Comparative efficacy of eletriptan vs. naratriptan in the acute treatment of migraine

This was a randomized, double-blind study designed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of the 40-mg dose of eletriptan and the 2.5-mg dose of naratriptan. Patients (n = 548) meeting International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for migraine were randomized to treat a single migraine attack with either eletriptan 40 mg, naratriptan 2.5 mg, or placebo. Headache response rates at 2 h and 4 h, respectively, were 56% and 80% for eletriptan, 42% and 67% for naratriptan (P < 0.01 for both time-points vs. eletriptan), and 31% and 44% for placebo (P < 0.0001 vs. both active drugs at both time-points). Eletriptan also showed a significantly greater pain-free response at 2 h (35% vs. 18%; P < 0.001) as well as lower use of rescue medication (15% vs. 27%; P < 0.01) and higher sustained headache response at 24 h (38%) compared with naratriptan (27%; P < 0.05) and placebo (19%; P < 0.01). Both eletriptan and naratriptan were well tolerated. The results confirm previous meta-analyses that have suggested the superiority of eletriptan vs. naratriptan in the acute treatment of migraine.     

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

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy, consistency, safety, and tolerability of oral eletriptan in the acute treatment of three migraine attacks. BACKGROUND: Eletriptan is a selective 5-HT1B/1D agonist member of a class of agents known to be effective in the acute treatment of migraine. METHODS: Thirteen hundred thirty-four patients were randomized to 20 mg, 40 mg, or 80 mg of eletriptan, or placebo and could treat up to three attacks. The primary efficacy endpoint was 2-hour headache response for the first attack. Secondary endpoints included associated symptom relief, and pain-free, sustained pain-free, and consistency of response. RESULTS: Eletriptan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg achieved significantly (P <.0001) better headache response rates than placebo at 2 hours (47%, 62%, and 59%, respectively, versus 22%) and 4 hours (64%, 76%, and 79%, respectively, versus 25%). Headache response was observed to be rapid, showing improvement at 0.5 hour and 1 hour. Two-hour pain-free response rates for eletriptan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg were 14%, 27%, and 27%, respectively, compared with 4% for placebo. Sustained pain-free response rates were significantly (P <.001) better for eletriptan 20 mg (10%), 40 mg (20%), and 80 mg (18%) compared with placebo (3%). Eletriptan had a higher consistency of intrapatient response than placebo in two of three (68% to 82%) and three of three attacks (32% to 60%) versus 16% and 8%, respectively. All eletriptan doses yielded significant functional improvement at 2 hours. Adverse events were generally mild or moderate and transient, with eletriptan 20 mg having an adverse event profile comparable to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Eletriptan is efficacious, displaying high consistency of response over multiple attacks, and is well tolerated for the acute treatment of migraine.     

Eletriptan for the treatment of migraine in patients with previous poor response or tolerance to oral sumatriptan

To determine the tolerability and efficacy of eletriptan in patients who had discontinued oral sumatriptan due to lack of efficacy or intolerable adverse events (AEs) during previous clinical treatment (not a controlled trial). Eletriptan is a potent, selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonist with beneficial pharmacokinetic properties compared with sumatriptan. In a double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled multicentre study, patients with and without aura (n = 446) were randomized to 40 mg eletriptan (E40, n = 188), 80 mg eletriptan (E80, n = 171) or placebo (n = 87) for treatment of up to three migraine attacks. Two-hour headache response, based on first-dose, first-attack data, was 59% for eletriptan 40 mg, 70% for eletriptan 80 mg, and 30% for placebo (P < 0.0001 for both doses of eletriptan vs. PBO; P < 0.05 for E80 vs. E40). Onset of action was rapid, with 1-h headache response rates significantly superior for E40 and E80 vs. placebo (40%, 48%, 15%; P < 0.0005). Both E40 and E80 were significantly superior to placebo, based on first-dose, first-attack data, for 2-h pain-free response (35%, 42%, and 7%; P < 0.0001). Both E40 and E80 demonstrated significant consistency of response, with headache relief rates at 2 h on at least two of three attacks in 66% and 72% vs. 15% on placebo (P < 0.001). AEs were mild to moderate in severity and dose related. The most commonly reported AEs included nausea, vomiting, asthenia, and chest symptoms. E40 and E80 produce an effective response in patients who had previously discontinued treatment with sumatriptan due to lack of efficacy or side-effects.     

