Restoring migraine sufferers' ability to function normally: a comparison of rizatriptan and other triptans in randomized trials

BACKGROUND: Many migraine patients are unable to function normally during a migraine attack. Assessments of treatment efficacy have tended to focus on migraine symptoms, rather than looking at functional impact. This study compared the efficacy of different oral triptans for restoring normal function in migraine sufferers. METHODS: Retrospective subgroup analysis of data from five randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials in which oral rizatriptan was directly compared with oral sumatriptan 100 mg (772 attacks), 50 mg (2,227 attacks), and 25 mg (1,182 attacks), naratriptan 2.5 mg (413 attacks), and zolmitriptan 2.5 mg (578 attacks) for the acute treatment of a moderate or severe migraine attack. Functional disability was evaluated by patients on a 4-grade scale ('normal', 'mild impairment', 'severe impairment', 'requires bedrest') at baseline and at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3 and 4 h after dosing. This analysis looked at the percentage of patients who had normal functional ability at 2 h, the last time point before escape medications were allowed, in the subgroup of patients who had some level of disability at baseline. RESULTS: Most patients in each trial and treatment group had some level of disability at baseline (range = 94-100%). At 2 h, more patients on rizatriptan 10 mg were able to function normally compared with sumatriptan 100 mg (39 vs. 32%, odds ratio = 1.4, p = 0.021), sumatriptan 50 mg (47 vs. 42%, odds ratio = 1.2, p = 0.033), sumatriptan 25 mg (48 vs. 36%, odds ratio = 1.7, p < 0.001), naratriptan 2.5 mg (39 vs. 22%, odds ratio = 2.5, p < 0.001), and zolmitriptan 2.5 mg (45 vs. 36%, odds ratio = 1.6, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: In direct head-to-head comparative clinical trials, oral rizatriptan 10 mg enabled more migraine sufferers to function normally at 2 h after dosing than oral sumatriptan, naratriptan, and zolmitriptan.     

Rational migraine management: optimising treatment with the triptans

In the last two years, a number of 5-HT1B/1D agonist triptans with enhanced lipophilicity (TELs) relative to the first drug of this class, sumatriptan, have been approved for marketing in most countries of the world (naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan). In addition, at least three others are in advanced stage of clinical development (almotriptan, eletriptan, and frovatriptan). This paper sets out to review the recent data with the aim of identifying: 1) What are the critical differences between the TELs and sumatriptan? 2) How do the currently licensed TELs compare? 3) Is it possible to provide a rational approach to migraine therapy based on objective differences in the clinical profile of these new drugs? Recent randomised controlled and comparator data were reviewed, including the independent FDA assessment of rizatriptan. Critical differences for the new TELs (naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan) which may lead to more rational migraine management: Both rizatriptan (10 mg) and zolmitriptan (2.5 mg and 5.0 mg) have demonstrated superior efficacy to sumatriptan 100 mg, and 25 and 50 mg respectively. Therefore, for first line use either rizatriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate for moderate and severe headache. Rizatriptan has a more rapid onset of action than sumatriptan 100 mg. Both rizatriptan and zolmitriptan have a more rapid onset of action than naratriptan. Therefore, for a rapid onset of action either rizatriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate. Naratriptan would appear to have a lower recurrent headache rate than sumatriptan, rizatriptan or zolmitriptan. However, 24-hour efficacy rates for zolmitriptan 2.5 mg were significantly greater than for sumatriptan 25 mg and 50 mg and were not significantly different from naratriptan. Therefore, for headaches of long duration and with a tendency to recur (e.g. menstrual headaches) either naratriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate. Naratriptan has lower reported adverse event rates comparable with placebo. This would support the use of naratriptan 2.5 mg in patients who have demonstrated poor tolerance to the "triptan type" adverse events.     

Comparison of rizatriptan 10 mg vs. naratriptan 2.5 mg in migraine.

