Tolerability of the triptans: clinical implications

Hallmarks of primary headache: part 1 - migraine

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Migraine is a common disabling conditions which, globally, affects 15.2% of the population. It is the second cause of health loss in terms of years lived with disability, the first among women. Despite being so common, it is poorly recognised and too often undertreated. Specialty centres and neurologists with specific expertise on headache disorders have the knowledge to provide specific care: however, those who do not regularly treat patients with migraine will benefit from a synopsis on the most relevant and updated information about this condition. This paper presents a comprehensive view on the hallmarks of migraine, from genetics and diagnostic markers, up to treatments and societal impact, and reports the elements that identify migraine specific features.

MAIN RESULTS

The most relevant hallmark of migraine is that it has common and individual features together. Besides the known clinical manifestations, migraine presentation is heterogeneous with regard to frequency of attacks, presence of aura, response to therapy, associated comorbidities or other symptoms, which likely reflect migraine heterogeneous genetic and molecular basis. The amount of therapies for acute and for prophylactic treatment is really wide, and one of the difficulties is with finding the best treatment for the single patient. In addition to this, patients carry out different daily life activities, and might show lifestyle habits which are not entirely adequate to manage migraine day by day. Education will be more and more important as a strategy of brain health promotion, because this will enable reducing the amount of subjects needing specialty care, thus leaving it to those who require it in reason of refractory condition or presence of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognizing the hallmarks of migraine and the features of single patients enables prescribing specific pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. Medical research on headaches today particularly suffers from the syndrome of single-disease approach, but it is important to have a cross-sectional and joint vision with other close specialties, in order to treat our patients with a comprehensive approach that a heterogeneous condition like migraine requires.

Evidence-based review and frontiers of migraine therapy

BACKGROUND

Cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) is identified as one of the "episodic syndromes that may be associated with migraine," along with benign paroxysmal torticollis, benign paroxysmal vertigo, and abdominal migraine. It has been proposed that CVS and migraine may share pathophysiologic mechanisms of hypothalamic activation and altered dopaminergic signaling, and impaired sensorimotor intrinsic connectivity. The past decade has brought groundbreaking advances in the treatment of migraine and other headache disorders. While many of these therapies have yet to be studied in episodic syndromes associated with migraine including CVS and abdominal migraine, the potential shared pathophysiology among these conditions suggests that use of migraine-specific treatments may have a beneficial role even in those for whom headache is not the primary symptom.

PURPOSE

This manuscript highlights newer therapies in migraine. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and its relation to migraine pathophysiology and the therapies that target the CGRP pathway, as well as a 5HT1F receptor agonist and neuromodulation devices used to treat migraine are briefly discussed as they may potentially prove to be useful in the future treatment of CVS.

Towards precision medicine in migraine: Recent therapeutic advances and potential biomarkers to understand heterogeneity and treatment response

After 35 years since the introduction of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD), we are living in the era of the second great revolution in migraine therapies. First, discoveries of triptans provided a breakthrough in acute migraine treatment utilizing bench-to-bedside research results on the role of serotonin in migraine. Next, the discovery of the role of neuropeptides, more specifically calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in migraine attack led to the development of anti-CGRP therapies that are effective both in acute and preventive treatment, and are also able to reduce migraine-related burden. Here, we reviewed the most recent clinical studies and real-world data on available migraine-specific medications, including triptans, ditants, gepants and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies. Novel drug targets, such as PACAP and amylins were also discussed. To address the main challenges of migraine therapy, the high heterogeneity of people with migraine, the prevalent presence of various comorbid disorders, and the insufficient medical care of migraine patients were covered. Promising novel approaches from the fields of omics, blood and saliva biomarker, imaging and provocation studies might bring solutions for these challenges with the potential to identify further drug targets, distinguish more homogeneous patient subgroups, contribute to more optimal drug selection strategies, and detect biomarkers in association with headache features or predicting treatment efficacy. In the future, the combined analysis of data of different biomarker modalities with machine learning algorithms may serve precision medicine in migraine treatment.

Utilization patterns, cardiovascular risk, and concomitant serotoninergic medications among triptan users between 2008 and 2018: A gender analysis in one Italian region, Tuscany

OBJECTIVE

To describe the pattern of triptan use by gender in Tuscany, Italy, focusing on special user populations in which evidence on triptan safety is still not conclusive.

BACKGROUND

Growing evidence supports the role of gender differences in migraine pathophysiology and treatment. However, gender impact on triptan real-word utilization has been poorly investigated.

METHODS

A retrospective, descriptive, cohort study was performed using the population-based Administrative Healthcare Database of Tuscany region (Italy). Subjects registered in the database on the January 1 of each year between 2008 and 2018 were identified. New users (NU) of triptans (ATC:N02CC*) were patients with one or more triptan dispensation during the year of interest and none in the past. Age, cardiovascular comorbidities representing an absolute or a possible contraindication to triptan utilization, concomitant serotonergic medications, and pattern of triptan use during 1-year follow-up were described by gender.