Eletriptan in the early treatment of acute migraine: influence of pain intensity and time of dosing

This double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of early treatment of a single migraine attack, when headache pain was mild, with two doses (20 mg and 40 mg) of eletriptan. Patients (N = 613; female 79%; mean age 39 years) meeting International Headache Society criteria for migraine were encouraged, but not required, to utilize early treatment, thus providing an opportunity to assess the relative contribution to efficacy of pain severity and timing of dose. For the total patient sample (mild-to-severe headaches), 2-h pain-free rates were significantly higher than placebo (22%) on both eletriptan 20 mg (35%; P < 0.01) and eletriptan 40 mg (47%; P < 0.0001). For the cohort of patients who treated their headache when the pain intensity was mild, the 2-h pain-free rate on eletriptan 40 mg was 68% compared with 25% on placebo (P < 0.0001). Pain intensity at the time of taking eletriptan appeared to influence outcome more than the timing of the dose relative to headache onset. Eletriptan was well-tolerated, with adverse event rates similar to placebo when mild headaches were treated.     

Eletriptan for the acute treatment of migraine in adolescents: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Eletriptan is a potent 5-HT(1B/1D) agonist with proven efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine in adults. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of eletriptan 40 mg versus placebo in adolescent patients (aged 12-17). METHODS: A multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial was conducted comparing 40 mg of oral eletriptan with placebo for the treatment of migraine in adolescent patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was 2-hour headache response, and a number of secondary endpoints were also evaluated. An exploratory analysis evaluated which clinical and demographic characteristics might be correlated with high placebo response. RESULTS: Of 274 patients who treated a migraine attack, 267 were evaluated for efficacy (n = 138 eletriptan; n = 129 placebo) at 2 hours post-dose. There was no significant difference in 2-hour headache response for eletriptan 40 mg versus placebo (57% vs 57%), and no significant improvements were observed for any of the outcomes at 1 or 2 hours post-dose. By contrast, there was a significant advantage for eletriptan 40 mg in reducing headache recurrence within 24 hours post-dose (11% vs 25%, P= .028), and post hoc analyses showed statistically significant differences for sustained headache response rates (52% vs 39%; P= .04) and sustained pain-free response rates (22% vs 10%; P= .013). The strongest clinical predictor of placebo response was triptan-na?ve status (i.e., no previous use of any triptan). Eletriptan 40 mg was well tolerated in this population, and the profile of adverse events was similar to that observed in Phase III trials in adult patients. CONCLUSIONS: The high placebo response rates reported here for 1- and 2-hour outcomes are in accordance with other studies of triptans in adolescent patients. The evaluation of treatment effect in adolescent migraine might benefit from use of more stringent outcome measures, such as headache recurrence, sustained headache response, and sustained pain-free response at 24 hours post-dose.     

Comparative efficacy of eletriptan 40 mg versus sumatriptan 100 mg

OBJECTIVE: To confirm the efficacy advantage of eletriptan 40 mg over sumatriptan 100 mg. Background.-Eletriptan 80 mg has demonstrated significantly greater efficacy when compared to both sumatriptan 50 mg and 100 mg in two studies. Eletriptan 40 mg demonstrated significantly greater efficacy than sumatriptan 100 mg in one previous trial. METHODS: Two thousand one hundred thirteen patients with a diagnosis of migraine according to International Headache Society criteria were randomized using a double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group design, and treated for a single migraine attack with either eletriptan 40 mg, sumatriptan 100 mg, or placebo. The primary endpoint was 2-hour headache response. Secondary endpoints included headache response rates at 1 hour, pain-free rates, absence of associated symptoms, functional response at 1 and 2 hours, and sustained headache response. RESULTS: Headache response rates at 2 hours postdose were significantly higher for eletriptan 40 mg (67%) than for sumatriptan 100 mg (59%; P <.001) and placebo (26%; P <.0001). Eletriptan 40 mg consistently showed significant (P <.01) efficacy over sumatriptan 100 mg across secondary clinical outcomes, including 1-hour headache response; 2-hour pain-free response; absence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia; functional improvement; use of rescue medication; treatment acceptability; and sustained headache response (P <.05). Overall, treatment-related adverse events were low, nausea being the only adverse event with an incidence of 2% or higher (4.9% with eletriptan, 4.2% sumatriptan, 2.8% placebo). CONCLUSION: This trial confirmed that eletriptan 40 mg offers superior efficacy in treating migraine pain and associated symptoms and in restoring patient functioning when compared with sumatriptan 100 mg.     

Efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral eletriptan in the acute treatment of migraine: results of a phase III, multicentre, placebo-controlled study across three attacks

The efficacy, safety and tolerability of the 5-HT1B/D receptor agonist eletriptan (40 mg and 80 mg) in acute treatment of migraine was evaluated in a multinational, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, three-attack study treating 1153 patients. In the initial attack, significantly more eletriptan patients reported headache relief and complete pain relief at 2 h vs. placebo (40 mg 62% and 32%, 80 mg 65% and 34%, placebo 19% and 3%; P < 0.0001). Headache relief occurred faster after eletriptan, with more patients at both doses reporting relief 30 min (P < 0.01) and 1 h (P < 0.0001) after treatment than after placebo. There was a significantly lower recurrence rate with eletriptan 80 mg compared with placebo (P < 0.01). Adverse events for all treatments were generally mild or moderate and self-limiting. Eletriptan 40 mg and eletriptan 80 mg both appear to be effective and well-tolerated acute migraine treatments.     

Comparative efficacy of eletriptan and zolmitriptan in the acute treatment of migraine

Eletriptan 40 mg and 80 mg have shown greater efficacy in acute migraine than oral sumatriptan 100 mg and naratriptan 2.5 mg. This study continues the systematic series of active comparator trials in the eletriptan clinical development programme. In a multicentre double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-groups trial, 1587 outpatients with migraine by IHS criteria were randomised in a 3: 3 : 3: 1 ratio to eletriptan 80 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, zolmitriptan 2.5 mg or placebo. Of these, 1312 treated a single migraine attack and recorded baseline and outcome data to be included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary analysis was between eletriptan 80 mg and zolmitriptan. For the primary efficacy end-point of 2-h headache response, rates were 74% on eletriptan 80 mg, 64% on eletriptan 40 mg, 60% on zolmitriptan (P < 0.0001 vs. eletriptan 80 mg) and 22% on placebo (P < 0.0001 vs. all active treatments). Eletriptan 80 mg was superior to zolmitriptan on all secondary end-points at 1, 2 and 24 h, in most cases with statistical significance. Eletriptan 40 mg had similar efficacy to zolmitriptan 2.5 mg in earlier end-points, and significantly (P < 0.05) lower recurrence rate and need for rescue medication over 24 h. All treatments were well tolerated; 30-42% of patients on active treatments and 40% on placebo reported all-causality adverse events that were mostly mild and transient. On patients' global ratings of treatment, both eletriptan doses scored significantly better than zolmitriptan.     

ELETRIPTAN VERSUS COMPETITORS

Eletriptan 40 mg and 80 mg have shown greater efficacy in acute migraine than oral sumatriptan 100 mg and naratriptan 2.5 mg. This study continues the systematic series of active comparator trials in the eletriptan clinical development programme. In a multicentre double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-groups trial, 1587 outpatients with migraine by IHS criteria were randomised in a 3:3:3:1 ratio to eletriptan 80 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, zolmitriptan 2.5 mg or placebo. Of these, 1312 treated a single migraine attack and recorded baseline and outcome data to be included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary analysis was between eletriptan 80 mg and zolmitriptan. For the primary efficacy end-point of 2-h headache response, rates were 74% on eletriptan 80 mg, 64% on eletriptan 40 mg, 60% on zolmitriptan ( P < 0.0001 vs. eletriptan 80 mg) and 22% on placebo ( P < 0.0001 vs. all active treatments). Eletriptan 80 mg was superior to zolmitriptan on all secondary end-points at 1, 2 and 24 h, in most cases with statistical significance. Eletriptan 40 mg had similar efficacy to zolmitriptan 2.5 mg in earlier end-points, and significantly ( P < 0.05) lower recurrence rate and need for rescue medication over 24 h. All treatments were well tolerated; 30-42% of patients on active treatments and 40% on placebo reported all-causality adverse events that were mostly mild and transient. On patients' global ratings of treatment, both eletriptan doses scored significantly better than zolmitriptan.     

