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

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of migraine

We here present evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of migraine. These guidelines, created by the Italian Society for the Study of Headache and the International Headache Society, aim to offer clear, actionable recommendations to healthcare professionals. They incorporate evidence-based recommendations from randomized controlled trials and expert-based opinions. The guidelines follow the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for assessing the quality of evidence. The guideline development involved a systematic review of literature across multiple databases, adherence to Cochrane review methods, and a structured framework for data extraction and interpretation. Although the guidelines provide a robust foundation for migraine treatment, they also highlight gaps in current research, such as the paucity of head-to-head drug comparisons and the need for long-term outcome studies. These guidelines serve as a resource to standardize migraine treatment and promote high-quality care across different healthcare settings.

A Nickel/Organoboron-Catalyzed Coupling of Aryl Bromides with Sodium Sulfinates: The Synthesis of Sulfones under Visible Light

An efficient cross-coupling of aryl bromides with sodium sulfinates, using an organoboron photocatalyst with nickel, is described herein. Under the irradiation of white light, this dually catalytic system enables the synthesis of a series of sulfone compounds in moderate to good yields. A broad range of functional groups and heteroaromatic compounds is tolerated under these reaction conditions. The use of an organoboron photocatalyst highlights a sustainable alternative to iridium or ruthenium complexes. These findings contribute to the field of photochemistry and provide a greener approach to sulfone synthesis.

The Impact of P-Glycoprotein on Opioid Analgesics: What's the Real Meaning in Pain Management and Palliative Care?

Opioids are widely used in cancer and non-cancer pain management. However, many transporters at the blood-brain barrier (BBB), such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp, ABCB1/MDR1), may impair their delivery to the brain, thus leading to opioid tolerance. Nonetheless, opioids may regulate P-gp expression, thus altering the transport of other compounds, namely chemotherapeutic agents, resulting in pharmacoresistance. Other kinds of painkillers (e.g., acetaminophen, dexamethasone) and adjuvant drugs used for neuropathic pain may act as P-gp substrates and modulate its expression, thus making pain management challenging. Inflammatory conditions are also believed to upregulate P-gp. The role of P-gp in drug-drug interactions is currently under investigation, since many P-gp substrates may also act as substrates for the cytochrome P450 enzymes, which metabolize a wide range of xenobiotics and endobiotics. Genetic variability of the ABCB1/MDR1 gene may be accountable for inter-individual variation in opioid-induced analgesia. P-gp also plays a role in the management of opioid-induced adverse effects, such as constipation. Peripherally acting mu-opioid receptors antagonists (PAMORAs), such as naloxegol and naldemedine, are substrates of P-gp, which prevent their penetration in the central nervous system. In our review, we explore the interactions between P-gp and opioidergic drugs, with their implications in clinical practice.

Comparison between metamizole and triptans for migraine treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of metamizole and triptans for the treatment of migraine. MethodsRandomized controlled trials including people who received metamizole or triptan by multiple routes of administration and at all doses as treatment compared to subjects who received another treatment or placebo were included in the systematic review. The primary outcomes were freedom from pain at 2 hours; pain relief at 2 hours; sustained headache response at 24 hours; sustained freedom from pain at 24 hours. The statistical analysis of all interventions of interest were based on random effect models compared through a network meta-analysis. Results 209 studies meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed. Of these, 130 had data that could be analyzed statistically. Only 3.0% provided enough information and were judged to have a low overall risk of bias for all categories evaluated; approximately 50% of the studies presented a low risk of selection bias. More than 75% of the studies presented a low risk of performance bias, and around 75% showed a low risk of detection and attrition bias. ConclusionThere is no evidence of a difference between dipyrone and any triptan for pain freedom after 2 hours of medication. Our study suggests that metamizole may be equally effective as triptans in acute migraine treatment.

Copper-catalyzed regioselective sulfonylcyanations of vinylarenes

A set of copper-catalyzed sulfonylcyanations of vinylarenes with readily accessible arylsulfonyl chlorides and trimethyl cyanide was achieved, providing a streamlined route to various decorated β-sulfonyl nitriles with good regioselectivity and functional group tolerance.

Evaluating the reporting of adverse events in controlled clinical trials conducted in 2010–2015 on migraine drug treatments

Background

In 2008, the International Headache Society published guidelines on the “evaluation and registration of adverse events in clinical drug trials on migraine”. They listed seven recommendations for reporting adverse events in randomized controlled trials on migraine. The present study aimed to evaluate adherence to these recommendations, and based on the results, to recommend improvements.

Methods

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE database to identify controlled trials on migraine drugs published from 2010 to 2015. For each trial, we noted whether five of the recommended parameters were presented. In addition, we noted whether adverse events were reported in abstracts.

Results

We identified 73 trials; 51 studied acutely administered drugs and 22 studied prophylactic drugs for migraine. The number of patients with any adverse events were reported in 74% of acute-administration and 86% of prophylactic drug trials. Only 30 (41%) of the 73 studies reported adverse events with data in the abstracts, and 27 (37%) abstracts did not mention adverse events.

Conclusion

Adverse events, both frequency and symptoms, should be reported to allow a fair judgement of benefit/tolerability ratio when randomized controlled trials in migraine treatment are published. Clinically significant adverse events should be included in the abstract of every randomized controlled trial in migraine treatment.

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.

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.