RESULTS

A total of 86,109 patients who received one or more triptan dispensing were identified. Of 64,672 NU (men = 17,039; women = 47,633), 10.2% (6823/64,672) were aged >65 years, who were mostly women (n = 4613). Among NU, men and women with absolute cardiovascular contraindications were 4.3% (740/17,039) and 2.1% (1022/47,633), respectively, while those concomitantly taking serotonergic medications were 17.2% (267/1549) and 21.9% (949/4330), respectively (949/4330). Regular users (two or more dispensing with ≥3 months between first and last observed dispensing) accounted for 26.4% of women (12,597/47,633) and 19.11% of men (3250/17,039); frequent users (≥15 dosage units/month during ≥3 consecutive months) were overall 0.1% (94/64,672) and 62.0% (58/94) of them concomitantly received serotonergic medications.

CONCLUSION

Considering gender differences in triptan use highlighted here, large scale observational studies are warranted to better define what populations are safe to use triptans and whether it is appropriate to tighten or relax certain recommendations on triptan use. In the meantime, any suspected adverse drug reaction observed in the special user populations highlighted in this study should be promptly reported.

"The Triptan's Hangover": A Multicentric Cross-sectional Observational Study of the Adverse Events of Triptans in Patients With Migraine

ABSTRACT

The emergence of triptans represented a breakthrough in the treatment of migraine, but in clinical practice, patients describe symptoms that resemble those of a hangover after taking them. We propose the use of the Hangover Symptoms Scale (HSS) to evaluate this syndrome in patients that take triptans, which may help identify patients at higher risk of presenting these adverse effects that may interfere with therapeutic compliance.A cross-sectional observational pilot study with prospective data collection through a clinical-demographic questionnaire and the HSS was carried out on patients with migraine treated in headache units in 3 tertiary hospitals in Madrid.Sixty-six patients were included in the study. The median HSS was 4 and all symptoms were present in at least 15% of the patients, with difficulty to concentrate being the most frequent (57.6%). No significant differences were found between the presence of a higher HSS score and the sociodemographic characteristics of the patient or his migraine. The presence of aura was associated with a higher percentage of trembling (P = 0.029) and fatigue (nonvisual, polymodal auras; P = 0.017).According to our study, triptans are responsible for a set of symptoms overlapping with those that occur during a hangover. Therefore, we propose that the HSS could be a useful tool for the evaluation and quantification of these effects in patients receiving triptans. In addition, we found that clinical features could be more frequently associated with the appearance of these adverse effects that, however, are not related to any particular patient profile.

A Framework for Estimating the Eligible Patient Population for New Migraine Acute Therapies in the United States

Introduction

Migraine is associated with considerable disability for patients not adequately managed with current standards of care. New acute therapies may offer relief for this population of patients; however, population size and associated potential costs of new therapies are unclear. In this study, a conceptual framework was developed to estimate anticipated use of new acute therapies.

Methods

Targeted literature review (TLR) was conducted to identify factors affecting access to migraine-specific acute therapies, and characteristics of individuals who would be eligible for new acute therapies. Findings from the TLR were combined to create a framework for estimating the size of the eligible patient population. This framework was used to calculate two estimates of the eligible patient population by applying parameters (i) identified in the TLR and (ii) from a recent budget-impact analysis (BIA).

Results

The primary factors affecting access to migraine-specific acute therapies identified in the TLR were consulting a healthcare professional for headache, receiving a migraine diagnosis, and receiving a prescription for migraine-specific treatment. Characteristics of individuals likely to use new acute therapies reflected in the TLR were contraindication to triptans, or failure to respond to/tolerate at least two oral triptans. Application of the framework suggested that 15–25% of individuals with migraine would be eligible for new acute therapies.

Conclusion

A limited number of patients currently use migraine-specific acute therapies. Among such patients, a significant proportion do not have adequate symptom control. Accordingly, a minority of individuals with migraine may be expected to use new acute therapies. The framework developed in this study is intended to facilitate estimating the eligible patient population in assessments of costs of new acute therapies. Such assessments should also consider recommendations that patients have access to multiple types of acute therapies, which may yield savings from reduced medication-overuse headache (MOH), progression to chronic migraine, and urgent-care costs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01781-z.