Eletriptan in migraine patients reporting unsatisfactory response to rizatriptan

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this open-label study was to evaluate the efficacy of switching patients who had a previous unsatisfactory response to rizatriptan to eletriptan 40 mg. Background.-The characteristics of individual migraine patients can vary tremendously and can have a significant impact on treatment outcomes. In addition, clinical experience has demonstrated that the triptans are not identical or interchangeable and that patients who respond poorly or who are dissatisfied with one agent can derive benefit by being switched to another agent within the triptan class. METHODS: Patients were eligible if they met International Headache Society criteria for migraine, with a frequency of 1 to 6 migraine attacks per month, and had documented "unsatisfactory treatment response" to rizatriptan within the past year (54% on the melt formulation; 46% on tablets). Reasons for dissatisfaction with rizatriptan (>1 could be cited) included inadequate (84%) or slow onset (50%) of pain relief, high recurrence rate (69%), and lack of improvement in associated symptoms (60%). One hundred twenty-three patients were eligible for treatment. Patients were instructed to take eletriptan 40 mg as soon as they were certain that their headache was a migraine, regardless of level of pain severity (8% treated headaches that were mild). RESULTS: Headache response at 2 hours (first-attack data) was 64%. Absence of nausea (from baseline to 2 hours) increased from 50% to 78%, absence of photophobia from 30% to 72%, and absence of phonophobia from 39% to 77%. Functional response at 2 hours was 63%, with 41% of patients reporting normal functioning. Treatment with eletriptan 40 mg was associated with a 27% to 40% reduction in migraine attack-related functional impairment, as measured by the PQ-7. Recurrence rates were 36.6%. Overall, 72% of patients rated eletriptan as a "good-to-excellent" treatment, and 78% reported overall satisfaction with the degree of headache relief. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that eletriptan is an efficacious treatment option for patients who are dissatisfied with their response to rizatriptan.     

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

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

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

OBJECTIVE: To identify clinical variables associated with risk of headache recurrence within 22 hours of initial successful treatment of a migraine attack (2-hour headache response), and to analyze the effect of eletriptan in reducing the incidence of recurrence. METHODS: Data were pooled from 10 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluating eletriptan 40 mg (E40), eletriptan 80 mg (E80), and sumatriptan 100 mg (S100) for acute migraine treatment. Patients who achieved a headache response (improvement from moderate/severe pain at baseline to mild/no pain at 2 hours postdose) were evaluable. A multivariable logistic regression analysis identified significant predictors of headache recurrence (return to moderate/severe pain intensity within 22 hours of initial headache response). Treatment response was assessed in two high-risk subgroups, defined by the presence of significant recurrence predictors. RESULTS: Of 4312 patients responding to acute treatment within 2 hours postdose, 1232 (29%) experienced recurrence. Initial headache response within 2 hours was significantly higher for E40 (62.0%), E80 (67.4%), and S100 (57.9%) compared to placebo (25.1%; all P < .0001). Three clinical variables were significant predictors of recurrence: female gender, age > or = 35 years, and severe baseline headache pain. Among patients with all 3 risk factors (n = 742; 17% of total population), recurrence rates were lower with E40 (35.6%) and E80 (32.9%) than placebo (47.8% P < .01). The same result was observed in the subgroup of patients with 2 risk factors (female gender and age > or = 35 years; P < .0001 vs placebo). Sustained headache and pain-free response rates (a headache/pain-free response at 2 hours postdose with no headache recurrence and no rescue medication use in the subsequent 22 hours) were significantly higher with E40 and E80 than placebo in both high-risk subgroups (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Female gender, age > or = 35 years, and severe baseline headache pain are significant predictors of headache recurrence during a migraine attack. Eletriptan is effective at reducing the incidence of headache recurrence in high-risk subgroups.     