A Review of Evidence-Based Medicine and Meta-Analytic Reviews in Migraine

The following systematic reviews and meta-analyses are presented and the results discussed: the evidence-based American guidelines, five systematic reviews on naratriptan, rizatriptan, eletriptan, sumatriptan and propranolol; a meta-analysis of sumatriptan, a meta-analysis of acute migraine therapy, a meta-analysis of triptans available in Canada and a large meta-analysis of oral triptans. The systematic reviews of several randomized trials of one drug overcome random effects in estimating treatment effect of the reviewed drug. The results from the large meta-analysis of several drugs are compared with head-to-head comparative trials. Results are generally the same in the meta-analysis and in the comparative trials, with some exceptions. Head-to-head comparisons should remain the ‘gold standard’ and meta-analyses are a useful supplement in cases when comparative trials are relatively small and when no comparative trials exist.

Therapeutic Benefit of Eletriptan Compared to Sumatriptan for the Acute Relief of Migraine Pain — Results of a Model-Based Meta-Analysis that Accounts for Encapsulation

A novel model-based meta-analysis was used to quantify the dose-response relationship of sumatriptan and eletriptan for the proportion of patients that achieve migraine pain relief up to 4h after treatment. The proportion of patients that became pain free was also evaluated. This analysis includes some unique features, allowing comparison of sumatriptan and eletriptan doses that have not been directly compared in a head to head study and also permitting comparison between the two drugs at multiple time points up to 4 h after treatment. Because the analysis allows comparison of response to blinded sumatriptan with that to marketed sumatriptan and contains timepoints as early as 0.5 h, it is especially suited to detection of possible effects of encapsulation on sumatriptan's therapeutic effectiveness and thus was employed to assess this also. Data from 19 randomized placebo controlled clinical trials were jointly analysed using a random-effects logistic regression model. The results of this analysis show a significant clinical benefit of eletriptan 40 mg compared to sumatriptan 100 mg at any point in time up to 4 h after treatment. The benefit of eletriptan 40 mg is greatest around 1.5-2 h after treatment with an absolute difference at 2 h of 9.1% (7.4-11.5%) more patients achieving pain relief and 7.3% (5.8-8.6%) more patient achieving pain free when compared to sumatriptan 100 mg. An absolute benefit of more than 5% of patients is maintained from 45 min up to 4 h after treatment for pain relief and from 1.5 h up to 4 h for pain free. Eletriptan 20 mg was superior to sumatriptan 50 mg and similar to sumatriptan 100 mg for pain relief while it was similar to sumatriptan 50 mg for pain free. The benefit of eletriptan 20 mg when compared to sumatriptan 50 mg is greatest around 1.5-2 h after treatment with an absolute difference at 2 h of 5.0% (2.9-8.1%) more patients achieving pain relief. An absolute benefit of more than 3% of patients was maintained from 1 h up to 3 h after treatment. No significant difference was found between eletriptan 20 mg and sumatriptan 50 mg for the fraction of patients that became pain free. No significant effect of encapsulation of sumatriptan was found on the time course of response up to 4 h after treatment when compared to commercial sumatriptan.

Eletriptan in the management of acute migraine: an update on the evidence for efficacy, safety, and consistent response

Migraine is a multifactorial, neurological and disabling disorder, also characterized by several autonomic symptoms. Triptans, selective serotonin 5-HT1B/1D agonists, are the first-line treatment option for moderate-to-severe headache attacks. In this paper, we review the recent data on eletriptan clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability, and potential clinically relevant interactions with other drugs. Among triptans, eletriptan shows a consistent and significant clinical efficacy and a good tolerability profile in the treatment of migraine, especially for patients with cardiovascular risk factors without coronary artery disease. It shows the most favorable clinical response, together with sumatriptan injections, zolmitriptan and rizatriptan. Additionally, eletriptan shows the most complex pharmacokinetic/dynamic profile compared with the other triptans. It is metabolized primarily by the CYP3A4 hepatic enzyme and therefore the concomitant administration of CYP3A4-potent inhibitors should be carefully evaluated. A relatively low risk of serotonin syndrome is given by the co-administration with serotoninergic drugs. No clinically relevant interaction has been found with drugs used for migraine prophylactic treatment or other acute drugs, with the exception of ergot derivatives that should not be co-administered with eletriptan.

Targeted Review: Medications for Acute Migraine Treatment

Objective:

To assess the evidence base for drugs used for acute treatment of episodic migraine (headache on < 14 days a month) in Canada.

Methods:

A detailed search strategy was employed to find relevant published clinical trials of drugs used in Canada for the acute treatment of migraine in adults. Primarily meta-analyses and systematic reviews were included. Where these were not available for a drug or were out of date, individual clinical trial reports were utilized. Only double-blind randomized clinical trials with placebo or active drug controls were included in the analysis. Recommendations and levels of evidence were graded according to the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group, using a consensus group.

Results:

Eighteen acute migraine medications and two adjunctive medications were evaluated. Twelve acute medications received a strong recommendation with supporting high quality evidence for use in acute migraine therapy (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, ASA, ibuprofen, naproxen sodium, diclofenac potassium, and acetaminophen). Four acute medications received a weak recommendation for use with low or moderate quality evidence (dihydroergotamine, ergotamine, codeine-containing combination analgesics, and tramadol-containing combination analgesics). Three of these medications were NOT recommended for routine use (ergotamine, and codeine- and tramadol-containing medications), and strong recommendations were made to avoid use of butorphanol and butalbital-containing medications. Both metoclopramide and domperidone received a strong recommendation for use with acute migraine attack medications where necessary.

Conclusion:

Our targeted review formulated recommendations for the available acute medications for migraine treatment according to the GRADE method. This should be helpful for practitioners who prescribe medications for acute migraine treatment.

