A review of rizatriptan,a quick and consistent 5-HT1B/1D agonist for the acute treatment of migraine

Rizatriptan is a second-generation triptan marketed as 5 and 10 mg tablets and rapidly disintegrating wafer formulations. In > 5000 acute migraine patients enrolled in short-term trials and almost 1800 patients in long-term, open-label trials treating ~ 47,000 attacks, rizatriptan was effective and well-tolerated. Controlled head-to-head data and a meta-analysis of 53 randomised, placebo-controlled trials of oral triptans in > 24,000 patients have shown that rizatriptan 10 mg offers efficacy advantages over oral sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and other oral triptans, both in terms of speed of onset of action and consistency. These advantages may reflect its improved pharmacological profile over sumatriptan in terms of higher oral bioavailability and a shorter time to maximum concentration. The wafer formulation offers the convenience of being administered without water. As a result of its superior efficacy profile and generally good tolerability, rizatriptan can be considered as a first-line treatment for acute migraine.     

利扎曲普坦对硝酸甘油型偏头痛模型大鼠行为学和外周血中疼痛相关因子水平的影响

目的：观察利扎曲普坦对偏头痛模型大鼠行为学和外周血中疼痛相关因子的影响,探讨曲普坦类药物对偏头痛的治疗作用。方法：24只健康Wistar大鼠随机分为空白对照组、偏头痛组、利扎曲普坦对照组和利扎曲普坦治疗组,每组6只。利扎曲普坦对照组和利扎曲普坦治疗组大鼠给予利扎曲普坦灌胃,剂量为1 mg/kg/d（药物剂量根据成人常规每日口服剂量进行换算）,空白对照组和偏头痛组大鼠给予生理盐水灌胃（1 mL/d）。各组大鼠连续灌胃给药7 d后,偏头痛组和利扎曲普坦治疗组大鼠制备硝酸甘油型偏头痛动物模型,空白对照组和利扎曲普坦对照组给予同剂量生理盐水,记录各组大鼠给予药物（硝酸甘油注射剂/生理盐水）后60～90 min行为学表现;2 h后处死大鼠,留取外周血,检测各组大鼠血清降钙素基因相关肽（CGRP）、5-羟色胺(5-HT)、白细胞介素1β(IL-1β)和肿瘤坏死因子α(TNF-α)水平。结果：与偏头痛组比较,利扎曲普坦治疗组大鼠行为学评分明显降低（P<0.05）。与空白对照组比较,偏头痛组大鼠外周血中CGRP水平明显升高（P<0.05）;偏头痛组大鼠外周血中5-HT水平降低,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);与空白对照组比较,利扎曲普坦对照组大鼠外周血中5-HT水平明显升高（P<0.05）;与偏头痛组比较,利扎曲普坦治疗组大鼠外周血中5-HT水平明显升高（P<0.05）;各组大鼠外周血中IL-1β和TNF-α水平无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论：利扎曲普坦能够减轻硝酸甘油型偏头痛模型大鼠行为学症状,使偏头痛大鼠头痛发作期外周血中5-HT水平升高,改善偏头痛发作时血管舒缩功能紊乱的状态,减轻因5-HT耗竭而引起的血管过度扩张。     

Preference for rizatriptan 10-mg wafer vs. eletriptan 40-mg tablet for acute treatment of migraine

Preference is a composite, patient-oriented endpoint incorporating efficacy, tolerability, formulation, and convenience of medications. The objective of this study was to compare patient preference for rizatriptan 10-mg wafer vs. eletriptan 40-mg tablet for acute treatment of migraine. In this multicentre, open-label, two-period, crossover study, out-patients were randomly assigned to treat the first of two moderate to severe migraines with rizatriptan or eletriptan and the second with the alternate therapy. Patients completed diary assessments at baseline and up to 24 h after taking study medication. At the last visit, patients completed a psychometrically validated preference questionnaire. A total of 372 patients (mean age 38 years, 85% female) treated two migraine attacks, and 342 patients (92%) expressed a preference for treatment. Significantly more (P < or = 0.001) patients preferred rizatriptan 10-mg wafer [61.1%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 55.7, 66.3] to eletriptan 40-mg tablet (38.9%; 95% CI 33.7, 44.3). The most common reason given for preference of either treatment was speed of headache relief. At 2 h, 80% and 69% of patients reported that rizatriptan and eletriptan, respectively, was convenient or very convenient to take (mean convenience score 1.99 vs. 2.31, respectively; P < or = 0.001). Both triptans were well tolerated. In this head-to-head study designed to evaluate global patient preference, significantly more patients preferred the rizatriptan 10-mg wafer to the eletriptan 40-mg tablet for acute treatment of migraine. The single most important reason for preference was speed of relief, consistent with results from previous preference studies.     