Rizatriptan (MAXALT(TM), Merck & Co., Inc.) is a selective 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist with rapid oral absorption and early onset of action for the acute treatment of migraine. This randomized, double-masked, double-dummy, placebo-controlled study compared rizatriptan 10 mg to naratriptan (NARAMIG(TM), AMERGE(TM), both Glaxo Wellcome plc) 2.5 mg in 522 patients treating a single migraine attack. Rizatriptan was more effective than naratriptan. Rizatriptan provided earlier headache relief than naratriptan (hazard ratio 1.62, p < 0.001), acting as early as 30 min. More patients were pain free at 2 h on rizatriptan than on naratriptan (44.8 vs. 20.7%, p < 0.001). Rizatriptan also provided earlier relief of associated migraine symptoms within 2 h than naratriptan and more patients had normal function at 2 h (39.3 vs. 22.6%, p < 0. 001). Both active treatments were effective compared to placebo. Both active treatments were well tolerated. The most common side effects with rizatriptan were dizziness, asthenia/fatigue, nausea and somnolence, while the most common side effects with naratriptan were dizziness and asthenia/fatigue.     

A systematic review of the use of triptans in acute migraine

OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken, to consolidate evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of triptans currently available in Canada (sumatriptan, rizatriptan, naratriptan, zolmitriptan), and to provide guidelines for selection of a triptan. METHODS: Data from published, randomized, placebo-controlled trials were pooled and a combined number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) was generated for each triptan. Direct comparative trials of triptans were also examined. RESULTS: The lowest NNT for headache response/pain-free at one/two hours is observed with subcutaneous sumatriptan. Among the oral formulations, the lowest NNT is observed with rizatriptan and the highest NNT with naratriptan. The lowest NNH is observed with subcutaneous sumatriptan. CONCLUSIONS: Triptans are relatively safe and effective medications for acute migraine attacks. However, differences among them are relatively small. Considerations in selecting a triptan include individual patient response/tolerance, characteristics of the attacks, relief of associated symptoms, consistency of response, headache recurrence, delivery systems and patient preference.     

Comparison of preference for rizatriptan 10-mg wafer versus sumatriptan 50-mg tablet in migraine

Rizatriptan (MAXALT, a registered trademark of Merck & Co. Inc.) is a selective 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist with rapid oral absorption and early onset of action in the acute treatment of migraine. This randomized, open-label, crossover outpatient study assessed the preference of 481 patients for rizatriptan 10-mg rapidly disintegrating tablets versus sumatriptan (IMIGRAN, a registered trademark of GlaxoWellcome PLC) 50-mg tablets in the treatment of a single migraine attack with each therapy. Almost twice as many patients preferred rizatriptan 10-mg rapidly disintegrating tablet to sumatriptan 50-mg tablet (64.3 vs. 35.7%, p < or = 0.001). Faster relief of headache pain was the most important reason for the preference, cited by 46.9% of patients preferring rizatriptan and 43.4% of patients who preferred sumatriptan. Headache relief at 2 h was 75.9% with rizatriptan and 66.6% with sumatriptan (p < or = 0.001), with rizatriptan being superior to sumatriptan within 30 min of dosing. Fifty-five percent of patients were pain free 2 h after rizatriptan, compared with 42.1% treated with sumatriptan (p < or = 0.001), rizatriptan being superior within 1 h of treatment. Forty-one percent of patients taking rizatriptan were pain free at 2 h and had no recurrence or need for additional medication, compared to 32.3% of patients on sumatriptan. Rizatriptan was also superior to sumatriptan in terms of the proportions of patients with no nausea, phonophobia or photophobia, and patients with normal function 2 h after treatment intake (p < 0.05). More patients were (completely, very or somewhat) satisfied 2 h after treatment with rizatriptan (73.3%) than 2 h after treatment with sumatriptan (59.0%) (p < or = 0.001). Additionally, 2 h after the dose, more patients found rizatriptan to be very convenient, convenient or somewhat convenient (87.2%) than they did sumatriptan (76.3%) (p < or = 0.001). Both active treatments were well tolerated. The most common side effects with rizatriptan and sumatriptan were nausea (6.6 and 6.9% of patients, respectively), dizziness (6.1 and 5.8%) and somnolence (7.4 and 6.7%).     