AVP-825 breath-powered intranasal delivery system containing 22 mg sumatriptan powder vs 100 mg oral sumatriptan in the acute treatment of migraines (The COMPASS study): a comparative randomized clinical trial across multiple attacks

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of AVP-825, an investigational bi-directional breath-powered intranasal delivery system containing low-dose (22 mg) sumatriptan powder, vs 100 mg oral sumatriptan for acute treatment of migraine in a double-dummy, randomized comparative efficacy clinical trial allowing treatment across multiple migraine attacks.

BACKGROUND

In phases 2 and 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, AVP-825 provided early and sustained relief of moderate or severe migraine headache in adults, with a low incidence of triptan-related adverse effects.

METHODS

This was a randomized, active-comparator, double-dummy, cross-over, multi-attack study (COMPASS; NCT01667679) with two ≤12-week double-blind periods. Subjects experiencing 2-8 migraines/month in the past year were randomized 1:1 using computer-generated sequences to AVP-825 plus oral placebo tablet or an identical placebo delivery system plus 100 mg oral sumatriptan tablet for the first period; patients switched treatment for the second period in this controlled comparative design. Subjects treated ≤5 qualifying migraines per period within 1 hour of onset, even if pain was mild. The primary end-point was the mean value of the summed pain intensity differences through 30 minutes post-dose (SPID-30) using Headache Severity scores. Secondary outcomes included pain relief, pain freedom, pain reduction, consistency of response across multiple migraines, migraine-associated symptoms, and atypical sensations. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 275 adults were randomized, 174 (63.3%) completed the study (ie, completed the second treatment period), and 185 (67.3%) treated at least one migraine in both periods (1531 migraines assessed). There was significantly greater reduction in migraine pain intensity with AVP-825 vs oral sumatriptan in the first 30 minutes post-dose (least squares mean SPID-30 = 10.80 vs 7.41, adjusted mean difference 3.39 [95% confidence interval 1.76, 5.01]; P < .001). At each time point measured between 15 and 90 minutes, significantly greater rates of pain relief and pain freedom occurred with AVP-825 treatment compared with oral sumatriptan. At 2 hours, rates of pain relief and pain freedom became comparable; rates of sustained pain relief and sustained pain freedom from 2 to 48 hours remained comparable. Nasal discomfort and abnormal taste were more common with AVP-825 vs oral sumatriptan (16% vs 1% and 26% vs 4%, respectively), but ∼90% were mild, leading to only one discontinuation. Atypical sensation rates were significantly lower with AVP-825 than with conventional higher dose 100 mg oral sumatriptan.

CONCLUSIONS

AVP-825 (containing 22 mg sumatriptan nasal powder) provided statistically significantly greater reduction of migraine pain intensity over the first 30 minutes following treatment, and greater rates of pain relief and pain freedom within 15 minutes, compared with 100 mg oral sumatriptan. Sustained pain relief and pain freedom through 24 and 48 hours was achieved in a similar percentage of attacks for both treatments, despite substantially lower total systemic drug exposure with AVP-825. Treatment was well tolerated, with statistically significantly fewer atypical sensations with AVP-825.

A review of the pharmacoeconomics of eletriptan for the acute treatment of migraine

Migraine is a commonly occurring, chronic disorder that can cause significant disability. Eletriptan, a selective serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine 1 receptor subtype B/D (5-HT_1B/1D) agonist, is a clinically effective treatment for moderate to severe migraine. The objective of this literature review was to summarize the available data on the pharmacoeconomics of eletriptan relative to other triptans. Articles meeting the following three criteria were included in the review: 1) contained pharmacoeconomic data on a marketed dose of eletriptan; 2) included data on at least one other comparator triptan; and 3) was in English. A MEDLINE^® search yielded a total of eight studies (from the European Union [n=5] and from the USA [n=3]) across multiple regions. Seven of the studies examined the pharmacoeconomics of eletriptan relative to other triptans, and a further study examined the health care costs of eletriptan 40 mg versus sumatriptan 100 mg. Eletriptan 40 mg was among a group of triptans, including rizatriptan 10 mg and almotriptan 12.5 mg, demonstrating the greatest cost-effectiveness. This result held across different definitions of efficacy (2 hours pain-free, sustained pain-free, and sustained pain-free with no adverse events) and also held when cost-effectiveness models accounted for second doses and use of rescue medication, management of adverse events, and productivity loss, in addition to drug acquisition costs. Only limited head-to-head comparator data were available. The majority of pharmacoeconomic studies utilized the same set of efficacy and/or tolerability data, and indirect costs were rarely included despite the fact that the majority of per capita migraine costs are attributable to indirect costs. In summary, although the market is now dominated by generics, eletriptan 40 mg is among the most clinically and cost-effective oral triptans available for the management of acute migraine. Increased effectiveness/efficacy of eletriptan may necessitate a lesser need for other migraine treatments and/or switching to other triptans.

Myocardial infarction after taking eletriptan

We report the case of a 53-year-old male patient with a medical history significant for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, migraines with visual aura and non-obstructive coronary artery disease, who sustained a non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction a few hours after taking eletriptan as abortive therapy for migraine headaches. We believe this case implies a causal association between eletriptan and myocardial infarction, considering the timing of both drug intake and symptom onset. To the best of our knowledge this is the first reported myocardial infarction attributable to eletriptan overdose in a patient without obstructive coronary artery disease.

Comparing the efficacy of eletriptan for migraine in women during menstrual and non-menstrual time periods: a pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of eletriptan in treating migraine attacks occurring within the defined menstrual time period of 1 day before and 4 days after onset of menstruation (menses days -1 to +4) compared with attacks occurring during non-menstrual time periods (occurring outside of menses days -1 to +4).