Emerging Treatment Options for Migraine

Migraine is one of top 5 medical conditions that contribute to Years Lived with Disability and affects approximately 1 billion people from around the world. To date, preventive treatment and acute therapies for migraine are limited, have undesirable side effects and are poorly tolerated in patients. In the last few decades, considerable advances in our understanding of migraine and its pathophysiology have paved the way for the development of targeted treatment options. Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) plays an integral role in the neurobiology of migraine, and new classes of drugs that target the CGRP pathway have included gepants and CGRP pathway monoclonal antibodies. Serotonin 5-HT1F receptor agonists—namely ditans—have also been developed to treat acute migraine. Lastly, non-invasive neuromodulation offers another treatment option for migraine patients who prefer treatments that have fewer side effects and are well tolerated. In this review, we discussed emerging treatment options for migraine that were made available in recent years. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2020;49:226–35 Key words: Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibody, Gepants, Headache, Lasmiditan, Neuromodulation

Aspirin in the Treatment and Prevention of Migraine Headaches: Possible Additional Clinical Options for Primary Healthcare Providers

Migraine headaches are among the most common and potentially debilitating disorders encountered by primary healthcare providers. In the treatment of acute migraine and the prevention of recurrent attacks, there are prescription drugs of proven benefit. However, for those without health insurance or high co-pays, these drugs may be neither available nor affordable and, for all patients, they may be either poorly tolerated or contraindicated. The totality of evidence, which includes data from randomized trials, suggests that high-dose aspirin, in doses from 900 to 1300 mg, taken at the onset of symptoms, is an effective and safe treatment option for acute migraine headaches. In addition, the totality of evidence, including some, but not all, randomized trials, suggests the possibility that daily aspirin, in doses from 81 to 325 mg, may be an effective and safe treatment option for the prevention of recurrent migraine headaches. The relatively favorable side effect profile of aspirin and extremely low costs compared with other prescription drug therapies may provide additional options for primary healthcare providers in the treatment of both acute and recurrent migraine headaches.

Getting to the Heart of the Matter: Migraine, Triptans, DHE, Ditans, CGRP Antibodies, First/Second-Generation Gepants, and Cardiovascular Risk

PREMISE

The science of migraine pathophysiology has advanced significantly since the 1930's. Imaging techniques, neurochemical analysis, clinical trials, and the clinical experience of providers treating migraine patients have not only sharpened our understanding of the disease, but have also led to the development of novel neural-based targets. Targeted therapies such as calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antibodies and "Second Generation" CGRP receptor antagonists (Gepants) have not only demonstrated efficacy, but have not resulted in any significant cardiovascular nor other serious adverse events. "First Generation" Gepants were associated with liver toxicity.

PROBLEM

Triptans and dihydroergotamine (DHE) are contraindicated in patients with hemiplegic and basilar migraine based on theories of migraine pathophysiology from the 1930s. While our understanding of migraine has evolved substantially, perceived concerns of safety from almost a century ago continue to preclude their use in certain patient populations.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION

While migraine aura was once thought to be primarily due to vasoconstriction, current evidence debunks this concept. For instance, hemiplegic migraine is the consequence of genetic mutations resulting in channelopathies without evidence of cerebral ischemia or infarction. Evidence of basilar artery constriction as postulated in basilar migraine is also lacking. This recognition has led the International Headache Society to rename basilar-type migraine to migraine with brainstem aura. The following discussion reviews current literature with respect to migraine as a neuronal disorder, as well as the published data on the safety of triptans, DHE, Ditans (a novel class of 5-HT_1f receptor agonists), CGRP antibodies, and Gepants.

Migraine and Tension-Type Headache: Diagnosis and Treatment

Migraine and tension-type headache are highly prevalent. Migraine is associated with significant work- and family-related disability. Migraine is underdiagnosed; it reasonable to err on the side of migraine when choosing between primary headaches. Barriers to appropriate treatment of migraine include lack of access to providers, misdiagnosis, and acute and preventive therapies not being prescribed. Acute, rescue, and preventive treatment options are extensive, and new classes of treatments are either available or in development. This review addresses diagnostic challenges including recognizing migraine with aura. It also summarizes nonpharmacologic, acute, rescue, and preventive treatment options for migraine and treatment of tension-type headache.

Ischemic Colitis as a Complication of Medication Use: An Analysis of the Federal Adverse Event Reporting System

BACKGROUND

More than one decade ago, rising cases of ischemic colitis (IC) prompted the Federal Drug Administration to revoke alosetron's approval as treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The aim of this study was to identify medical therapies associated with development of IC.

METHODS

The Federal Adverse Event Reporting System was queried for the time between January 2004 and September 2015. We identified reports listing IC as treatment complication and extracted suspected causative and concomitantly administered drugs, indications for their use and outcomes.

RESULTS

After eliminating duplicates, we found 2811 cases of IC (68.4 % women; 59.4 ± 0.4 years). Patients with IBS accounted for 3.9 % of the cases, mostly attributed to tegaserod or alosetron. Chemotherapeutic and immunosuppressive drugs, sex hormones, and anticoagulants were the most commonly suspected causes. Bisphosphonates, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antipsychotics, triptans, interferon therapy, and laxative use prior to colonoscopy were among the more commonly listed treatments. In 8 %, the adverse event contributed to the patient's death with male sex and older age predicting fatal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Beyond confirming known risks of IC, the results identified several potential culprits of ischemic colitis. This information may not only explain the development of this serious adverse event, but could also guide treatment decisions, cautioning healthcare providers when considering these agents in persons with known risk factors or other drugs that may increase their risk of IC.

