Patient preference for eletriptan 80 mg versus subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg: results of a crossover study in patients who have recently used subcutaneous sumatriptan

Patient Preferences and Values in Decision Making for Migraines: A Systematic Literature Review

Objective

To comprehensively summarize the evidence on the preferences and values of migraine patients.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Sino-Med, Chongqing VIP, and Wanfang Data for studies on the preferences and values of migraine patients. A qualitative review was performed, but no quantitative synthesis.

Results

Twenty‐one studies were finally included, involving a total of 8701 participants. Patients expected a cure, to be symptom-free, a reduction in frequency of headaches, a reduction in severity of headaches, and an improved quality of life from their preventive treatment. Patients expected rapid pain relief, complete pain relief, return to normal activities, no recurrence, and no adverse events from their acute symptomatic treatment.

Conclusion

Efficacy is the primary consideration in the treatment of migraine. Specifically, the most important embodiment of patient preferences and values is the reduced frequency of attacks with preventive treatment as well as prompt analgesia with acute symptomatic treatment.

Value-based healthcare: Il nuovo approccio di AIFA alla determinazione multidimensionale del valore

In this viewpoint, we discuss the approach promoted by the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA) to the assessment of the value of new pharmaceuticals in the Italian Healthcare Service. On top of traditionally acknowledged components, such as quality adjusted life years gained and net costs, the overall value framework might include other elements such as productivity and adherence, equity, severity of disease, reduction in uncertainty, spillover effects. There is a residual dimension in the value framework that may capture the option value or reduction in fear of contagion for infectious disease treatments. We debate measurement issues on these elements of value and discuss open issues from a methodological and policy standpoint.

Eletriptan Treatment of Migraine in Patients Switching from Barbiturate-Containing Analgesics: Results from a Multiple-Attack Study

The aim of this study was to examine efficacy and tolerability of eletriptan in patients switched from barbiturate-containing combinations (Fiorinal®, Fioricet®). Migraineurs ( n = 160) meeting IHS criteria, with unsatisfactory response in the past year to butalbital-containing combinations, treated up to 16 attacks over 3 months with eletriptan 40 mg. Assessments included headache response and pain-free rates and functional impairment at baseline and 2 h postdose, and global ratings of treatment satisfaction at 24 h. At 2 h postdose, average headache response and pain-free rates were 71% (95% CI, 69-74%) and 37% (95% CI, 35-40%), respectively; 68.5% of patients (95% CI, 65-72%) reported functional response. Within-patient analysis found no efficacy diminution over time (no tolerance). Average headache recurrence rate was 20% (95% CI, 18-23%). Eletriptan was well-tolerated; 6 (3.7%) patients discontinued due to adverse events. There were no serious treatment-related adverse events. We conclude that in poor responders to butalbital-caffeine combinations, switching to eletriptan 40 mg was well-tolerated and efficacious.

Duel-acting subcutaneous microemulsion formulation for improved migraine treatment with zolmitriptan and diclofenac: formulation and in vitro-in vivo characterization

Subcutaneous triptan provides immediate analgesia in migraine and cluster headache but is limited by high pain recurrence due to rapid drug elimination. A dual-acting subcutaneous formulation providing immediate release of a triptan and slow but sustained release of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug may provide a longer duration of relief. A microemulsion-based technology has various advantages over other technically complex dosage forms. Oil-in-water microemulsions of zolmitriptan and diclofenac acid using Labrafac Lipophile, Tween 80, Capryol 90 and water were prepared. One formulation was characterised in vitro and found to have uniformly dispersed nanosized globules. The formulation provided differential release of zolmitriptan and diclofenac acid both in vitro as well as in vivo that may be potentially beneficial to migraine patients.

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

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

Development, reliability, and validity of a new Preference and Satisfaction Questionnaire

OBJECTIVES

Existing questionnaires that assess preference and/or satisfaction with postmenopausal bone loss treatments were reviewed and determined to be inadequate for the assessment of an oral pill versus a subcutaneous injection. The Preference and Satisfaction Questionnaire (PSQ) was developed to assess preference, satisfaction, and bother with a weekly oral tablet versus a once every 6 months subcutaneous injection for treatment of postmenopausal bone loss.

METHODS

Questions were developed based on literature review and expert input. Content validity of the PSQ in this patient population was assessed among current or previous bisphosphonate users in group interviews, and item comprehension and readability were also evaluated. Reliability, validity, and structure of the questionnaire were assessed in two phase 3 randomized clinical trials.

RESULTS

Twenty-four women participated in cognitive interviews and found the PSQ understandable and acceptable. Subsequently, 1583 trial participants took the PSQ. Interitem correlations, ranging from 0.50 to 0.97 for preference items, 0.85 to 0.94 for pill-satisfaction items, and 0.84 to 0.92 for injection-satisfaction items, and a well-fitting confirmatory factor analysis (root mean square error of approximation 0.04, nonnormed fit index 0.99, and root mean square residual 0.08) supported the structure of the instrument. Cronbach's alpha reliability values for pill satisfaction, injection satisfaction, pill bother, and injection bother were 0.93, 0.89, 0.82, and 0.61, respectively. Discriminative validity was indicated with better satisfaction and bother scores being related to adherence and the absence of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The PSQ is a valid and reliable measure and may be a valuable tool to assess patient preference and satisfaction with a weekly oral tablet and 6-month subcutaneous injection for postmenopausal bone loss.