Zolmitriptan versus sumatriptan for the acute oral treatment of migraine: a randomized, double-blind, international study

This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy and tolerability of zolmitriptan (2.5 or 5 mg) and sumatriptan (50 mg) in the acute oral treatment of up to six moderate-to-severe migraine attacks. The intention to treat (ITT) population comprised of 1522 patients: 500 treated with zolmitriptan 2.5 mg (2671 attacks), 514 with zolmitriptan 5 mg (2744 attacks) and 508 with sumatriptan 50 mg (2693 attacks). Overall, the 2-h headache response rates in these groups were 62.9, 65.7 and 66.6%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between sumatriptan 50 mg and zolmitriptan 2.5 mg (P = 0.12) or 5 mg (P = 0.80). Approximately 40% of patients in each group reported a 2-h headache response in > or = 80% of attacks. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in the rates of headache response at 1 h (zolmitriptan 2.5 mg 36.9%, zolmitriptan 5 mg 39.5% and sumatriptan 50 mg 38.0%) or 4 h (70.3, 72.9 and 72.2%, respectively) or in the rates of meaningful migraine relief at 1, 2 or 4 h or sustained (24-h) pain relief. All treatments were well tolerated. In conclusion, zolmitriptan (2.5 or 5 mg) proved similarly efficacious compared with sumatriptan (50 mg), both in terms of response rates and consistency across attacks.     

Zolmitriptan versus a combination of acetylsalicylic acid and metoclopramide in the acute oral treatment of migraine: a double-blind, randomised, three-attack study

This multicentre, randomised, double-blind study compared oral zolmitriptan 2.5 mg with a combination of oral acetylsalicylic acid 900 mg and metoclopramide 10 mg as acute anti-migraine therapy for 3 migraine attacks. In total, 666 patients took at least one dose of study medication (326 took zolmitriptan and 340 took acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide). The percentage of patients with a 2-hour headache response after the first dose for all 3 attacks (the primary end point) was 33.4% with zolmitriptan and 32.9% with acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide [odds ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.47; p = 0.7228]. For the majority of secondary end points, the two treatments demonstrated comparable efficacy. However, post hoc analysis showed that significantly more patients receiving zolmitriptan were free of pain 2 h after the first dose in all 3 attacks compared with patients receiving acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide (10.7 vs. 5.3%; odds ratio 2.19, 95% CI 1.23-4.03; p = 0.0095). In addition, post hoc analysis showed that the overall 2-hour pain-free response rate was consistently higher with zolmitriptan (34.6%) than with acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide (27.9%) (odds ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.09-1.78; p = 0.007). Both treatments reduced migraine-associated nausea, vomiting, phonophobia and photophobia. There were no important inter-group differences with respect to the onset of meaningful migraine relief, the frequency of headache recurrence, the usage or efficacy of a second dose of medication or the use of escape medication. However, at the last attack, the proportion of patients who expressed overall satisfaction with the treatment was significantly higher in the zolmitriptan group, i.e. 83.7%, versus 75.0% with acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide (p = 0.0346). Both agents were well tolerated. Adverse events were reported by 40.8% (133/326) of zolmitriptan-treated patients and 29.1% (99/340) of those treated with acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide. The incidence of withdrawals due to adverse events was very low with both zolmitriptan (0.9%) and the combination regimen (1.5%); the latter percentage included 1 patient who withdrew from the study due to phlebitis, which was classified as a serious adverse event. This study showed that zolmitriptan is effective and well tolerated for the acute treatment of moderate to severe migraine. Zolmitriptan was at least as effective as acetylsalicylic acid plus metoclopramide in achieving a 2-hour headache response, but significantly more effective than the combination therapy for other end points, including the 2-hour pain-free response.     

Eletriptan vs sumatriptan: a double-blind,placebo-controlled,multiple migraine attack study

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of oral eletriptan, 40 mg and 80 mg, and oral sumatriptan, 50 mg and 100 mg, in the acute treatment of migraine. METHODS: Patients with a history of migraine (n = 1,008) were randomly assigned to receive placebo, 40 mg of eletriptan, 80 mg of eletriptan, 50 mg of sumatriptan, or 100 mg of sumatriptan to treat up to three attacks. Early headache response (at 1 hour) was the primary endpoint, in addition to the standard endpoint, 2-hour headache response. RESULTS: Headache response rates were 12% at 1 hour and 31% at 2 hours for placebo; 24% at 1 hour and 50% at 2 hours for sumatriptan 50 mg; 27% at 1 hour and 53% at 2 hours for sumatriptan 100 mg; 30% at 1 hour and 64% at 2 hours for eletriptan 40 mg; and 37% at 1 hour and 67% at 2 hours for eletriptan 80 mg. More patients receiving eletriptan 80 mg achieved a 1-hour headache response than did patients receiving sumatriptan 50 mg (p < 0.05). All doses of eletriptan were superior to sumatriptan at 2 hours for headache response and complete pain relief (p < 0.05). Significantly more patients on eletriptan 80 mg achieved headache response in all attacks than did patients receiving either sumatriptan dose. Eletriptan 40 mg was superior to both sumatriptan doses in functional improvement (p < 0.005). The superior efficacy of both eletriptan doses was associated with higher rates of patient acceptability than sumatriptan 50 mg (p < 0.05). Eletriptan and sumatriptan were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Oral eletriptan (40 mg and 80 mg) is effective, safe, and tolerable in the acute treatment of migraine and yields a consistent response.     