BACKGROUND

Migraine attacks during menses have been associated with longer duration, higher recurrence rates, greater treatment resistance, and greater functional disability than those not associated with menses. The efficacy of eletriptan in treating migraine attacks associated with menstruation vs those outside a defined menstrual period has not been evaluated.

METHODS

Data were pooled from 5 similarly designed, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of eletriptan 20 mg/40 mg/80 mg. Two groups were defined for this analysis: women with a single index migraine beginning during the menstrual (group 1) and non-menstrual (group 2) time periods. End points of interest were headache response at 2 hours, migraine recurrence and sustained responses for nausea, photo/phonophobia, and function. Logistic regression was used to compare group 1 vs group 2 and each eletriptan dose (20, 40, or 80 mg) vs. placebo. Adverse events were also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 3217 subjects pooled from 5 studies, 2216 women were either in group 1 (n = 630) or group 2 (n = 1586). Rates of headache response at 2 hours were similar in group 1 vs. group 2 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.11 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91, 1.36]; P = .2944). The rate of headache recurrence was significantly higher in group 1 vs group 2 (26.8% vs. 18.6%; OR = 1.67 [95% CI 1.23, 2.26]; P < .001). The odds of achieving sustained nausea responses were significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2 (OR = 0.70 [95% CI 0.54, 0.92]; P = .0097). There was no significant difference between group 1 and group 2 in the odds of achieving a sustained photo/phonophobia and functional response (OR = 0.96 [95% CI 0.77, 1.20]; P = .7269 and OR = 1.14 [95% CI 0.87, 1.50]; P = .3425, respectively). Adverse events were comparable between group 1 and group 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-hour headache outcome measures were similar in women treated with eletriptan both within and outside of the defined menstrual time period (menses days -1 to +4). The main treatment differences between the 2 groups occurred 2-24 hours post-treatment, with higher recurrence rates and lower sustained response rates for nausea in the group treated during the menstrual time period.

Outcome for headache and pain-free nonresponders to treatment of the first attack: a pooled post-hoc analysis of four randomized trials of eletriptan 40 mg

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this article is to evaluate, in first attack eletriptan headache and pain-free nonresponders, the efficacy of treating a second and third attack with the same dose of eletriptan 40 mg (ELE-40).

METHODS

Data were pooled from four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple attack studies of eletriptan in the treatment of migraine. The first-attack eletriptan headache (HNR) and pain-free (PFNR) nonresponder samples consisted of patients who did not achieve headache or pain-free responses at two hours, or sustained headache or pain-free responses at 24 hours. The efficacy of the same dose of eletriptan (vs placebo; PBO) in treating the second and third attacks was evaluated using a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Among Attack 1 eletriptan HNRs, treatment with ELE-40 (vs PBO) was associated with significantly higher two-hour headache response and pain-free rates, respectively, on both Attack 2 (48.8% vs 20.2%; 17.0% vs 3.9%; P  < 0.0001 for both comparisons) and Attack 3 (37.4% vs 15.5%; 18.8% vs 3.2%; P  < 0.0001 for both comparisons). Significantly higher sustained headache response and pain-free rates at 24 hours were also observed on both Attack 2 and Attack 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pooled analysis suggest that patients who have HNR or PFNR to an initial dose of eletriptan may respond when a second and third attack is treated with the same dose.

Consistency of eletriptan in treating migraine: Results of a randomized, within-patient multiple-dose study

OBJECTIVE

The current study evaluated the consistency of eletriptan response.

METHODS

Using a within-patient crossover design, patients with migraine completed a three-attack, open-label, lead-in period, before being treated, double-blind for four attacks, with either eletriptan 40 mg (ELE-40; N = 539) or eletriptan 80 mg (ELE-80; N = 432); placebo was randomly substituted for the treatment of one attack.

RESULTS

On an A PRIORI analysis of within-patient consistency, double-blind treatment was associated with similar 2 hour headache response rates using a ≥2/3 response criterion for ELE-40 (77%) and ELE-80 (73%), and using a 3/3 response criterion for ELE-40 (46%) and ELE-80 (47%). Within-patient consistency in achieving pain-free status at 2 hours using a ≥2/3 criterion was slightly higher on ELE-40 (42%) compared with ELE-80 (38%), and was similar using the 3/3 criterion (18% on ELE-40, 17% on ELE-80). On a repeated measures logistic regression analysis across all treated attacks, the probability of achieving a headache response at 2 hours ranged from 71% to 74% on ELE-40 vs. 17% to 28% on placebo ( P < 0.0001), and from 66% to 74% on ELE-80 vs. 21% to 27% on placebo ( P < 0.0001). The incidence, per attack, of adverse events was low for both ELE-40 and ELE-80. Few adverse events occurred with incidence ≥10% on ELE-40 (asthenia, 5.0%) or ELE-80 (asthenia, 10%; nausea, 5.8%). Discontinuations because of adverse events were 0.2% on ELE-40, and 1.6% on ELE-80 CONCLUSION: In this multiple attack study, eletriptan was well-tolerated and demonstrated consistent and significant efficacy in the treatment of migraine.