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

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

Comparative sensitivity of stopwatch methodology and conventional pain assessment measures for detecting early response to triptans in migraine: results of a randomized, open-label pilot study

BACKGROUND: The standard measure of efficacy used in migraine trials is a 4-point patient-rated headache pain intensity (HPI) scale. However, it has been suggested that using a stopwatch to measure the time to meaningful pain relief can provide a more precise measurement of treatment response. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the sensitivity of a stopwatch method for detecting meaningful relief of headache pain and the correlation of this method with the HPI scale and a 5-point pain relief scale. METHODS: In this open-label, parallel-group pilot study, patients were randomized to receive oral eletriptan 40 mg, eletriptan 80 mg, or rizatriptan 10 mg for the treatment of a single acute migraine attack. The effect of study treatment on migraine pain was assessed immediately before dosing and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 hours after dosing. At each time point, patients recorded the 3 types of pain assessment in a patient diary. HPI was rated using the standard 4-point International Headache Society pain intensity scale (from 0 = no pain to 3 = severe pain). Pain relief was rated on a 5-point pain relief scale (from 4 = no relief to 0 = complete relief). The time to the onset of meaningful pain relief was measured using a stopwatch. At 4 hours after dosing, patients provided a global rating of the overall efficacy of study medication on a 5-point scale (from 0 = poor to 4 = excellent). RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients participated in the trial (78.5% female; mean [SD] age, 37.7 [9.8] years; 58.2% white). The median times to meaningful pain relief measured by stopwatch were 84, 72, and 93 minutes for eletriptan 40 mg, eletriptan 80 mg, and rizatriptan 10 mg, respectively (log-rank P = 0.029, eletriptan 80 mg vs rizatriptan 10 mg). At 90 minutes (approximating the median time to meaningful pain relief on the stopwatch), headache response rates using HPI scoring (mild to no pain) were 65%, 68%, and 52% in the respective treatment groups, with no significant difference between groups. On the pain relief scale, the corresponding mean (SD) scores at 90 minutes were 1.6 (1.2), 1.4 (1.3), and 2.0 (1.4) (P = NS). The pain relief-defined response (> or = 75% pain relief) at 90 minutes did not differ significantly between the 3 treatment groups (62%, 56%, and 48%). Detection of early improvement (0.5 and 1 hour) was similar with the HPI and pain relief scales. CONCLUSION: The results of this open-label pilot study suggest the convergent validity of 3 pain-assessment methods in migraine, but indicate that the use of a stopwatch may be a more sensitive method for detecting between-group differences.     

Meta-analysis of rizatriptan efficacy in randomized controlled clinical trials

Data from seven randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase III clinical trials were analysed to further evaluate the efficacy of rizatriptan 10 mg (n = 2068) in comparison with placebo (n = 1260) and rizatriptan 5 mg (n = 1486) for the acute treatment of a migraine attack. Migraine was diagnosed according to International Headache Society criteria. Headache severity, associated migraine symptoms and functional disability were measured immediately before dosing and at 0.5, 1, 1.5 and 2 h. Headache recurrence (return of moderate or severe headache after an initial response) was also recorded. In addition to conventional pain relief (reduction of moderate or severe headache to mild or none) and pain free measures, the analysis looked at the elimination of associated migraine symptoms and disability in patients who had symptoms or disability at baseline. Maintenance of pain relief or pain-free status over 24 h was also analysed. At 2 h, rizatriptan 10 mg was significantly more effective than placebo for pain relief (71% vs. 38%, P < 0.001), and for elimination of pain, nausea, photophobia, phonophobia and functional disability. The benefit was maintained over 24 h; 37% of patients on rizatriptan 10 mg had sustained pain relief vs. 18% for placebo (P < 0.001). Rizatriptan 10 mg was also more effective than rizatriptan 5 mg, with a significant superiority at 2 h on all measures except for elimination of nausea. The benefit was maintained over 24 h; 38% of patients on rizatriptan 10 mg had sustained pain relief vs. 32% for rizatriptan 5 mg (P = 0.001).     