Crossover comparison of efficacy and preference for rizatriptan 10 mg versus ergotamine/caffeine in migraine

Rizatriptan is a selective 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist with rapid oral absorption and early onset of action in the acute treatment of migraine. This randomized double- blind crossover outpatient study assessed the preference for 1 rizatriptan 10 mg tablet to 2 ergotamine 1 mg/caffeine 100 mg tablets in 439 patients treating a single migraine attack with each therapy. Of patients expressing a preference (89.1%), more than twice as many preferred rizatriptan to ergotamine/caffeine (69.9 vs. 30.1%, p < or = 0.001). Faster relief of headache was the most important reason for preference, cited by 67.3% of patients preferring rizatriptan and 54.2% of patients who preferred ergotamine/caffeine. The co-primary endpoint of being pain free at 2 h was also in favor of rizatriptan. Forty-nine percent of patients were pain free 2 h after rizatriptan, compared with 24.3% treated with ergotamine/caffeine (p < or = 0.001), rizatriptan being superior within 1 h of treatment. Headache relief at 2 h was 75.9% for rizatriptan and 47.3% for ergotamine/caffeine (p < or = 0.001), with rizatriptan being superior to ergotamine/caffeine within 30 min of dosing. Almost 36% of patients taking rizatriptan were pain free at 2 h and had no recurrence or need for additional medication within 24 h, compared to 20% of patients on ergotamine/caffeine (p < or = 0.001). Rizatriptan was also superior to ergotamine/caffeine in the proportions of patients with no nausea, vomiting, phonophobia or photophobia and for patients with normal function 2 h after drug intake (p < or = 0.001). More patients were (completely, very or somewhat) satisfied 2 h after treatment with rizatriptan (69.8%) than at 2 h after treatment with ergotamine/caffeine (38.6%, p < or = 0.001). Recurrence rates were 31.4% with rizatriptan and 15.3% with ergotamine/caffeine. Both active treatments were well tolerated. The most common adverse events (incidence > or = 5% in one group) after rizatriptan and ergotamine/caffeine, respectively, were dizziness (6.7 and 5.3%), nausea (4.2 and 8.5%) and somnolence (5.5 and 2.3%).     

Dexamethasone decreases migraine recurrence observed after treatment with a triptan combined with a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Triptans are effective drugs for the acute treatment of migraine. However, 30-40% of the patients commonly present recurrence before 24 hours therefore requiring another dose. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) such as tolfenamic acid and naproxen sodium combined with sumatriptan have demonstrated efficacy in reducing recurrence observed with the single use of this drug. Steroids also have been suggested to treat refractory migraine and status migranosus. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether patients presenting frequent recurrence with the combination triptan plus NSAID, would decrease it with the association of dexamethasone. METHOD: Twenty three patients, 17 women and 6 men with migraine according to IHS criteria were prospectively studied. All patients presented frequent recurrence (> or= 60%, mean recurrence rate 74,8%) with the single use of sumatritpan 100 mg or zolmitriptan 2,5 mg or rizatriptan 10mg in at least 5 consecutive attacks, and didn't present a reduction of the recurrence rate superior than 20% with the combination of tolfenamic acid 200 mg or rofecoxib 25 mg in at least 5 other consecutive attacks (mean recurrence rate 60%). The patients had to treat 6 consecutive moderate or severe migraine attacks with their usual combination plus 4 mg of dexamathasone with a maximum of twice a week, and fill out a diary reporting headache parameters. RESULTS: Twenty patients, 16 women and 4 men completed the study. Of those who completed the study, 11 took rizatriptan plus rofecoxib, 4 rizatriptan plus tolfenamic acid, 3 zolmitriptan plus rofecoxib, 1 zolmitriptan plus tolfenamic acid and 1 patient took sumatriptan plus tolfenamic acid, having the 20 patients taken as a third medication, a single tablet of 4 mg of dexamethasone. All patients took oral formulations and none presented vomiting after that. Among all 20 patients, one female and one male patient presented recurrence in 3 out of the 6 attacks (50%) while the remaining 18 patients revealed recurrence in 1 or 2 treated attacks (mean 23,4%) (p<0,001). CONCLUSION: We concluded that the judicious use of oral dexamethasone might be useful for a limited population of migraine patients still presenting recurrence with the combination of a triptan and a NSAID. Case-control studies and studies with a randomized double-blind design are necessary to confirm these observations.     