In Vivo Disintegration Profiles of Encapsulated and Nonencapsulated Sumatriptan: Gamma Scintigraphy in Healthy Volunteers

The goal of this exploratory pilot study was to use gamma scintigraphy to evaluate, under physiological conditions, disintegration profiles of encapsulated and nonencapsulated formulations of 100 mg sumatriptan. Using a crossover design, healthy volunteers (n = 10) ingested 100-mg doses of sumatriptan tablets radiolabeled with 111Indium, as well as encapsulated sumatriptan tablets that were prepared similarly, then placed within a gelatin capsule and backfilled with an excipient blend radiolabeled with 99mTechnetium. A gamma camera recorded scintigraphic images until 5 hours postdose. Initial disintegration of the gelatin capsule was observed at a mean (range) of 5 minutes (1-11 minutes); disintegration was complete within 14 minutes (5-24 minutes). For nonencapsulated versus encapsulated tablets, the mean (+/- standard deviation) time to initial disintegration (6 +/- 5 minutes vs 8 +/- 5 minutes) and time to complete disintegration (18 +/- 14 minutes vs 16 +/- 7 minutes) were comparable. Results of this study demonstrate that encapsulated and nonencapsulated sumatriptan have equivalent in vivo dissolution rates.

Sumatriptan (oral route of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults

BACKGROUND

Migraine is a highly disabling condition for the individual and also has wide-reaching implications for society, healthcare services, and the economy. Sumatriptan is an abortive medication for migraine attacks, belonging to the triptan family.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of oral sumatriptan 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), MEDLINE, EMBASE, online databases, and reference lists for studies through 13 October 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We used numbers of participants achieving each outcome to calculate relative risk (or 'risk ratio') and numbers needed to treat to benefit (NNT) or harm (NNH) compared to placebo or a different active treatment.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-one studies (37,250 participants) compared oral sumatriptan with placebo or an active comparator. Most of the data were for the 50 mg and 100 mg doses. Sumatriptan surpassed placebo for all efficacy outcomes. For sumatriptan 50 mg versus placebo the NNTs were 6.1, 7.5, and 4.0 for pain-free at two hours and headache relief at one and two hours, respectively. NNTs for sustained pain-free and sustained headache relief during the 24 hours postdose were 9.5 and 6.0, respectively. For sumatriptan 100 mg versus placebo the NNTs were 4.7, 6.8, 3.5, 6.5, and 5.2, respectively, for the same outcomes. Results for the 25 mg dose were similar to the 50 mg dose, while sumatriptan 100 mg was significantly better than 50 mg for pain-free and headache relief at two hours, and for sustained pain-free during 24 hours. Treating early, during the mild pain phase, gave significantly better NNTs for pain-free at two hours and sustained pain-free during 24 hours than did treating established attacks with moderate or severe pain intensity.Relief of associated symptoms, including nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia, was greater with sumatriptan than with placebo, and use of rescue medication was lower with sumatriptan than with placebo. For the most part, adverse events were transient and mild and were more common with the sumatriptan than with placebo, with a clear dose response relationship (25 mg to 100 mg).Sumatriptan was compared directly with a number of active treatments, including other triptans, paracetamol (acetaminophen), acetylsalicylic acid, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and ergotamine combinations.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral sumatriptan is effective as an abortive treatment for migraine attacks, relieving pain, nausea, photophobia, phonophobia, and functional disability, but is associated with increased adverse events.

Triptans for the management of migraine

Migraine is a chronic, recurrent, disabling condition that affects millions of people in the US and worldwide. Proper acute care treatment for migraineurs is essential for a full return of function and productivity. Triptans are serotonin (5-HT)(1B/1D) receptor agonists that are generally effective, well tolerated and safe. Seven triptans are available worldwide, although not all are available in every country, with multiple routes of administration, giving doctors and patients a wide choice. Despite the similarities of the available triptans, pharmacological heterogeneity offers slightly different efficacy profiles. All triptans are superior to placebo in clinical trials, and some, such as rizatriptan 10 mg, eletriptan 40 mg, almotriptan 12.5 mg, and zolmitriptan 2.5 and 5 mg are very similar to each other and to the prototype triptan, sumatriptan 100 mg. These five are known as the fast-acting triptans. Increased dosing can offer increased efficacy but may confer a higher risk of adverse events, which are usually mild to moderate and transient in nature. This paper critically reviews efficacy, safety and tolerability for the different formulations of sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, rizatriptan, naratriptan, almotriptan, eletriptan and frovatriptan.

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.

Headache diaries and calendars

Headache is one of the most common types of pain and, in the absence of biological markers, headache diagnosis depends only on information obtained from clinical interviews and physical and neurological examinations. Headache diaries make it possible to record prospectively the characteristics of every attack and the use of headache calendars is indicated for evaluating the time pattern of headache, identifying aggravating factors, and evaluating the efficacy of preventive treatment. This may reduce the recall bias and increase accuracy in the description. The use of diagnostic headache diaries does have some limitations because the patient's general acceptance is still limited and some subjects are not able to fill in a diary. In this chapter, we consider diaries and calendars specially designed for migraine and, in particular, aim to: (1) determine what instruments are available in clinical practice for diagnosis and follow-up of treatments; and (2) describe the tools that have been developed for research and their main applications in the headache field. In addition, we include information on diaries available online and proposals for future areas of research.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Efficacy of Eletriptan in Triptan-Naïve Patients: Results of a Combined Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of eletriptan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg in triptan-naïve patients (who have not previously used triptans) versus triptan-experienced patients (who have previously used triptans).

METHODS

Efficacy and tolerability data for eletriptan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg were pooled from 10 similarly designed, randomized, parallel-group studies, and triptan-naïve and triptan-experienced patients were compared with placebo across the 3 triptan doses. The primary efficacy endpoint was headache response at 2 hours postdose. Secondary efficacy endpoints were 2-hour pain-free response, 2-hour absence of associated symptoms, 2-hour functional response, 24-hour sustained headache response, and 24-hour sustained pain-free response.

