Zolmitriptan is effective and well tolerated in Japanese patients with migraine: a dose-response study

Efficacy of Lasmiditan as a Secondary Treatment for Migraine Attacks after Unsuccessful Treatment with a Triptan

The combined use of lasmiditan and triptan is unexplored in medical literature. This study aimed to investigate whether the intake of lasmiditan following triptan improves migraine pain. Following triptan intake, if headache relief was less than 50% at 1 h, patients took 50 mg of lasmiditan within 2 h of migraine onset. Patients recorded headache intensity and adverse events (AEs) caused by lasmiditan at 1, 2, and 4 h after the intake of an additional 50 mg of lasmiditan. A significant reduction in pain scale was observed post 50 mg lasmiditan intake (p < 0.001, t-test). Pain relief was reported for 32 migraine attacks (80%) at 1 h after additional lasmiditan intake. Although AEs were observed in 63% of the patients who took an additional lasmiditan, most were mild and resolved 1 h after lasmiditan intake. Our study revealed the significant headache relief provided by an additional lasmiditan for patients who did not achieve satisfactory results following initial triptan intake for treating migraine. The AEs associated with this treatment strategy were mild and lasted for a short time. This study suggested that the combination of triptan and lasmiditan is promising for the treatment of migraine and should be studied in a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Network meta-analysis of migraine disorder treatment by NSAIDs and triptans

Background

Migraine is a neurological disorder resulting in large socioeconomic burden. This network meta-analysis (NMA) is designed to compare the relative efficacy and tolerability of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) and triptans.

Methods

We conducted systematic searches in database PubMed and Embase. Treatment effectiveness was compared by synthesizing direct and indirect evidences using NMA. The surface under curve ranking area (SUCRA) was created to rank those interventions.

Results

Eletriptan and rizatriptan are superior to sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, almotriptan, ibuprofen and aspirin with respect to pain-relief. When analyzing 2 h-nausea-absence, rizatriptan has a better efficacy than sumatriptan, while other treatments indicate no distinctive difference compared with placebo. Furthermore, sumatriptan demonstrates a higher incidence of all-adverse-event compared with diclofenac-potassium, ibuprofen and almotriptan.

Conclusion

This study suggests that eletriptan may be the most suitable therapy for migraine from a comprehensive point of view. In the meantime ibuprofen may also be a good choice for its excellent tolerability. Multi-component medication also attracts attention and may be a promising avenue for the next generation of migraine treatment.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s10194-016-0703-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Comparative tolerability of treatments for acute migraine: A network meta-analysis

Introduction

Migraine headache is a neurological disorder whose attacks are associated with nausea, vomiting, photophobia and phonophobia. Treatments for migraine aim to either prevent attacks before they have started or relieve attacks (abort) after onset of symptoms and range from complementary therapies to pharmacological interventions. A number of treatment-related adverse events such as somnolence, fatigue, and chest discomfort have previously been reported in association with triptans. The comparative tolerability of available agents for the abortive treatment of migraine attacks has not yet been systematically reviewed and quantified.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis for comparative tolerability of treatments for migraine. The literature search targeted all randomized controlled trials evaluating oral abortive treatments for acute migraine over a range of available doses in adults. The primary outcomes of interest were any adverse event, treatment-related adverse events, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, dizziness, chest discomfort, somnolence, nausea, and vomiting.

Results

Our search yielded 141 trials covering 15 distinct treatments. Of the triptans, sumatriptan, eletriptan, rizatriptan, zolmitriptan, and the combination treatment of sumatriptan and naproxen were associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring compared with placebo. Of the non-triptans, only acetaminophen was associated with a statistically significant increase in odds of an adverse event occurring when compared with placebo. Overall, triptans were not associated with increased odds of serious adverse events occurring and the same was the case for non-triptans. For the secondary outcomes, with the exception of vomiting, all triptans except for almotriptan and frovatriptan were significantly associated with increased risk for all outcomes. Almotriptan was significantly associated with an increased risk of vomiting, whereas all other triptans yielded non-significant lower odds compared with placebo. Generally, the non-triptans were not associated with decreased tolerability for the secondary outcomes.

Discussion

In summary, triptans were associated with higher odds of any adverse event or a treatment-related adverse event occurring when compared to placebo and non-triptans. Non-significant results for non-triptans indicate that these treatments are comparable with one another and placebo regarding tolerability outcomes.