Pain free efficacy of sumatriptan in the early treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND: There is evidence that headache response rates may be higher if triptans are used early when a migraine attack is still mild, as compared to when it is treated after pain has reached moderate or severe intensity. METHODS: In this randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group clinical trial, 361 patients took either placebo, sumatriptan 50 mg, or sumatriptan 100 mg in a single attack study. The primary outcome measure was pain-free status at two hours. RESULTS: In the intention to treat group, two hour pain free rates were 16%, 40%, and 50% in the placebo group, sumatriptan 50 mg group, and the sumatriptan 100 mg group respectively (p < 0.001, active treatment groups vs. placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Both sumatriptan 50 mg and 100 mg were significantly superior to placebo for the pain-free end point at two hours. The pain-free response rates in this trial where sumatriptan was taken while the headache was still mild were generally higher than in older clinical trials where headache was treated after reaching a moderate or severe intensity.     

Early clinical experience with subcutaneous naratriptan in the acute treatment of migraine: a dose-ranging study

Naratriptan is a novel, potent agonist at the 5HT_1B/1D receptor. A total of 335 migraine patients were treated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, in-clinic study, to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of five doses of subcutaneous (sc) naratriptan (0.5, 1, 2.5, 5 or 10 mg) in comparison with sc sumatriptan (6 mg) and placebo in the acute treatment of a moderate/severe migraine attack. Headache relief [reduction of headache severity from moderate or severe (grade 2/3) to mild or none (grade 1/0)] at 1 and 2 h after each dose, was reported by a statistically significantly higher proportion of patients for all doses of sc naratriptan and sc sumatriptan (6 mg) than for placebo. The percentages of patients with headache relief at 2 h post-dose were: naratriptan (0.5 mg) 65%, (1 mg) 75%, (2.5 mg) 83%, (5 mg) 94% and (10 mg) 91%; sumatriptan (6 mg) 89%; placebo 41%, ( P < 0.005). The earliest report of a statistically significant difference compared with placebo for the times assessed was with sc naratriptan (10 mg) at 10 min post-dose ( P = 0.023). The percentages of patients reporting adverse events were dose-related; sc naratriptan (0.5 mg) 33%, (1 mg) 29%, (2.5 mg) 43%, (5 mg) 59% and (10 mg) 71%; sc sumatriptan 53%; placebo 22%. There were no clinically significant changes in electrocardiogram (ECG), vital signs or laboratory parameters. Systemic exposure increased proportionally to the dose, the absorption of sc naratriptan was rapid (t_max= 10 min) and the half-life was 5 h. In conclusion, sc naratriptan was an effective and well-tolerated acute treatment for migraine.     