Rizatriptan combined with rofecoxib vs. rizatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: an open label pilot study

Rizatriptan is an effective and fast acting drug for the acute treatment of migraine. As with any other acute treatment for migraine, headache recurrence may occur in up to one-third of responders. Combination with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) seems to reduce the incidence of headache recurrence in clinical practice. Rofecoxib is a member of a new class of NSAIDs, which selectively inhibits the COX-2 enzyme and therefore is associated with a lower risk of gastrointestinal side-effects; the drug has a long plasma half-life (17 h). This open label study compared rizatriptan with rizatriptan plus rofecoxib in the acute treatment of migraine. Fifty-six triptan naive patients from a tertiary centre (37 women and 19 men, ages 16-55 years, mean 35 years) with International Headache Society migraine were randomized into two groups. They were instructed to treat three consecutive moderate or severe attacks with either 10 mg rizatriptan (group 1: 18 women and 10 men) or with 10 mg rizatriptan plus 25 mg rofecoxib (group 2: 19 women and 9 men). The presence of headache and nausea at 1, 2 and 4 h, and of side-effects, use of rescue medication and recurrence were compared. Fifty-four patients completed the study. Group 1 treated 76 attacks and group 2 treated 81 attacks. Absence of headache at 1 h was seen in 19 attacks (25%) in group 1 and in 34 attacks (42%) in group 2 (P=0.082); at 2 h absence of headache was seen in 60% of group 1 attacks and in 76% of group 2 attacks (P=0.115). At 4 h, 75% of group 1 attacks and 88% of group 2 attacks were pain free (P=0.122). With regard to nausea, of those who had nausea at baseline, 31% and 49% of attacks in groups 1 and 2, respectively, were nausea free at 1 h (P=0.091), 75% and 79% at 2 h (P=0.736) and 82% and 91% (P=0.479) at 4 h. Recurrence, based on all attacks of those patients who achieved pain free at 4 h, was observed in 53% of group 1 and 20% of group 2 attacks (P<0.001). Sustained pain-free rates (for the 4-h time point) were 45.6% of group 1 and 78.9% of group 2 attacks. There were no significant differences with regard to rescue medication consumption after 4 h and side-effects in both groups. There was a non-significant trend for the combination group to have a higher response rate. The group treated with rizatriptan and rofecoxib had a lower recurrence rate than the group treated with rizatriptan. This study demonstrated that combining a fast acting triptan such as rizatriptan with rofecoxib reduced headache recurrence rates, was well tolerated and may be more effective than the use of rizatriptan alone. Double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are necessary to confirm these observations.     

An in vitro interethnic comparison of monoamine oxidase activities between Japanese and Caucasian livers using rizatriptan, a serotonin receptor 1B/1D agonist, as a model drug

AIMS: Monoamine oxidase (MAO) is located in human liver, and catalyses the oxidative deamination step of many xenobiotics. However, whether there exists an interethnic difference in MAO activities has, to our knowledge, not been clarified. We aimed to assess the MAO type A (MAO-A) involvement in the metabolic pathway of rizatriptan (RIZ), an antimigraine 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)1B/1D agonist, and the interethnic difference in MAO activities between Caucasians and Japanese using RIZ as a model drug in in vitro experiments. METHODS: Oxidative deaminase activities were determined with the subcellular fractions of Japanese livers and the microsomal fraction of Caucasian livers using RIZ, 5-HT (MAO-A substrate) and 2-phenylethylamine (PEA) (MAO-B substrate) as substrates. RESULTS: The oxidative deaminase activities of RIZ vs. 5-HT were highly (r = 0.87 and 0.96, P < 0.001) correlated with each other in both the microsomal and mitochondrial fractions of Japanese livers. Subsequent results were obtained from in vitro experiments using liver microsomes based upon these findings. The oxidative deaminase activities of RIZ were inhibited completely by the nanomolar-order concentration of clorgyline and Ro 41-1049 (MAO-A selective inhibitors), but not by that of Ro 16-6491 (MAO-B selective inhibitor). The majority of the mean Michaelis-Menten values for three substrates toward MAO obtained from six Japanese and six Caucasian liver microsomes reached no significant differences between the two ethnic groups. The mean microsomal oxidative deaminase activities assessed in 18 Japanese and 20 Caucasian livers using the three substrates also showed no significant differences between the two ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: RIZ is mainly metabolized by MAO-A and the in vitro oxidative deaminase activities mediated via MAO-A and -B do not appear to differ between Japanese and Caucasians.     