Use of the Foreign Studies: Transposition of the Results, Prediction of the Therapeutic Effects in the French Population, Modelling of the Public Health Interest

More and more frequently, the health authorities and the French assessment agencies are led to issue Marketing Authorizations (MAs), give opinions on the eligibility for reimbursement of drugs or to draft recommendations for clinical practice based on the results of foreign studies. The results of these studies are more or less difficult to transpose to French practice. These difficulties generate varying degrees of uncertainty concerning the effect to be expected of a drug. A more or less extensive loss of effect is sometimes even predictable. Some of the difficulties in transposition are discussed in this article and proposals for action are made in order to allow one, in the long term, to predict in the most precise manner possible the effects to be expected from a drug in the French population and be able to verify this prediction at an interval from its eligibility for reimbursement.

Zolmitriptan for acute migraine attacks in adults

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a common, disabling condition and a burden for the individual, health services, and society. Zolmitriptan is an abortive medication for migraine attacks, belonging to the triptan family. These medicines work in a different way to analgesics such as paracetamol and ibuprofen.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of zolmitriptan compared to placebo and other active interventions in the treatment of acute migraine attacks in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Oxford Pain Relief Database, together with three online databases (www.astrazenecaclinicaltrials.com, www.clinicaltrials.gov, and apps.who.int/trialsearch) for studies to 12 March 2014. We also searched the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies, with at least 10 participants per treatment arm, using zolmitriptan to treat a migraine headache episode.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate risk ratios and numbers needed to treat for an additional beneficial effect (NNT) or harmful effect (NNH) compared with placebo or a different active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (20,162 participants) compared zolmitriptan with placebo or an active comparator. The evidence from placebo-controlled studies was of high quality for all outcomes except 24 hour outcomes and serious adverse events where only limited data were available. The majority of included studies were at a low risk of performance, detection and attrition biases, but did not adequately describe methods of randomisation and concealment.Most of the data were for the 2.5 mg and 5 mg doses compared with placebo, for treatment of moderate to severe pain. For all efficacy outcomes, zolmitriptan surpassed placebo. For oral zolmitriptan 2.5 mg versus placebo, the NNTs were 5.0, 3.2, 7.7, and 4.1 for pain-free at two hours, headache relief at two hours, sustained pain-free during the 24 hours postdose, and sustained headache relief during the 24 hours postdose, respectively. Results for the oral 5 mg dose were similar to the 2.5 mg dose, while zolmitriptan 10 mg was significantly more effective than 5 mg for pain-free and headache relief at two hours. For headache relief at one and two hours and sustained headache relief during the 24 hours postdose, but not pain-free at two hours, zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray was significantly more effective than the 5 mg oral tablet.For the most part, adverse events were transient and mild and were more common with zolmitriptan than placebo, with a clear dose response relationship (1 mg to 10 mg).High quality evidence from two studies showed that oral zolmitriptan 2.5 mg and 5 mg provided headache relief at two hours to the same proportion of people as oral sumatriptan 50 mg (66%, 67%, and 68% respectively), although not necessarily the same individuals. There was no significant difference in numbers experiencing adverse events. Single studies reported on other active treatment comparisons but are not described further because of the small amount of data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Zolmitriptan is effective as an abortive treatment for migraine attacks for some people, but is associated with increased adverse events compared to placebo. Zolmitriptan 2.5 mg and 5 mg benefited the same proportion of people as sumatriptan 50 mg, although not necessarily the same individuals, for headache relief at two hours.

Bioequivalence and rapid absorption of zolmitriptan nasal spray compared with oral tablets in healthy Japanese subjects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Oral zolmitriptan is highly effective in the acute treatment of migraine. However, nausea and vomiting during attacks may limit the usefulness of oral medications. An alternative, nasal spray, formulation has been developed that demonstrates good efficacy, high tolerability and a very fast onset of action. This study assessed the pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of zolmitriptan and its active metabolite 183C91 in healthy Japanese subjects following single-dose (2.5 or 5mg) oral or intranasal administration.

METHODS

This was a single-centre, open-label, randomised, crossover study. Forty-eight subjects each received one oral and one intranasal dose of 2.5 or 5mg zolmitriptan, with a 72-hour washout period between doses. Blood was drawn at various timepoints from 2 minutes to 15 hours post-dose and urine was collected over the course of the study; samples were analysed for zolmitriptan and 183C91, from which pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated.

RESULTS

Zolmitriptan was detected in plasma 2 minutes after intranasal administration in the majority of subjects (~75%) compared with 10 minutes after oral administration. The intranasal : tablet ratio for zolmitriptan area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity was 0.924 (90% CI 0.826, 1.033) and 0.960 (90% CI 0.865, 1.066) for the 2.5 and 5mg doses, respectively. Other pharmacokinetic parameters were similar between the two formulations. While 183C91 appeared in the plasma concurrently to zolmitriptan after oral dosing, its appearance was delayed to approximately 30 minutes after intranasal dosing. Zolmitriptan was safe and well tolerated at both doses.