RESULTS

For eletriptan 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg versus placebo, respectively, triptan-naïve patients showed significantly higher 2-hour headache response (54%, 61%, 66% vs. 31%; P < .0001), 2-hour pain-free response (20%, 28%, and 31% vs. 8%; P < .0001), and 24-hour sustained headache response (34%, 45%, and 51% vs. 20%; P < .0001). A similarly significant efficacy advantage was also observed in the triptan-experienced subgroup for 2-hour headache response (46%, 63%, 69% vs. 21%; P < .0001), 2-hour pain-free response (13%, 32%, and 38% vs. 4%; P < .0001), and 24-hour sustained headache response (29%, 41%, and 45% vs. 9%; P < .0001). Previous treatment status did not influence tolerability, and all 3 doses of eletriptan were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that eletriptan has comparable efficacy versus placebo among both triptan-naïve and triptan-experienced patients.

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.

Diaries and calendars for migraine. A review

Headache is one of the most common types of pain and, in the absence of biological markers, headache diagnosis depends only on information obtained from clinical interviews and physical and neurological examinations. Headache diaries make it possible to record prospectively the characteristics of every attack and the use of headache calendars is indicated for evaluating the time pattern of headache, identifying aggravating factors and evaluating the efficacy of preventive treatment. This may reduce the recall bias and increase accuracy in the description. The use of diagnostic headache diaries does have some limitations because the patient's general acceptance is still limited and some subjects are not able to fill in a diary. In this review, we considered diaries and calendars especially designed for migraine and, in particular, we aimed at: (i) determining what instruments are available in clinical practice for diagnosis and follow-up of treatments; and (ii) describing the tools that have been developed for research and their main applications in the headache field. In addition to the literature review, we added two paragraphs concerning the authors' experience of the use of diaries and calendars in headache centres and their proposals for future areas of research.

Eletriptan in migraine

Migraine is a highly prevalent, chronic and disabling illness in which the gap between practice guideline recommendations and actual clinical practice remains wide. Eletriptan, similar to other triptans, is a potent 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist with a high selectivity for cranial versus coronary artery constriction and favorable pharmacokinetic profile. An extensive program of double-blind, placebo-controlled, head-to-head comparator trials has demonstrated the superior efficacy of eletriptan compared with the combination of ergotamine and caffeine, and selected oral triptans for the acute treatment of migraine. Eletriptans tolerability profile makes it a good choice as a first-line treatment of migraine. An early treatment study suggests that treatment of mild headache is associated with unusually high sustained pain-free rates and a tolerability profile that is equivalent to placebo.

Safety and Efficacy of Eletriptan in the Treatment of Acute Migraine

Eletriptan is a new selective serotonin agonist approved for the treatment of acute migraine headaches. To review the pharmacologic, pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, safety, and clinical efficacy data for eletriptan, we searched the literature in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Science Direct databases to gather all published reports from January 1996-October 2004. All English-language reports (abstract or full trial reports) about the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety of eletriptan were reviewed. Eletriptan's pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters translate into a favorable safety and efficacy profile. The drug is rapidly absorbed when administered orally, has good bioavailability and central nervous system penetration due to its lipophilicity, and has a long half-life, which contributes to its ability to prevent recurrent headaches. Compared with other serotonin agonists, eletriptan has a longer duration of action and greater lipophilicity. Eletriptan is metabolized through the cytochrome P450 3A4 system; therefore, it does have the potential for clinically significant drug interactions. In clinical trials, eletriptan demonstrated efficacy superior to that of placebo and similar or superior efficacy to that of other serotonin agonists, with limited adverse effects. With clinical use, headache and pain-free responses and headache recurrence rates were similar to those of other serotonin agonists, but the agent is superior to ergotamine tartrate-caffeine. Based on pharmaco-economic data, eletriptan is more cost-effective than other agents in its class. Eletriptan is a safe and cost-effective option for the treatment of migraine headaches.

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.

Acetaminophen, Aspirin, and Caffeine Versus Sumatriptan Succinate in the Early Treatment of Migraine: Results From the ASSET trial

OBJECTIVE

To address the need for a rigorous, direct comparison of prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) migraine drugs and to expand the database on early treatment of migraine.

BACKGROUND

Most people who experience migraine use OTC medications to treat their symptoms, but no head-to-head clinical trials comparing these agents with prescription migraine therapies have been published. In addition, even though most migraineurs treat early in the attack, few studies have been conducted to reflect this treatment pattern.

METHODS

We compared a combination of nonprescription migraine medication (acetaminophen 500 mg, aspirin 500 mg, and caffeine 130 mg) with a prescription migraine product (50 mg sumatriptan) in a randomized, controlled clinical trial in which subjects treated at the first sign of a migraine attack. Subjects who reported vomiting during more than 20% of migraine episodes or who required bedrest during more than 50% of migraine episodes were excluded from the study. Of the 188 subjects randomized, 171 took study medication and were included in the analysis.

CONCLUSION

The combination of acetaminophen, aspirin, and caffeine was significantly more effective (P > .05) than sumatriptan in the early treatment of migraine, as shown by superiority in summed pain intensity difference, pain relief, pain intensity difference, response, sustained response, relief of associated symptoms, use of rescue medication, disability relief, and global assessments of effectiveness. An additional, larger clinical trial is needed to confirm these results.

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.