Efficacy of oral naratriptan in the treatment of menstrually related migraine

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of orally administered 2.5 mg naratriptan in the treatment of menstrually related migraine (MRM). A high percentage of women suffering from migraine report increased frequency of attacks in association with menstruation that may be more severe, of longer duration and more difficult to treat than at other times. This was a phase IIIb, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Subjects were given either 2.5 mg naratriptan or placebo to treat a single MRM episode, defined as starting between days -2 and +4 relative to the start of menstruation. The primary efficacy measure was the percentage of subjects who were free of pain 4 h after treatment, the absence of pain at 30 min, 1 and 2 h being secondary efficacy measures. Other secondary measures were the absence of associated symptoms, sustained headache relief 24 h after a single dose of the study medication, recourse to a second dose of study medication or escape medication, pain intensity 4-24 h after first treatment, the ability to carry out work or daily activities, and patient satisfaction. Adverse events were also monitored. A total of 275 women were enrolled in the trial and 229 (115 naratriptan group, 114 placebo group) provided data on the effects of the study medication on MRM. A higher percentage of subjects in the naratriptan group (58%) reported complete pain relief 4 h after medication than in the placebo group (30%) (P<0.001). Significant differences between the naratriptan and placebo groups and in favor of naratriptan were also found for: total pain relief at 2 h (P=0.004), sustained pain-free response within 4-24 h (P<0.001), absence of all associated symptoms at 2 and 4 h (P=0.004), ability to work and carry out daily activities at 2 h (P=0.036), and patient overall satisfaction (P<0.001). Three adverse events were recorded that might potentially be attributable to naratriptan. Naratriptan given orally at a dose of 2.5 mg is effective in the acute treatment of MRM as early as 2 h after treatment.     

Profiles of 5-HT 1B/1D agonists in acute migraine with special reference to second generation agents.

The efficacy of 5-hydroxytryptamine 1B/1D (5-HT 1B/1D) agonists is related to their inhibitory effects on neurogenic inflammation, mediated through serotoninergic control mechanisms. Recently, a series of oral second generation 5-HT 1B/1D agonists (eletriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan) have been developed and are reviewed in this paper. Their in vitro and in vivo pharmacological properties, clinical efficacy, drug interactions, and adverse effects are evaluated and compared to the gold standard in the treatment of acute migraine, sumatriptan.     

Treatment of childhood migraine attacks with oral zolmitriptan and ibuprofen

The authors conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study to investigate the efficacy of oral zolmitriptan in the treatment of migraine in children and adolescents. Patients (n = 32) received placebo, zolmitriptan 2.5 mg, and ibuprofen 200 to 400 mg to treat three consecutive migraine attacks. Pain relief rates after 2 hours were 28% for placebo, 62% for zolmitriptan, and 69% for ibuprofen (p < 0.05). Both drugs are well tolerated with only mild side effects.     

The use of multiattribute decision models in evaluating triptan treatment options in migraine

Background The physician treating patients with migraine is now able to choose from among seven triptans–almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan and zolmitriptan. These differ, to greater or lesser degrees, on a range of clinical attributes important for treatment selection. Objective To outline the basic principles of Multiattribute Decision Making (MADM) and describe how one such method–TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution)–can be applied to evaluate the currently available triptans. Methods In an example application, summary data from a recent meta–analysis of 53 published and unpublished placebo–controlled trials of the oral triptans were combined in TOPSIS models with computer–generated attribute importance weights representing the entire range of possible values, That is, the relative performance of the triptans was explored across all logically possible combinations of relative importance of the treatment attributes available from the meta–analysis, and uncertainty was assessed based on the confidence intervals from the meta–analysis. Results When compared across the entire range of values for relative attribute importance, almotriptan, eletriptan and rizatriptan were more similar to a hypothetical ideal triptan and were more likely to appear in the top three closest to the hypothetical ideal, than were naratriptan, sumatriptan, and zolmitriptan. Conclusion Using the TOPSIS model, almotriptan, eletriptan and rizatriptan were more likely to appear in the top three closest to the hypothetical ideal triptan.     

Frovatriptan versus zolmitriptan for the acute treatment of migraine with aura: a subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, multicenter, Italian study

Migraine with aura affects ~20-30 % of migraineurs and it is much less common than migraine without aura. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of frovatriptan 2.5 mg and zolmitriptan 2.5 mg in the treatment of migraine with aura. Analysis was carried out in a subset of 18 subjects with migraine with aura (HIS criteria) out of the 107 enrolled in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, cross-over study. According to the study design, each patient had to treat three episodes of migraine in no more than 3 months with one drug, before switching to the other treatment. The rate of pain-free episodes at 2 h was significantly (p < 0.05) larger under frovatriptan (45.8 %) than under zolmitriptan (16.7 %). Pain free at 4 h, pain relief at 2 and 4 h and recurrent episodes were similar between the two treatments, while sustained pain-free episode was significantly (p < 0.05) more frequent during frovatriptan treatment (33.3 vs. 8.3 % zolmitriptan). Our study suggests that frovatriptan is superior to zolmitriptan in the immediate treatment of patients with migraine with aura, and it is capable of maintaining its acute analgesic effect over 48 h.     