Rizatriptan tablet versus wafer: patient preference

After taking both conventional oral rizatriptan tablets and oral disintegrating rizatriptan tablets in the treatment of migraine with or without aura, patients were permitted to select their formulation preference. All adult patients who had requested continuation of rizatriptan during a 6-month period were included in the study. Of the 367 patients studied, 188 selected the oral disintegrating tablet, while 179 preferred the conventional tablet. Although individual patients had strong preferences for one preparation over the other, no group preference was found.     

Effects on productivity and quality of life of rizatriptan for acute migraine: a workplace study

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of treatment with rizatriptan 10 mg on jobs and quality of life of patients with migraine. METHODS: Prospective, open-label study at 27 work sites of 20 companies representing diverse labor sectors in Spain. Eligible patients according International Headache Society (IHS) criteria were recruited for the study by on-site physicians and instructed to treat moderate or severe migraine attacks with one tablet of rizatriptan 10 mg. They were asked to complete the study questionnaires (ML-96, SF-36) at baseline, and then 3 months later. RESULTS: A total of 259 patients (83 men and 176 women) of a mean age of 39 (range 18 to 61 years) completed the study. Only 7% had taken triptans before for treatment of their migraine attacks. After 3 months of rizatriptan therapy, the use of medical services was significantly lower and all tested domains of quality of life had improved (P<.001). Absenteeism and days worked during migraine attacks also fell significantly during 3 months of rizatriptan therapy as compared with the 3 months before the study (P<.001). The improvement in productivity was reflected in the significant decreases in lost workday equivalents (decrease from 3.32 to 1.21 days; P<.001) and also in the total number of workdays lost (decrease from 5.16 to 1.82 days; P<.001). Two-thirds of patients described the efficacy of oral rizatriptan as excellent or very good (62%), and 89% preferred it over their usual medications for acute treatment of migraine attacks. CONCLUSION: For this employed population of patients with migraine, treatment with rizatriptan significantly improved parameters measuring direct medical costs, work and productivity, and health-related quality of life. In accordance with these findings, direct and indirect costs related to migraine could be substantially reduced by gathering detailed information about the nature of headache, eliminating triggering factors, and instituting effective treatment of migraine attacks.     

A Randomized Double‐Blind Study Comparing Rizatriptan,Dexamethasone, and the Combination of Both in the Acute Treatment of Menstrually Related Migraine

Objectives.— To assess the efficacy and tolerability of rizatriptan (RI), dexamethasone (DE), and RI combined with DE (RI+DE) in the acute treatment of menstrually related migraine (MRM). Methods.— This was a randomized, double‐blind, 6‐attack crossover study comparing RI 10 mg, DE 4 mg, and RI+DE (2 attacks each). The primary endpoint was 24‐hour sustained‐relief. The secondary endpoint was 24‐hour sustained pain‐free. We treated the primary and secondary endpoint as dichotomous outcomes and used matched nonparametric statistics to assess proportions. We used logistic regression to determine the effect of treatment order and if response to previous treatment influenced treatment response. Results.— A total of 35 patients treated 190 attacks (mean of 5.4 per participant). For the primary endpoint, RI was significantly superior to DE (62.7% vs 33.3%, P = .001). RI+DE was superior to RI (81.5% vs 62.7%, P < .05) and to DE (81.5% vs 33.3%%, P < .001). For the secondary endpoint RI was also superior to DE (32.2% vs 12.1%, P < .05). RI+DE was superior to RI (50.7% vs 32.2%, P < .05) and DE (P < .01, RR). Similar findings were seen for the other endpoints. More attacks treated with DE+RI (33.8%) were associated with side effects, compared to RI (18.6%) and DE (15.2%). Conclusions.— Rizatriptan is an effective treatment for MRM. RI+DE is significantly more effective than RI alone, although is associated with higher rate of adverse events. The combination should be considered for subjects with high disability, incomplete relief, or recurrence of pain with triptan monotherapy. The use of DE alone in the treatment of MRM is not justified based on our data.     

Symptoms of cutaneous sensitivity pre-treatment and post-treatment: results from the rizatriptan TAME studies

The presence of cutaneous allodynia may predict response to triptans. Identical randomized double-blind studies were conducted comparing the efficacy of rizatriptan 10 mg or placebo administered within 1 h of headache onset, while pain was mild. The primary endpoint was freedom from pain at 2 h. Presence of symptoms suggesting cutaneous sensitivity (SCS) at baseline and at 2 h post-treatment was recorded. Before treatment, 29% of rizatriptan patients and 22% of placebo patients reported SCS. At 2 h, the percentage of patients with SCS was significantly decreased with rizatriptan. The presence of SCS pre-treatment was not predictive of response to rizatriptan. Most patients with SCS at 2 h were non-responders. Early treatment with rizatriptan significantly reduced the percentage of patients with SCS at 2 h. The presence of SCS at baseline did not predict pain-free response, but presence of SCS at 2 h correlated with lack of a 2-h pain-free response.