CONCLUSIONS

The rapid absorption of zolmitriptan nasal spray may explain the faster relief from migraine reported in patients compared with oral zolmitriptan.

Are the current IHS guidelines for migraine drug trials being followed?

In 2000, the Clinical Trials Subcommittee of the International Headache Society (IHS) published the second edition of its guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine. The purpose of this publication was to improve the quality of such trials by increasing the awareness amongst investigators of the methodological issues specific to this particular illness. Until now the adherence to these guidelines has not been systematically assessed. We reviewed all published controlled trials of drugs in migraine from 2002 to 2008. Eligible trials were scored for compliance with the IHS guidelines by using grading scales based on the most essential recommendations of the guidelines. The primary efficacy measure of each trial was also recorded. A total of 145 trials of acute treatment and 52 trials of prophylactic treatment were eligible for review. Of the randomized, double-blind trials, acute trials scored an average of 4.7 out of 7 while prophylactic trials scored an average of 5.6 out of 9 for compliance. Thirty-one percent of acute trials and 72% of prophylactic trials used the recommended primary efficacy measure. Fourteen percent of the reviewed trials were either not randomized or not double-blinded. Adherence to international guidelines like these of IHS is important to ensure that only high-quality trials are performed, and to provide the consensus that is required for meta analyses. The primary efficacy measure for trials of acute treatment should be “pain free” and not “headache relief”. Open-label or non-randomized trials generally have no place in the study of migraine drugs.

Frovatriptan is Effective and Well Tolerated in Korean Migraineurs: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background and Purpose

Frovatriptan is a selective 5-HT_1B/1D agonist with a long duration of action and a low incidence of side effects. Although several placebo-controlled trials have documented the clinical efficacy and safety of frovatriptan in adults with migraine, this drug has not previously been studied in Asian including Korean patients.

Methods

In this double-blind multicenter trial, 229 patients with migraine were randomized to receive frovatriptan 2.5 mg or placebo upon the occurrence of a moderate-to-severe migraine. The primary outcome was the 2-hour headache response rate.

Results

Frovatriptan significantly increased the 2-hour headache response rate compared with placebo (52.9% vs. 34.0%, p=0.004). The headache response rates at 4, 6, and 12 hours were significantly higher in the frovatriptan group than in the placebo group, as was the pain-free rate at 2 hours (19.0% vs. 5.7%, p=0.004), 4 hours (40.7% vs. 23.0%, p=0.006), and 6 hours (56.1% vs. 34.0%, p=0.002). The median time to a headache response was significantly shorter in the frovatriptan group than in the placebo group (2.00 hours vs. 3.50 hours, p<0.001). The use of rescue medications was more common in the placebo group (p=0.005). Chest tightness associated with triptan was infrequent (2.5%), mild, and transient.

Conclusions

These results demonstrate that 2.5-mg frovatriptan is effective and well tolerated in Korean migraineurs for acute treatment of migraine attacks.

Marketed oral triptans in the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review on efficacy and tolerability

BACKGROUND

In the current literature, there is neither a reported systematic review comparing the efficacy of triptans at 30 minutes and 1 hour after the migraine treatment, nor data related to efficacy of new marketed triptans.

OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this analysis was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of currently marketed oral, non-reencapsulated triptan formulations vs placebo in the treatment of moderate-to-severe migraine attacks.

METHODS

A systematic review of double-blind, randomized clinical trials reporting data after a single migraine attack was conducted. Efficacy results are shown using relative risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. A sensitivity analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

After reviewing 221 publications, 38 studies were included. All marketed triptans provided significant relief and/or absence of pain at 2 hours, and relief at 1 hour when compared with placebo. After 30 minutes, fast-dissolving sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg, sumatriptan 50 mg, and rizatriptan 10 mg showed significant relief when compared to placebo, whereas the fast-dissolving formulation of sumatriptan 100 mg was the only oral triptan that was superior to placebo in meeting the pain-free endpoint. On the other hand, fast-dissolving sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg and eletriptan 40 mg showed a lower rate of recurrence than placebo, whereas rizatriptan 10 mg was the only triptan with a recurrence rate greater than that of placebo. Adverse events associated with treatment with tablet formulations of sumatriptan and zolmitriptan were significantly more frequent than those of the placebo group. The inclusion of trials with reencapsulated triptans in the analysis introduced minor specific changes in these results.