Safety, Tolerability and Pharmacokinetics of BIBN 4096 BS, the First Selective Small Molecule Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonist, Following Single Intravenous Administration in Healthy Volunteers

BIBN 4096 BS ([R-(R∗,S∗)]-N-[2-[[5-amino-1-[[4-(4-pyridinyl)-1-piperazinyl]carbonyl] pentyl]amino]-1-[(3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxyphenyl)methyl]-2-oxoethyl]-4-(1,4-dihydro-2-oxo-3(2H)-quinazolinyl)-,1-piperidinecarboxamide) is the first selective, highly potent, small molecule, nonpeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, which has been developed for the treatment of acute migraine. The objective of this study was to obtain information on the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of BIBN 4096 BS following single intravenous administration of rising doses (0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2.5, 5 and 10 mg) in 55 healthy male and female volunteers. The study was of single-centre, double-blind (within dose levels), placebo-controlled, randomized, single rising dose design. Blood pressure, pulse rate, respiratory rate, ECG, laboratory tests and forearm blood flow did not reveal any clinically relevant, drug-induced changes. Sixteen adverse events (AEs) were reported by eight of 41 volunteers after BIBN 4096 BS compared to five AEs reported by four of 14 volunteers after placebo. Approximately two-thirds of all AEs related to active treatment occurred at the highest dose of 10 mg. At this dose level, all AEs were confined to the three BIBN 4096 BS-treated females, and consisted mainly of transient and mild paresthesias. Paresthesias were the single most frequent AE, whereas fatigue was the AE which occurred in the highest number of subjects. Only two AEs were of moderate intensity, all remaining AEs were of mild intensity. No serious AEs were reported. The local tolerability after intravenous administration was good. In summary, intravenously administered BIBN 4096 BS revealed a very favourable safety profile over the dose range tested in both genders. Generally well tolerated at all dose levels, it was of satisfactory tolerability in female subjects at the highest dose of 10 mg. The plasma concentration-time courses of BIBN 4096 BS showed multicompartmental disposition characteristics. Mean maximum concentration (Cmax) values appeared to be dose-proportional. Based on the results from the two high dose levels (5 and 10 mg) with sufficient individual subject data, BIBN 4096 BS exhibited a total plasma clearance (CL) of approximately 12 l/h and an apparent volume of distribution at steady state (Vss) of approximately 20 l, resulting in a terminal half-life (t1/2) of approximately 2.5 h. Inter-individual variability was moderate with a coefficient of variation of approximately 45% based on the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) values. The mean renal clearance (CLR) was approximately 2 l/h, suggesting that renal excretion plays only a minor role in the elimination of unchanged BIBN 4096 BS.

A retrospective analysis of triptan and dhe use for basilar and hemiplegic migraine

BACKGROUND

Patients with basilar migraine (BM) and hemiplegic migraine (HM) have been excluded from triptan and DHE clinical trials due to a potential risk of ischemic vascular events, and the FDA mandates that package labeling state that they are contraindicated in BM and HM. The objective of this study was to demonstrate that triptans and DHE can be used for the abortive treatment of BM and HM without significant adverse ischemic vascular events.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients with BM features or HM who received acute abortive treatment with either triptans or DHE was conducted at 4 headache centers to assess the frequency of ischemic vascular events after administration. The diagnoses of BM or HM were made by headache specialists based on The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition (ICHD-II). Searchable terms included BM, vertigo, dysarthria, diplopia, hemiplegia/hemiparesis, facial droop, weakness, confusion, altered consciousness, confusion, ataxia, and aphasia, as well as all triptans or DHE.

RESULTS

The study included 67 patients with BM features and 13 patients with HM. Among those receiving triptans, 40 were in the BM group and 5 were in the HM group. Among those receiving DHE, 27 were included in the BM group and 8 were in the HM group. No side effects of stroke or myocardial infarction were reported. In the triptan group, 5 patients reported adverse effects that included GI upset, rash, neck dystonia, nightmares, and flushing. In the DHE group, 5 patients had adverse events that included chest tightness, dystonic reaction, transient asymptomatic anterior T wave inversion, and agitation.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, triptans and DHE were used with no reported, subsequent acute/subacute ischemic vascular events for the abortive treatment of migraines with basilar and hemiplegic-type features. Although the small sample sizes generated theoretical statistical event rates of 4.5% for BM and 23% for HM, there has been no clear evidence that BM and HM carry an actual elevated risk for vascular events compared with migraine with aura.

The pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of AVP-825: a potential advancement for acute treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

Oral triptans have dominated the prescription market for acute treatment of migraine for nearly 25 years. Today, patients often express dissatisfaction with prescribed acute treatment in part because they do not have confidence that the therapy will provide consistent efficacy over time. Major limitations to sustained successful use of oral triptans are their relatively slow onset of meaningful clinical benefit and variable absorption/efficacy due to impaired gastrointestinal function during migraine. AVP-825, a new intranasal delivery system for sumatriptan , may be an effective alternative to oral triptans.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews AVP-825, which deposits low-dose sumatriptan powder deep into the vascular mucosa of the posterior nose, allowing rapid absorption of drug into the systemic circulation. Studies suggest that AVP-825 is a highly effective, well-tolerated acute treatment for episodic migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

Oral triptans are limited in providing effective patient-centered outcomes to migraine patients. Failed or suboptimal abortive treatment of migraine is a major driver of migraine chronification and increases in healthcare costs. AVP-825 is an easy to use, novel, breath-powered intranasal delivery system that provides early onset of efficacy with low systemic drug exposure and few triptan-associated adverse events. AVP-825 will be a welcomed therapeutic tool for the acute treatment of migraine.

Triptan safety during pregnancy: a Norwegian population registry study

Knowledge on triptan safety during pregnancy remains limited to their class effect or studies on sumatriptan. Our aim was to evaluate the individual effect of four most frequently used triptans on several pregnancy outcomes. We used the Norwegian prescription database to access information on triptans redeemed by pregnant women living in Norway between 2004 and 2007. This database was linked to the Medical Birth Registry of Norway covering every institutional delivery in Norway and providing information on pregnancy, delivery, maternal and neonatal health. Estimates of associations with pregnancy outcomes were obtained by Generalised Estimation Equations analysis. Of the 181,125 women in our study, 1,465 (0.8%) redeemed triptans during pregnancy, and 1,095 (0.6%) redeemed triptans before pregnancy only (disease comparison group). The population comparison group comprised the remaining 178,565 women. Using this group as reference, we found no associations between triptan redemption during pregnancy and congenital malformations. Second trimester redemption was associated with postpartum haemorrhage (adjusted OR 1.57; 95% CI 1.19-2.07). The disease comparison group had an increased risk of major congenital malformations (adjusted OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.11-1.97), low birth weight (adjusted OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.08-1.81), and preterm birth (adjusted OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.06-1.60). The association of triptans with postpartum hemorrhage could be attributable to decreased platelet agreeability occurring in severe migraine. Likewise, the increased risk of major congenital malformations and other adverse pregnancy outcomes in the disease comparison group might be attributable to migraine severity.

Subcutaneous delivery of sumatriptan in the treatment of migraine and primary headache

Subcutaneous sumatriptan is an effective treatment for pain from acute migraine headache, and can be used in patients with known migraine syndrome and in patients with primary headaches when secondary causes have been excluded. In limited comparative trials, subcutaneous sumatriptan performed in a manner comparable with oral eletriptan and intravenous metoclopramide, was superior to intravenous aspirin and intramuscular trimethobenzamide-diphenhydramine, and was inferior to intravenous prochlorperazine for pain relief. The most common side effects seen with subcutaneous sumatriptan are injection site reactions and triptan sensations. As with all triptans, there is a risk of rare cardiovascular events with subcutaneous sumatriptan and its use should be limited to those without known cerebrovascular disease and limited in those with known cardiovascular risk factors and unknown disease status. In studies of patient preference and tolerability, the subcutaneous formulation has a faster time of onset and high rate of efficacy when compared with the oral formulation, but the oral formulation appears to be better tolerated. It is important to consider the needs of the patient, their past medical history, and what aspects of migraine treatment are most important to the patient when considering treatment of acute migraine or primary headache. Subcutaneous sumatriptan is a good first-line agent for the treatment of pain from acute migraine headaches and primary headaches.

Current and emerging treatment options for migraine and other primary headache disorders

Primary headache disorders are highly prevalent worldwide. The impact of primary headaches to the individual is significant and reflects physical suffering and decreased social and occupational functioning. The economic burden to society is enormous and represents direct healthcare costs and the indirect costs associated with decreased workplace productivity and work absences. The last decade has witnessed tremendous advances both in our understanding of the biology of headache and in our therapeutic armamentarium. This review outlines how these developments may be rationally implemented by highlighting individual treatment options and general treatment strategies. The state-of-the-art methods for the abortive and prophylactic treatment of tension-type headache, migraine and cluster headache are reviewed.

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

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

Tolerability of Acute Migraine Medications: Influence of Methods of Assessment and Relationship With Headache Attributes

Tolerability is an important attribute of patient satisfaction with, and consequence adherence to, migraine acute treatment. Nevertheless, the determinants of tolerability are poorly explored. Accordingly, our objectives were: (i) in subjects receiving triptans, to contrast two methods of assessing adverse events (AEs); and (ii) to explore the relationship between migraine features and treatment attributes with tolerability. We surveyed 365 migraineurs who had been using the same triptan for at least 3 months. After prospectively treating an attack, headache characteristics and treatment response were assessed using headache calendars. Subjects also completed a standardized questionnaire, first asking about any AE and then prompting patients with a list of possible AEs. We contrasted both sets of answers and conducted logistic regression to assess if headache attributes or response to therapy influenced tolerability. Using the unprompted method, AEs occurred in 11.5-36.4± of patients, depending on the triptan used. Using the prompted method, they ranged from 26.9 to 64.3±. Chest and neck tightness were spontaneously reported by 3.5± of the sample, vs. 7.4± when prompted ( P< 0.05). Chest pain was not spontaneously reported and was elicited in nine patients (2.5±, P = 0.002). Feeling groggy occurred in 5.7 and 17.5± ( P< 0.001). AEs were not a function of headache severity, disability, efficacy of the drug, time to meaningful relief with the drug or recurrence of pain. The report of AEs varies dramatically with the methods of assessment. However, tolerability is not influenced by the severity of the attacks or by medication efficacy.