Pharmacology and efficacy of eletriptan for the treatment of migraine attacks

Sumatriptan, a 5-HT 1B/1D agonist, was introduced 10 years ago and was the most effective therapy for migraine attacks at that time. Eletriptan is a new 5-HT 1B/1D agonist with high potency and selectivity at 5-HT 1B/1D receptors. It is effective in animal models in which the vascular and neurogenic mechanisms implicated in migraine were measured. Eletriptan is selective for the intracranial blood vessels over other extracranial vasculature, in particular coronary arteries. Eletriptan has a rapid and complete oral absorption and a good oral bioavailability in migraineurs. In comparative trials 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg eletriptan, 100 mg sumatritpan and placebo were compared for the treatment of migraine attacks. All three doses of eletriptan were statistically superior to placebo for headache response and headache-free patients. The 80 mg dose of eletriptan was also superior to sumatriptan 100 mg. Headache recurrence, defined as return of moderate or severe headache within 24 hours of dosing and following a headache response at two hours after initial dosing, occurred in 33% of the patients following 100 mg sumatriptan and in 28%, 34% and 32% after 20 mg, 40 mg and 80 mg eletriptan. In another large trial, headache response rates were significantly higher for both doses of eletriptan (64% for 40 mg and 67% for 80 mg) than for two doses of sumatriptan (50% for 50 mg and 53% for 100 mg). Eletriptan 40 mg or 80 mg was also superior to ergotamine plus caffeine (Cafergot). In summary, eletriptan is a highly effective and fast-acting drug for the treatment of acute migraine attacks.     

Lumiracoxib 400 mg compared with celecoxib 400 mg and placebo for treating pain following dental surgery: a randomized, controlled trial.

This randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy, parallel-group, single-center study compared a single dose of the novel selective COX-2 inhibitor lumiracoxib (400 mg), with celecoxib (400 mg) or placebo in dental pain. Patients > or =17 years with moderate-to-severe dental pain were recruited after surgical extraction of 2 or more partially or fully bony impacted molars. Pain intensity was measured using the categorical scale and the primary efficacy variable was the summed pain intensity difference over 8 hours after dosing (SPID-8). Patient disposition and demographics were comparable between lumiracoxib 400 mg (n = 156), celecoxib 400 mg (n = 156), and placebo (n = 52) groups. Lumiracoxib was statistically superior (P < .001) to both celecoxib and placebo in reducing pain intensity (SPID-8; least-squares means: 8.31, lumiracoxib; 4.26, celecoxib; -1.87, placebo). Significantly more patients treated with lumiracoxib (58.9%) considered treatment to be good or excellent compared with celecoxib and placebo (42.3% and 5.7%, respectively; P = .001). Lumiracoxib was superior to celecoxib and placebo for all other secondary efficacy variables. All treatments were well-tolerated. In conclusion, 400 mg lumiracoxib was well-tolerated and provided significantly superior analgesia to 400 mg celecoxib or placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe pain after dental surgery. PERSPECTIVE: In a randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy, parallel-group, single-center study, a single dose of the novel selective COX-2 inhibitor lumiracoxib (400 mg) was well-tolerated and provided significantly superior analgesia to 400 mg celecoxib or placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe dental pain after surgical extraction of impacted molars.     

Tramadol/acetaminophen for the treatment of acute migraine pain: findings of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare tramadol/acetaminophen (APAP) and placebo for the management of acute migraine pain. BACKGROUND: Tramadol/APAP tablets reduced moderate-to-moderately severe acute pain in controlled studies of other painful conditions. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group study enrolled adults with migraine pain as per International Headache Society criteria. Subjects took tramadol/APAP (total dose, 75 mg/650 mg) or placebo for a typical migraine with moderate-to-severe pain. Severity of pain and migraine-related symptoms were recorded before study medication and at 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 24 hours after study medication. RESULTS: Efficacy analyses included 305 subjects (154 tramadol/APAP and 151 placebo). Treatment response was higher for tramadol/APAP than a placebo at 2 hours after dosing (55.8% vs. 33.8%, P < .001) and at every other assessment from 30 minutes (12.3% vs. 6.6%) through 6 hours (64.9% vs. 37.7%) (all P< or = .022). Subjects in the tramadol/APAP group were more likely than those in the placebo group to be pain-free at 2 hours (22.1% vs. 9.3%), 6 hours (42.9% vs. 25.2%), and 24 hours (52.7% vs. 37.9%) (all P< or = .007). Two hours after dosing, moderate-to-severe symptoms that were less common for tramadol/APAP than placebo included photophobia (34.6% vs. 52.2%, P= .003) and phonophobia (34.3% vs. 44.9%, P = .008), but not migraine-related nausea (38.5% vs. 29.4%, P= .681). Treatment-related adverse events included nausea, dizziness, vomiting, and somnolence. CONCLUSIONS: Tramadol/APAP reduces the severity of pain, photophobia, and phonophobia associated with migraine headache, but does not reduce migraine-associated nausea. Tramadol/APAP might be an appropriate option for the management of moderate-to-severe migraine headache.     