The 40-mg dose of eletriptan: comparative efficacy and tolerability versus sumatriptan 100 mg

Meta-analysis provides valuable information regarding relative efficacies of triptans, but head-to-head comparator studies remain the gold standard. Three similar head-to-head trials comparing eletriptan 40 mg (E40) with sumatriptan 100 mg (S100) provide a rare opportunity and sufficient power, for robust comparisons of efficacy. Data were combined from three double-blind, placebo-controlled, first-dose, first-attack acute migraine treatment studies comparing E40 (n=1132), S100 (n=1129), and placebo (n=645). The primary outcome was headache response at 2 h. Secondary outcomes included headache response at 1 h, pain-free and functional responses, and sustained headache and pain-free responses. Odds ratios were calculated for summary estimates of probability of response. There were higher headache response rates with eletriptan versus sumatriptan at 2 h (67% vs. 57%; P<0.0001) and 1 h (34% vs. 26%; P<0.0001). Eletriptan also had higher 2 h pain-free (35% vs. 25%; P<0.0001) and functional responses (67% vs. 58%; P<0.0001). Sustained headache (42%) and pain-free (22%) response rates were higher for eletriptan versus sumatriptan (34%, P<0.0001; 15%, P<0.0001). The probability of response for eletriptan versus sumatriptan ranged from 36% higher (relief of nausea) to 64% higher (sustained pain-free rate). Combined analysis demonstrates that E40 has superior efficacy versus S100 across all clinically relevant outcomes.     

Efficacy of frovatriptan versus other triptans in the acute treatment of menstrual migraine: pooled analysis of three double-blind, randomized, crossover, multicenter studies

The objective of this study was to review the efficacy and safety of frovatriptan (F) versus rizatriptan (R), zolmitriptan (Z) and almotriptan (A), in women with menstrually related migraine (IHS criteria) through a pooled analysis of three individual studies. Subjects with a history of migraine with or without aura were randomized to F 2.5 mg or R 10 mg (study 1), F or Z 2.5 mg (study 2), and F or A 12.5 mg (study 3). The studies had an identical multicenter, randomized, double-blind, crossover design. After treating three episodes of migraine in no more than 3 months with the first treatment, patients had to switch to the next treatment for other 3 months. 346 subjects formed intention-to-treat population of the main study; 280 of them were of a female gender, 256 had regular menses and 187 were included in the menstrual migraine subgroup analysis. Rate of pain free at 2, 4 and 24 h was 23, 52 and 67 % with F and 30, 61 and 66 % with comparators (P = NS). Pain relief episodes at 2, 4 and 24 h were 37, 60 and 66 % for F and 43, 55 and 61 % for comparators (P = NS). Rate of recurrence was significantly (P < 0.05) lower under F either at 24 h (11 vs. 24 % comparators) or at 48 h (15 vs. 26 % comparators). Number of menstrual migraine attacks associated with drug-related adverse events was equally low (P = NS) between F (5 %) and comparators (4 %).     

Low dose zolmitriptan as a 5-HT neuroendocrine challenge agent in humans

The 5-HT1B/D agonist sumatriptan has been used in a number of studies as a neuroendocrine challenge agent. Whether its neuroendocrine effects are centrally mediated is unclear, however, since sumatriptan shows minimal penetration of the central nervous system. Zolmitriptan shows a greater penetration into the central nervous system than sumatriptan, and has recently been shown to be an effective challenge agent. In order to determine the neuroendocrine, temperature and side effects of a 2.5 mg oral dose of zolmitriptan, 17 healthy volunteers underwent a placebo controlled, repeated measures, double blind neuroendocrine challenge. Zolmitriptan or placebo were administered, and cortisol, growth hormone, prolactin, blood pressure and temperature, were measured over four hours after the dose of zolmitriptan. Zolmitriptan at this dose was well tolerated by all subjects, with minimal side effects and only minor effects on blood pressure. There was a significant increase in serum growth hormone after zolmitriptan compared to placebo, however there were no significant effects on cortisol, prolactin or oral temperature. The neuroendocrine effects of 2.5 mg of orally administered zolmitriptan are similar to previously reported effects of sumatriptan, with minimal side effects.