Triptans in pregnancy

The triptans are a class of tryptamine-based drugs indicated for in the treatment of migraine headaches. The triptans act as serotonin (5-hydroxytriptamine) (5-HT) agonists by binding to various serotonin receptors, causing vasoconstriction and neuronal inhibition to alleviate migraines. There are 7 types of triptans currently available on the U.S. market: almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan and zolmitriptan. The objective of this study was to examine the use and effects of triptans in pregnancy. Although three of the triptans have pregnancy registries maintained by the manufacturer, triptan use in pregnancy has not been extensively studied. Information on the use of sumatriptan during pregnancy is relatively more abundant, because it has been on the market longer than the other triptans and may also have a higher percentage of the market share. There are no data to suggest teratogenicity for any of the triptans, although preterm birth rates appear to be elevated.

Temporary confusion depending on the usage of naratriptan

In this report, a case with vitamin B12 deficiency showing a temporary confusion depending on the usage of naratriptan during the migraine attack was presented.

Treatment of hemiplegic migraine with triptans

The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of triptans in patients who suffer from familial or sporadic hemiplegic migraine. Seventy-six subjects had used triptans at least once as an abortive treatment. Average triptan response was 6.9 (SD +/-3.1) and adverse event severity 4.9 (SD +/-3.3) on a scale from 0 to 10 (no response or side effect 0, excellent response or unbearable side effects 10). None of the patients had an ischaemic stroke or a heart attack. One patient reported prolonged neurological symptoms, related to a single dose of rizatriptan, but there were no pathological findings in several MRI-scans. Triptans seem to be safe and effective treatment for most hemiplegic migraine patients.

Use of the sustained pain-free plus no adverse events endpoint in clinical trials of triptans in acute migraine

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship between the sustained pain free (SPF) and adverse event (AE) rates associated with six oral serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists (triptans) used for the treatment of acute migraine, employing data from a previous meta-analysis (that included almotriptan, eletriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan and zolmitriptan, but not frovatriptan) in order to provide a rationale for the use of the rate of patients who are SPF plus no AE (SNAE) as an endpoint in trials of medications for acute migraine.

BACKGROUND

The attributes of drug treatment for acute migraine that are most important to people who experience them are complete pain relief, lack of recurrence, rapid onset and lack of AEs. The endpoints used to assess therapy for acute migraine do not always address these elements.

METHODS

The relationship between SPF and AE rates was explored using nonparametric regression techniques, and the box-plot method was used to identify outliers. The estimated SNAE rate for each triptan was calculated with and without assuming independence between efficacy and tolerability.

RESULTS

At the level of the individual agent, there was a significant relationship between the efficacy and tolerability of each triptan, with the exception of almotriptan 12.5 mg, which had an AE rate approximately 30% lower than would be expected, and eletriptan 20 mg, which had an AE rate approximately 20% higher than would be expected, on the basis of their efficacy. Almotriptan 12.5 mg and eletriptan 20 mg had the highest and lowest base-case values for SNAE, respectively, and both qualified statistically as outliers to the distribution of SNAE values obtained with the other triptans. The probability that each triptan was superior to the reference agent (sumatriptan 100 mg) in terms of SNAE was calculated across all possible values (at the level of the individual patient) for the relationship between efficacy and tolerability. Again, almotriptan 12.5 mg and eletriptan 20 mg had the highest and lowest values for their SNAE rates, respectively, and almotriptan 12.5 mg qualified statistically as an outlier from the distribution of the probabilities obtained for the other triptans.

CONCLUSION

This analysis determined that higher SPF rates were strongly associated with higher AE rates, with the notable exception of almotriptan 12.5 mg, which had a lower than expected AE rate, resulting in the highest SNAE rate of the included triptans and doses. SNAE is a useful measure that can be used to discriminate between therapies and this endpoint incorporates the attributes that are most relevant to patient satisfaction with treatment. We recommend calculation of the SNAE rate at the level of the individual patient in future clinical trials of medication for the treatment of acute migraine to facilitate selection of a treatment for acute migraine that offers the best chance for effective management.