Effect of high-dose intravenous eletriptan on coronary artery diameter

The goal of this study was to evaluate the coronary vasoconstrictive effects of high doses of eletriptan compared with a standard dose of sumatriptan. Patients with no clinically significant coronary artery disease were randomized to receive high-dose intravenous eletriptan (n = 24) vs a standard dose of sumatriptan (n = 18; 6 mg subcutaneously) vs placebo (n = 18). Serial angiograms were obtained. The primary non-inferiority analysis found equivalence between the mean maximum change in left anterior descending coronary artery diameter for eletriptan, -22%[95% confidence interval (CI) -26, -19], and sumatriptan, -19% (95% CI -22, -16). The change due to placebo was -16% (95% CI -20, -12). No individual cases of clinically significant vasoconstriction were observed. The results confirm that eletriptan has a broad cardiovascular safety margin, with plasma concentrations comparable to three to five times the Cmax of an oral 80-mg dose associated with modest vasoconstriction equivalent to standard therapeutic doses of sumatriptan.     

Efficacy and safety of topiramate for the treatment of chronic migraine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of topiramate (100 mg/day) compared with placebo for the treatment of chronic migraine. METHODS: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study consisting of 16 weeks of double-blind treatment. Subjects aged 18 to 65 years with 15 or more headache days per month, at least half of which were migraine/migrainous headaches, were randomized 1:1 to either topiramate 100 mg/day or placebo. An initial dose of topiramate 25 mg/day (or placebo) was titrated upward in weekly increments of 25 mg/day to a maximum of 100 mg/day (or to the maximum tolerated dose). Concomitant preventive migraine treatment was not allowed, and acute headache medication use was not to exceed 4 days per week during the double-blind maintenance period. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in the mean monthly number of migraine/migrainous days; the change in the mean monthly number of migraine days also was analyzed. A fixed sequence approach (ie, gatekeeper approach) using analysis of covariance was used to analyze the efficacy endpoints. Assessments of safety and tolerability included physical and neurologic examinations, clinical laboratory parameters, and spontaneous reports of clinical adverse events. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 306 (topiramate, n = 153; placebo, n = 153) of 328 randomized subjects who provided at least 1 efficacy assessment; 55.8% of the topiramate group and 55.2% on placebo were trial completers. The mean final topiramate maintenance dose was 86.0 mg/day. The mean duration of therapy was 91.7 days for the topiramate group and 90.6 days for the placebo group. Topiramate treatment resulted in a statistically significant mean reduction of migraine/migrainous headache days (topiramate -6.4 vs placebo -4.7, P= .010) and migraine headache days relative to baseline (topiramate -5.6 vs placebo -4.1, P= .032). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 132 (82.5%) and 113 (70.2%) of topiramate-treated and placebo-treated subjects, respectively, and were generally of mild or moderate severity. Most commonly reported adverse events in the topiramate group were paresthesia (n = 46, 28.8%), upper respiratory tract infection (n = 22, 13.8%), and fatigue (n = 19, 11.9%). The most common adverse events in the placebo group were upper respiratory tract infection (n = 20, 12.4%), fatigue (n = 16, 9.9%), and nausea (n = 13, 8.1%). Discontinuations due to adverse events occurred in 18 (10.9%) topiramate subjects and 10 (6.1%) placebo subjects. There were no serious adverse events or deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Topiramate treatment at daily doses of approximately 100 mg resulted in statistically significant improvements compared with placebo in mean monthly migraine/migrainous and migraine headache days. Topiramate is safe and generally well tolerated in this group of subjects with chronic migraine, a burdensome condition with important unmet treatment needs. Safety and tolerability of topiramate were consistent with experience in previous clinical trials involving the drug.