CONCLUSION

This analysis updates the comparative data available for the 7 currently marketed oral triptans and clearly demonstrates their efficacy when compared to placebo, even with stricter endpoints, such as efficacy at 30 minutes. No triptan exhibited better tolerability than placebo. Results are diverse, depending on the triptan, which probably is a reflection of heterogeneous pharmacokinetics.

Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan in the acute treatment of migraine

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan in the treatment of acute migraine attacks.

BACKGROUND

Zolmitriptan is a second-generation triptan developed for the treatment of migraine. Numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been carried out to compare different dosages and formulations of zolmitriptan against other treatments for acute migraine.

METHODS

Random effects meta-analysis of 24 RCTs, including 15,408 patients suffering from acute migraine attacks. Subgroup analyses compared differences in response between different dosages and formulations of zolmitriptan, and other triptan comparators.

RESULTS

Zolmitriptan 2.5 mg tablet was found to be as effective as almotriptan 12.5 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, sumatriptan 50 mg and 100 mg and more effective than naratriptan 2.5 mg in terms of 2-hour pain-free rates. Likewise, zolmitriptan 5 mg tablet was as effective as sumatriptan 50 mg and 100 mg in 2-hour pain-free rates. Compared against zolmitriptan 2.5 mg tablet, eletriptan 80 mg was more effective in achieving headache relief, pain-free and sustained pain-free responses, and rizatriptan 10 mg was more effective in terms of sustained pain-free rates. Zolmitriptan 2.5 mg tablet was associated with a lower risk of adverse events than eletriptan 80 mg but higher risk than naratriptan 2.5 mg and rizatriptan 10 mg. Zolmitriptan 5 mg tablet was superior to zolmitriptan 2.5 mg tablet in achieving 1- and 2-hour pain-free response. There were no significant differences in 1- and 2-hour headache relief and adverse event rates between the different formulations of zolmitriptan 2.5 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

Zolmitriptan 2.5 mg tablet is an effective treatment for acute attacks of migraine showing similar efficacy to almotriptan 12.5 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, and sumatriptan 50 mg, and being more effective than naratriptan 2.5 mg in terms of pain-free response at 2 hours post dose. Zolmitriptan 2.5 mg tablet was also as effective as rizatriptan 10 mg in terms of headache relief and pain-free response but less effective in terms of sustained pain-free response.

Zolmitriptan Intranasal: A Review of the Pharmacokinetics and Clinical Efficacy

Migraine is a common disabling neurological disorder, associated with headache, nausea, and on occasions vomiting. Zolmitriptan is a widely available serotonin 5HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist with a long track record in clinical studies and in the treatment of acute migraine. A nasal formulation has been developed that has clear evidence for local absorption, resulting in plasma drug concentrations within 2 minutes of dosing, central nervous system penetration 3 minutes later, and a significant efficacy benefit versus placebo 10 to 15 minutes after dosing. Intranasal zolmitriptan offers advantages to migraineurs, particularly those seeking a more rapid onset of effect without wishing to self-inject, or those with gastrointestinal upset. The comparison of pharmacokinetic and clinical data available from different formulations of zolmitriptan contributes both to the understanding of its mode of action and the characteristics required of an acute migraine treatment if it is to meet patient needs.

Cost effectiveness of oral triptan therapy: a trans-national comparison based on a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to appraise the relative cost effectiveness of oral triptan therapy in the management of acute migraine, comparing the results obtained using drug cost data from six different countries, USA, UK, Canada, Germany, Italy and The Netherlands.

METHOD

A meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials of single dose oral triptans was carried out in order to calculate aggregate Numbers Needed to Treat (NNT) for each triptan and dose. Cost effectiveness ratios were then derived for each treatment by applying mean drug acquisition costs for each country to these NNTs. Using a graphical plot for each country, incremental cost effectiveness comparisons were then made versus sumatriptan 100 mg, the most commonly used oral triptan.

RESULTS

When analysed in terms of 2-h pain one country to another. When compared to free outcomes, rizatriptan 10 mg and eletriptan 40 and 80 mg were the most effective oral triptans. Rizatriptan 10mg has the most advantageous absolute cost effectiveness ratio in all six countries studied, although levels of statistical significance compared to other agents varied from sumatriptan 100mg, rizatriptan 10 mg and eletriptan 40 mg are most consistently the cost effective treatment choices, both being cost dominant in five out of six countries studied.

CONCLUSIONS

There are systematic differences in triptan efficacy that have an impact on treatment choice. Differences in pricing structure between countries mean that hierarchies of cost effectiveness will vary. Country-specific data should therefore be examined before defining treatment strategies.