Crossover, double-blind clinical trial comparing almotriptan and ergotamine plus caffeine for acute migraine therapy

In this randomized, double-blind, crossover clinical trial, adult patients treated two migraine attacks: one with almotriptan 12.5 mg and the other with ergotamine 2 mg plus caffeine 200 mg. Treatment with almotriptan was associated with a significantly greater proportion of patients achieving 2-h pain free (20.9% vs. 13.7%; P < 0.05) and 2-h pain relief (57.7% vs. 44.5%; P < 0.01) compared with ergotamine plus caffeine therapy; significant differences were not seen at 1 h. Rates for sustained pain free and sustained pain free plus no adverse events (AEs) also were significantly greater after almotriptan treatment than after the use of ergotamine plus caffeine (P < 0.05). Almotriptan was associated with a significantly lower rate of photophobia at 90 min (P < 0.05), phonophobia at 60, 90, and 120 min (P < 0.05 to <0.01), and nausea and vomiting at 90 and 120 min (P < 0.01) compared with ergotamine plus caffeine. A significantly greater proportion of patients were more satisfied with almotriptan than with ergotamine plus caffeine (P < 0.05). Sixteen patients reported adverse events during almotriptan treatment and 27 patients reported AEs during the ergotamine plus caffeine therapy. Most AEs were mild-to-moderate and did not result in treatment-related discontinuations. In conclusion, almotriptan was associated with significantly greater efficacy for treating migraine compared with ergotamine plus caffeine, was generally well tolerated and was associated with greater rate of treatment satisfaction.

Migraine treatment throughout the lifecycle

The treatment of migraine headache is often suboptimal despite significant advances in our understanding of the pathophysiology and treatment of migraine. Children, adolescents, women and the elderly are particularly at risk of receiving inadequate or inappropriate therapy. In this review, the reader is brought up-to-date with changes to the International Headache Society diagnostic criteria for migraine. The pathophysiology of migraine is also reviewed, with a special emphasis on the evolving concept of central sensitization and cutaneous allodynia since this concept has led to a paradigm shift in the way migraines are managed. A review of the evidence supporting the benefits of early treatment before pain becomes moderate-to-severe is provided. Recommendations for acute and prophylactic treatments throughout the lifecycle are made in light of clinical practice guidelines and more recent evidence. Lastly, the current optimal treatment of migraine is provided and the potential role of calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists in the future is discussed.

An otolaryngology, neurology, allergy, and primary care consensus on diagnosis and treatment of sinus headache

While "sinus" headache is a widely accepted clinical diagnosis, many medical specialists consider it to be an uncommon cause of recurrent headaches. Unnecessary diagnostic studies, surgical interventions, and medical treatments are often the result of the inappropriate diagnosis of sinus headache. Both the International Headache Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery have attempted to characterize conditions leading to headaches of rhinogenic origin. However, they have done so from different perspectives and in isolation from the other specialty groups. An interdisciplinary ad hoc committee recently convened to discuss the role of sinus disease and the nose in the etiology of headache and to review recent epidemiologic studies suggesting that sinus headache (headache of rhinogenic origin) and migraine are frequently confused with one another. Clinical trial data are presented which clearly indicate that the majority of sinus headaches can actually be classified as migraines. This committee reviewed scientific evidence available from multiple disciplines and concludes that considerable research and clinical study are needed to further understand and explain the role of nasal pathology and autonomic activation in migraine and headaches of rhinogenic origin. However, there was a consensus from this group that greater diagnostic and therapeutic attention needs to be given to patients complaining of sinus headache that may indeed be due to the nose.

Focus on trial endpoints of clinical relevance and the use of almotriptan for the acute treatment of migraine

Almotriptan is a 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist, or triptan, indicated for the acute treatment of migraine. It has been shown to be effective and well tolerated for the treatment of acute migraine in approximately 5000 patients enrolled in short-term placebo- and active-controlled trials and long-term open-label trials. A recent meta-analysis reported that almotriptan has the highest sustained pain-free (SPF) rate and lowest adverse-event (AE) rate of all oral triptans. Sustained pain free is a composite endpoint of pain freedom at 2 h, no recurrence of moderate-to-severe headache and no use of rescue medication from 2 to 24 h after dosing. Patient surveys have indicated that migraine sufferers consider complete pain relief, no recurrence, rapid onset and no side-effects to be the most important attributes of their acute treatment. Composite endpoints such as SPF and SPF with no AEs (SNAE) contain the attributes that migraine sufferers express as being the most important elements of an acute migraine therapy, and their use in future clinical trials should aid in the selection of agents that can offer patients the highest likelihood of consistent treatment success.