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

This current randomized, open-label, crossover study evaluated preference for oral eletriptan 80 mg compared with subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg (suma-sc) amongst patients (n = 311) meeting IHS criteria for migraine who had recently used suma-sc, and found it well tolerated. Three attacks were treated on each study medication. Assessment of subjective preference was evaluated, after which patients freely chose which study medication they wished to use to treat each of three additional migraine attacks. A slight majority (50.6%) preferred or greatly preferred eletriptan, whilst 43% preferred suma-sc. When permitted to choose between eletriptan and suma-sc for subsequent treatment, 78% of patients who had preferred eletriptan took eletriptan during the extension phase for all three of their attacks, whilst only 37% of patients who preferred suma-sc took suma-sc for all of their extension-phase attacks (P < 0.05). Secondary efficacy measures showed comparable efficacy for each study medication, except for faster headache response and pain-free rates favor of suma-sc, and a significantly lower recurrence rate on eletriptan (25% vs. 40%; P < 0.05). The results of this study suggest that eletriptan is a strong alternative option for patients who have been prescribed suma-sc.

Evaluating the triptans

The debilitating effect of migraine has fueled the search for more specific agents to treat its characteristic and associated symptoms. Second-generation oral triptans have shown an improved efficacy profile in comparison with the pioneer sumatriptan and with the over-the-counter medications and prescription analgesics that have been staples of migraine treatment. Although all triptans exert effects through the 5-hydroxytryptamine 1B/1D receptors, each triptan has distinctive pharmacokinetic properties that determine its efficacy and tolerability profile. Empirical findings based on clinical trials have led to associations between triptan pharmacology and efficacy. With the expanded treatment choices, the onus is on healthcare providers (especially primary care physicians, who see the majority of patients with migraine) to determine which treatment has an efficacy profile that best suits the individual patient's needs. Patients prefer pharmacotherapy with a rapid onset of action that facilitates complete pain relief and no recurrence. Data from published comparator trials, based on commonly used efficacy end points and pharmacokinetic properties underlying patient-preferred outcomes, are reviewed in this article.

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.

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.

Effectiveness of Eletriptan in Acute Migraine: Primary Care for Excedrin Nonresponders

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of eletriptan as a treatment for acute migraine in patients who were poor responders to Excedrin and had not yet been exposed to a triptan.

BACKGROUND

Self-medication with over-the-counter drugs, such as Excedrin, is the most common treatment for migraine. Guidelines, however, recommend that triptans be used as first-line treatment of moderate to severe migraine--the severity affecting approximately 80% of migraineurs. Since over-the-counter medications, such as Excedrin, continue to be used in many patients, it is important that clinicians have information on the efficacy of triptans as first-line treatment and on treatment of migraineurs who have shown poor response to over-the-counter medications.

METHODS

One hundred ten patients meeting criteria for migraine who were poor responders to Excedrin received open-label treatment with a 40-mg dose of eletriptan for one migraine attack. Efficacy assessments were made at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours postdose and consisted of headache and pain-free response rates, absence of associated symptoms, and functional response.

RESULTS

At 1 hour, the headache response rate was 44%; at 2 hours, 81%. The pain-free response rate at 1 hour was 14% and at 2 hours, 48%. At 2 hours, relief of baseline-associated symptoms ranged from 74% to 80%. Functional response was achieved by 82% of patients by 2 hours, and 68% of patients achieved relief of migraine that was sustained across 24 hours with no need for a second dose of eletriptan or for rescue medication. Eletriptan was well tolerated with adverse events being transient and mild to moderate in intensity.

CONCLUSION

Previous studies have established the efficacy of eletriptan as a first-line treatment for migraine. The results of this open-label trial demonstrate that the 40-mg dose of eletriptan had a high degree of efficacy and tolerability among patients who were poor responders to Excedrin.

Eletriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: results of bridging a Japanese study to Western clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of eletriptan (20, 40 and 80 mg) to placebo when given to Japanese and Western patients for the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial with the aforementioned therapeutic objectives was conducted in Japan (N = 321). By bridging analysis, data from this study were compared to two migraine trials previously conducted in the US (N = 1190) and Europe (N = 563).

RESULTS

The 2-h post-dose headache response rates (i.e., the primary efficacy endpoint) of Japanese migraineurs to eletriptan 20, 40 and 80 mg were 64, 67 and 76%, respectively; European and American migraineurs showed similar trends and, in these studies, eletriptan was significantly superior to placebo (p < 0.05). Japanese patients did demonstrate a higher placebo response than Westerners, possibly due to differences in previous triptan exposure or expectation. Adverse events were generally mild to moderate, were comparable in all three studies, and showed a modest dose-response effect.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and tolerability of eletriptan for the acute treatment of migraine is comparable in Japan, Europe and the US.

Efficacy of Eletriptan in Migraineurs With Persistent Poor Response to Nonsteroidal Anti‐inflammatory Drugs

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs continue to be one of the most widely used therapies for migraine, but their efficacy in treating moderate to severe migraine headache has not been well documented. In contrast, the efficacy of triptans in this group of patients is well documented, although no systematic research is available that evaluates the effectiveness of switching to a triptan in patients who respond poorly to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

METHODS

One hundred thirteen patients who met International Headache Society criteria for migraine and who did not experience satisfactory response to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, received open-label treatment with a 40-mg dose of eletriptan for one migraine attack. Efficacy assessments were made at 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours postdose and consisted of headache and pain-free response rates, absence of associated symptoms, and functional response. Global ratings of treatment effectiveness and preference were obtained at 24 hours.

