effect of acupuncture combined with TAN treatment on migraine pain in women when compared with acupuncture or TAN alone.

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.

Migraine management: How do the adult and paediatric migraines differ?

Migraine is one of the common causes of severe and recurring headache. It may be difficult to manage in primary care settings, where it is under diagnosed and medically treated. Migraine can occur in children as well as in adults and it is three times more common in women than in men. Migraine in children is different from adults in various ways. Migraine management depends on the various factors like duration and severity of pain, associated symptoms, degree of disability, and initial response to treatment. The therapy of children and adolescents with migraines includes treatment modalities for acute attacks, prophylactic medications when the attacks are frequent, and biobehavioural modes of treatment to aid long-term management of the disorder. The long lasting outcome of childhood headaches and progression into adult headaches remains largely unknown. However, it has been suggested that adult migraine may represent a progressive disorder. In children, the progressive nature is uncertain and further investigations into longitudinal outcome and phenotypic changes in childhood headaches have yet to be recognized. Even though paediatric and adult migraines seem to be slightly different from one another, but not enough to categorize either as sole.

Nutraceuticals and headache: the biological basis

Nutrition must affect the structure and functioning of the brain. Since the brain has very high metabolic activity, what we consume throughout the day is likely to dramatically influence both its structure and moment to moment function. It follows that nutritional approaches to all neurological disorders are being researched and entering medical practice, while nutraceutical use is a mainstay of public habits. This review discusses the biological basis for non-conventional or non-mainstream approaches to the treatment of migraine. This requires at least limited discussion of current migraine pathophysiologic theory. How nutrients and other chemicals and approaches are mechanistically involved within migraine pathways is the focus of this article. The nutraceuticals reviewed in detail are: magnesium, riboflavin, coenzyme Q10, petasites, and feverfew with additional comments on marijuana and oxygen/hyperbaric oxygen. This article reviews the science when known related to the potential genetic susceptibility and sensitivity to these treatments. As we know, the basic science in this field is very preliminary, so whether to combine approaches and presumably mechanisms or use them alone or with or without conventional therapies is far from clear. Nonetheless, as more patients and providers participate in patient-centered approaches to care, knowledge of the science underpinning nutritional, nutraceutical, and complementary approaches to treatment for migraine will certainly benefit this interaction.

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.

[Is a migraine screener useful for pharmacists in community pharmacy to distinguish patients with migraine?]

In this study, to clarify the characteristics of a migraine screener that would be useful to pharmacists in community pharmacies, we used the migraine screener to investigate patients with migraine. Diagnosis of migraine was made according to the internal classification of headache disorders 2nd edition (ICHD-II). Eighty patients with migraine (with aura: n=21, without aura: n=59) were divided into a positive group (n=51, 64%) and a negative group (n=29, 36%) based on the results of the migraine screener, which included a 4-item (headache exacerbation in daily performance, nausea, light-sensitivity and hypersensitivity to odors). The positive rate of the migraine screener was 64%. In the positive group, patients had moderate-to-severe migraine attacks in the past 3 months. Moreover, 82% of patients in the positive group reported disturbances in their daily of life due to headache. In the negative group, 41% of patients also reported disturbances in their daily of life. Therefore, pharmacists have to check the influence of headache on daily of life not only in the positive group but also in the negative group. These findings provide useful information to guide pharmacists in community pharmacies when using the screener for migraine to distinguish patients with headache from those with migraine.

5-HT(1F) Receptor agonists: a new treatment option for migraine attacks?

Migraine is a debilitating disorder of the CNS. Although therapeutic options for migraine attacks have tremendously advanced with the development of triptans more than a decade ago, several conditions (such as vascular disease) restrict their use. Moreover, some patients do not respond to triptans and other currently available medications. Therefore, treatment alternatives are needed. Study data show that 5-HT(1F) receptor agonists successfully abort migraine attacks. These data also suggest a favorable vascular side-effect profile of these substances, which could be beneficial for migraine treatment in subjects with cardiac or vascular disease. We discuss the current knowledge of 5-HT(1F) receptor-mediated effects, in part by comparing them to triptans, and we also summarize data from basic research and clinical trials.

Meeting acute migraine treatment needs through novel treatment formulations

Migraineurs often do not use acute migraine-specific medications. Patient-reported satisfaction with triptans is modest. Patients are generally interested in obtaining more rapid and complete symptom relief. The role of trigeminal vascular activation may explain why some patients fail to respond to current treatment. Novel formulations of currently available acute migraine treatments have been developed, with improved clinical outcomes, response times, and pain-free rates. Currently available effective, novel, acute migraine therapies include needle-free injectable sumatriptan and effervescent diclofenac. Orally inhaled dihydroergotamine is a new treatment modality. These novel formulations may help patients achieve desirable outcomes, including faster and more complete relief, more consistent response, and improved drug tolerability.

Triptans: low utilization and high turnover in the general population

Studies performed in selected populations have shown a poor utilization of triptans for migraine. Our study was aimed at establishing patterns of triptans utilization in a large community using the pharmaceutical prescriptions database of two consecutive years in a regional Health Authority in Italy. About 0.5% of the population observed received triptans prescriptions in a year, but > 50% of the cases received only one prescription. On the other hand, 46% of triptan users did not receive a triptan prescription in the following year (past users): in 80% of cases, patients received only 1-2 triptan packages. The evaluation of the discontinued triptan type has shown percentages varying between 30 and 70%. The percentage of triptan users who received a triptan prescription for the first time in the successive year of study (new users) was 52%. These findings together highlight a high turnover in triptans utilization. Less than 15% of subjects received more than one triptan product in the 2 years. In conclusion, we observed a low percentage of triptan users and a low rate of utilization, associated with a high percentage of discontinuation and new utilization (high turnover), without any substantial increase in triptans utilization during the years. All these data probably do not support optimal satisfaction with triptan therapy.

Randomized, controlled trial of telcagepant for the acute treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

The neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) plays a key role in migraine pathophysiology. In this large phase 3 clinical trial, we sought to confirm the efficacy of telcagepant, the first orally bioavailable CGRP receptor antagonist.

METHODS

Adults with migraine with or without aura (International Headache Society criteria) treated a moderate or severe attack with oral telcagepant 50 mg (n = 177), 150 mg (n = 381), 300 mg (n = 371), or placebo (n = 365) in a randomized, double-blind trial. The 5 co-primary endpoints were pain freedom, pain relief, and absence of photophobia, absence of phonophobia, and absence of nausea, all at 2 hours postdose. The key secondary endpoint was 2-24 hour sustained pain freedom. The prespecified primary efficacy analyses evaluated the 150 mg and 300 mg groups; the 50-mg group was included on an exploratory basis to further characterize the dose response but was not prespecified for analysis. Tolerability was assessed by adverse experience reports.

RESULTS

Telcagepant 300 mg was more effective (p <or= 0.001) than placebo on all primary endpoints and the key secondary endpoint, as was telcagepant 150 mg (p <or= 0.05). Telcagepant 300 mg showed a slight numeric advantage over telcagepant 150 mg on most measures. Telcagepant 50 mg values were numerically intermediate between placebo and telcagepant 150 mg and 300 mg. The percentages of patients with adverse experiences were 32.2% for telcagepant 50 mg, 32.0% for telcagepant 150 mg, 36.2% for telcagepant 300 mg, and 32.2% for placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirmed previous findings that telcagepant 300 mg was effective at relieving pain and other migraine symptoms at 2 hours and providing sustained pain freedom up to 24 hours. In this study, telcagepant 150 mg was also effective. Telcagepant was generally well tolerated.