Quantitative analysis of eletriptan in human plasma by HPLC-MS/MS and its application to pharmacokinetic study

Authors developed a simple, sensitive, selective, rapid, rugged, and reproducible liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the quantification of eletriptan (EP) in human plasma using naratriptan (NP) as an internal standard (IS). Chromatographic separation was performed on Ascentis Express C18, 50 × 4.6 mm, 2.7 μm column. Mobile phase was composed of 0.1% formic acid: methanol (40:60 v/v), with 0.5 mL/min flow rate. Drug and IS were extracted by liquid-liquid extraction. EP and NP were detected with proton adducts at m/z 383.2→84.3 and 336.2→97.8 in multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) positive mode, respectively. The method was validated with the correlation coefficients of (r(2)) ≥ 0.9963 over a linear concentration range of 0.5-250.0 ng/mL. This method demonstrated intra- and inter-day precision within 1.4-9.2% and 4.4-5.5% and accuracy within 96.8-103% and 98.5-99.8% for EP. This method is successfully applied in the bioequivalence study of 24 human volunteers.

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.

Eletriptan

Migraine is a multifactorial chronic central nervous system disorder, characterized by recurrent disabling attacks of moderate-to-severe headache. Symptomatic acute treatment of migraine should provide rapid and effective relief of the headache pain. The introduction of the 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists (triptans) expanded the armamentarium for acute migraine pain treatment. Eletriptan is a second-generation triptan with favorable bioavailability and half-life, a high affinity for 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors and selectivity for cranial arteries. Eletriptan (40 and 80 mg) has been shown to be effective as early as 30 min after administration and well tolerated when compared to placebo. In comparative clinical trials, eletriptan 40 and 80 mg were superior or equivalent to other triptans and have shown a very high safety and tolerability profile across the studies performed. Eletriptan showed the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when compared with other agents in its class.

Eletriptan: a review and new perspectives

Eletriptan is a second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine(1B/1D) receptor agonist, or triptan, indicated for the acute treatment of migraine. Eletriptan has a favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile expressed by bioavailability, half-life and high selectivity for cranial arteries. It has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in a wide preapproval development program, which included over 11,000 patients and treated more than 74,000 migraine attacks. In clinical trials, eletriptan has been demonstrated to be one of the most effective oral therapies for the acute treatment of migraine and has shown a very high safety and tolerability profile across the studies performed. Eletriptan showed the most favorable cost-effectiveness profile when compared with other agents in its class.

Eletriptan

Eletriptan (Relpax) is an orally administered, lipophilic, highly selective serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist ('triptan') that is effective in the acute treatment of moderate to severe migraine attacks in adults. It has a rapid onset of action and demonstrates superiority over placebo as early as 30 minutes after the administration of a single 40 or 80 mg oral dose. The efficacy of eletriptan 20 mg was similar to that of sumatriptan 100 mg, while eletriptan 40 and 80 mg displayed greater efficacy than sumatriptan 50 or 100 mg for most endpoints. Eletriptan 40 mg was generally superior to naratriptan 2.5 mg and equivalent to almotriptan 12.5 mg, rizatriptan 10 mg and zolmitriptan 2.5 mg, while eletriptan 80 mg was superior to zolmitriptan 2.5 mg for most efficacy parameters. Eletriptan 40 and 80 mg were consistently superior to ergotamine/caffeine. Eletriptan is generally well tolerated, reduces time lost from normal activities, improves patients' health-related quality of life and appears to be at least as, if not more, cost effective than sumatriptan. Eletriptan is therefore a useful addition to the triptan family and a first-line treatment option in the acute management of migraine attacks.

Eletriptan review

Eletriptan is a selective, high affinity serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D)-receptor agonist which is rapidly absorbed and has a long half-life in plasma. Eletriptan has been shown to be effective and well tolerated in randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled acute migraine trials and long-term open-label trials. Eletriptan maintains a consistency of response across three attacks and patients continue to respond to eletriptan for at least up to 1 year. Eletriptan has been compared with sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, naratriptan and ergotamine/caffeine in placebo-controlled, randomised, head-to-head trials, and has shown better efficacy with similar adverse events. In a large triptan meta-analysis, including 53 trials and > 24,000 patients, eletriptan 80 mg showed better efficacy, similar consistency but lower tolerability compared with sumatriptan 100 mg. Eletriptan has also shown efficacy in difficult-to-treat patients who were dissatisfied with their previous treatment with sumatriptan, rizatriptan, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or Excedrin.