RESULTS

The pain-free response rate at 2 hours postdose was 25% and at 4 hours postdose, 55%; the headache response rate at 2 hours was 66% and at 4 hours, 87%. At 2 hours postdose, relief of baseline associated symptoms was achieved by 41% of patients with nausea compared to 82% of patients at 4 hours; for patients with phonophobia, 67% were relieved at 2 hours and 93% at 4 hours, and for patients with photophobia, 70% were relieved at 2 hours and 91% at 4 hours. Functional response was achieved by 70% of patients by 2 hours postdose. The high level of acute response was maintained over 24 hours, with only 24% of patients experiencing a headache recurrence and only 10% using rescue medication. At 24 hours postdose, 74% of patients rated eletriptan as preferable to any previous treatment for migraine. The most frequent reasons cited for this treatment preference were faster headache improvement (83%) and functional response (78%). Overall, eletriptan was well tolerated; most adverse events were transient and mild to moderate in severity. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Results of this open-label trial found the 40-mg dose of eletriptan to have a high degree of efficacy and tolerability among patients who responded poorly to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Tolerability and Safety of Eletriptan in the Treatment of Migraine: A Comprehensive Review

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive review of the tolerability and safety of eletriptan. Background.-Eletriptan is a potent and selective 5-HT1B/1D agonist that has demonstrated significant efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine in doses of 20 mg, 40 mg, and 80 mg.

DESIGN

This review reports the tolerability and safety of eletriptan across a broad spectrum of preclinical studies and clinical trials that collectively included treatment of more than 11 000 subjects and more than 74 000 migraine attacks.

RESULTS

In clinical trials, eletriptan was well tolerated and safe across its dosing range of 20 mg to 80 mg. The adverse event profile of eletriptan 20 mg was similar to placebo, while the most commonly used dose, eletriptan 40 mg, has an adverse event profile that is only marginally higher than placebo. Eletriptan was safe and well tolerated regardless of age or gender, and for both short- and long-term treatment. Eletriptan is metabolized primarily by the CYP3A4 enzyme. Coadministration of potent CYP3A4 inhibitors was not associated with clinically meaningful change in eletriptan tolerability or safety in the population included in these clinical trials. The margin of cardiovascular safety for eletriptan was also confirmed by a well-controlled clinical study in which intravenous eletriptan in excess of an 80-mg dose was rapidly infused in patients undergoing coronary angiography; nonetheless, it is recommended that eletriptan not be coadministered with a limited list of 7 potent CYP3A4 inhibitors; in addition, the triptan class in general (including eletriptan) is contraindicated in patients with symptoms or findings consistent with ischemic heart disease or other significant underlying cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive review found that eletriptan is safe and well tolerated, and that relatively large changes in dose and plasma concentration result in minimal changes in tolerability.

The triptan formulations : how to match patients and products

The 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonists (the 'triptans') are migraine-specific agents that have revolutionised the treatment of migraine. They are usually the drugs of choice to treat a migraine attack in progress. Different triptans are available in various strengths and formulations, including oral tablets, orally disintegrating tablets, nasal sprays and subcutaneous injections. In Europe, sumatriptan is also available as a suppository. Specific differences among the triptans exist, as evidenced by different pharmacological profiles including half-life, time to peak plasma concentrations, peak plasma concentrations, area under the concentration-time curve, metabolism and drug-drug interaction profiles. How or whether these differences translate to clinical efficacy and tolerability advantages for one agent over another is not well differentiated. However, delivery systems may play an important role in onset of action. Given that the clinical distinctions among these agents are subtle, identification of the most appropriate triptan for an individual patient requires consideration of the specific characteristics of the patient and knowledge of patient preference, an accurate history of the efficacy of previous acute-care medications and individual features of the drug being considered. The selection of an acute antimigraine drug also depends upon the stratification of the patient's migraine attack by peak intensity, time to peak intensity, level of associated symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, time to associated symptoms, comorbid diseases and concomitant treatments that might cause drug-drug interactions. Individual patient response to the triptans seems to be idiosyncratic and possibly genetically determined. Therefore, a set of specific questions can be used to determine whether a currently used triptan is optimally effective, whether the dose needs to be increased or whether another triptan should be tried. The clinician has in his/her armamentarium an ever-expanding variety of triptans, available in multiple formulations and dosages, which have good safety and tolerability profiles. Continued clinical use will yield familiarity with the various triptans, and it should become possible for the interested physician to match individual patient needs with the specific characteristics of a triptan to optimise therapeutic benefit. Use of the methods outlined in this review in choosing a triptan for an individual patient is probably more likely to lead to migraine relief than making an educated guess as to which triptan is most appropriate.

[Pharmacological, pharmacokinetic and clinical profile of eletriptan (Relpax), a new triptan for migraine]

Eletriptan (Relpax) is a new anti-migraine medication commonly referred to as triptans. Eletriptan is considered to reduce neuronal transmission of pain by causing vasoconstriction of dilated cranial vessels and inhibiting the release of neuropeptides from trigeminal nerves via activation of the 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors. Eletriptan showed selectivity, high affinities, and potent agonistic activity to human 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors. It selectively constricted the cranial artery relative to the coronary artery of the anesthetized dog and the isolated human specimen. The affinity to the 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors and the selectivity for the cranial artery over the coronary artery of eletriptan are higher than those of sumatriptan. Eletriptan inhibited the trigeminal nerve mediated inflammation in the rat dura mater with equal potency and efficacy to sumatriptan. Orally taken eletriptan was rapidly absorbed with good bioavailability. In clinical trials, eletriptan improved the headache response rate with rapid onset, and reduced headache recurrence. The functional impairments as well as associated symptoms such as nausea, vomiting, and photophobia were also improved by eletriptan. Eletriptan showed stable efficacy in chronic use against multiple attacks with no increase in adverse events. Eletriptan was well tolerated in patients and most adverse events were mild-to-moderate in nature.