Sinus headache: a neurology, otolaryngology, allergy, and primary care consensus on diagnosis and treatment

Sinus headache is a widely accepted clinical diagnosis, although many medical specialists consider it an uncommon cause of recurrent headaches. The inappropriate diagnosis of sinus headache can lead to unnecessary diagnostic studies, surgical interventions, and medical treatments. Both the International Headache Society and the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery have attempted to define conditions that lead to headaches of rhinogenic origin but have done so from different perspectives and in isolation of each other. An interdisciplinary ad hoc committee convened to discuss the role of sinus disease as a cause of headache and to review recent epidemiological studies that suggest sinus headache (headache of rhinogenic origin) and migraine are frequently confused with one another. This committee reviewed available scientific evidence from multiple disciplines and concluded that considerable research and clinical study are required to further understand and delineate the role of nasal pathology and autonomic activation in migraine and headaches of rhinogenic origin. However, this group agreed that greater diagnostic and therapeutic attention needs to be given to patients with sinus headaches.

Evaluating the safety and tolerability profile of acute treatments for migraine

Among the medications that have been used as acute treatments for migraine are nonspecific agents, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), analgesics (either single or combination), and narcotics, as well as migraine-specific medications, including ergot alkaloids and triptans (5-hydroxytryptamine 1B/1D agonists). All of these drugs have side effects that vary in type and severity. Side effects of nonspecific medications, including gastrointestinal (GI) and renal effects with NSAIDs and cognitive effects and the potential for abuse with narcotics and butalbital-containing medications, have been documented over time, as these medications have been used for various indications. Side effects of the migraine-specific medications include GI and vascular symptoms with the ergots; for the triptans, they include chest and neurologic symptoms. Although adverse events are reported fairly frequently in patients receiving triptans, they are usually mild, and few patients discontinue therapy because of them. The most serious adverse events are cardiovascular. Because of potential vasoconstrictor effects--mild and transient increases in blood pressure and mild and transient effects on coronary artery tone--triptans as a class are contraindicated in patients with established or clinically suspected cardiovascular disease, specifically ischemic heart disease and uncontrolled hypertension. Other adverse events, including the potential for drug-drug interactions, are less common. Therefore, consideration should be given to the tolerability and safety of medications before their use as abortive medications for the treatment of migraine headache.

Octreotide is not effective in the acute treatment of migraine

The aim of this study was to determine whether subcutaneous octreotide is effective for the treatment of acute migraine. Patients with migraine with and without aura as classified by the International Headache Society were recruited to a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study. Patients were instructed to treat two attacks of at least moderate pain severity, with at least a 7 day interval, using subcutaneous 100 microg octreotide or matching placebo. The primary endpoint was the headache response defined as: severe or moderate pain becomes mild or nil, at 2 h. The primary endpoint was analysed using a Multilevel Analysis approach. Secondary end-points included associated symptoms and a four-point functional disability score. The study was powered to detect a 30% difference at an alpha of 0.05 and a beta of 0.8. A total of 51 patients were recruited, of whom 42 provided efficacy data on an attack treated with octreotide and 41 with placebo. Modelling the headache response as a binomial determined by treatment, using the patient as the level 2 variable, and considering a possible period effect, and sex and migraine type as other variables of interest, subcutaneous octreotide was not significantly superior to placebo. The two hour headache response rates were 20% for placebo and 14% for octreotide, whilst the two hour pain free rates were 7% and 2%, respectively. Subcutaneous octreotide 100 microg is not effective in the acute treatment of migraine when compared to placebo.

Efficacy of candesartan in the treatment of migraine in hypertensive patients

Triptans are usually administered for migraine, but cannot be given to patients with malfunctioning cardiac or cerebral vascular systems, which commonly accompany hypertension. This article focuses on 8 cases in which treatment with candesartan was successful in reducing both the incidence and severity of headache in hypertensive patients with migraine. The cases reported in this article showed a mean improvement in Migraine Disability Assessment score from 29.4 to 9 points and in blood pressure from 154.9/90.4 to 129.5/81.9mmHg, suggesting that candesartan is an extremely attractive option for the treatment of migraine. Although recent studies have reported the efficacy of candesartan for treating migraine, there has been no description of its potential advantages over other prophylactic drugs. The present study included patients who could not tolerate triptans for whom triptans were contraindicated, several patients for whom other migraine prophylactic drugs showed little or no effect, and one patient for whom candesartan was prescribed initially for hypertension, but was also found to be therapeutic for migraines. Thus candesartan is considered to be a unique, attractive choice of prophylactic agent for migraine complicated by hypertension.

Treatment of migraine headaches with sumatriptan in pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature for treatment of migraine headaches with sumatriptan during pregnancy.

DATA SOURCES

Studies and reports were located in International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-September 2003) and MEDLINE (1966-week 3 September 2003).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Research has been performed to evaluate the risk of teratogenesis after sumatriptan exposure in pregnant patients. Data have been collected in areas including placental transmission of sumatriptan, prospective pregnancy registries, open-labeled and controlled prospective studies, and a retrospective prescription-linked study. As of August 6, 2004, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted with exposure to sumatriptan during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Teratogenesis occurs in approximately 150 000 births per year which represents an incidence of 3-5%. Available literature to date indicates that exposure to sumatriptan during pregnancy has no additional risk of birth defects compared with the incidence in the general population.