Speed of onset, efficacy and tolerability of zolmitriptan nasal spray in the acute treatment of migraine: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Effectiveness of Intranasal Analgesia in the Emergency Department

In the Emergency Department (ED), pain is one of the symptoms that are most frequently reported, making it one of the most significant issues for the emergency physician, but it is frequently under-treated. Intravenous (IV), oral (PO), and intramuscular (IM) delivery are the standard methods for administering acute pain relief. Firstly, we compared the safety and efficacy of IN analgesia to other conventional routes of analgesia to assess if IN analgesia may be an alternative for the management of acute pain in ED. Secondly, we analyzed the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs) and rescue analgesia required. We performed a narrative review-based keywords in Pubmed/Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Controlled Trials Register, finding only twenty randomized Clinical trials eligible in the timeline 1992-2022. A total of 2098 patients were analyzed and compared to intravenous analgesia, showing no statistical difference in adverse effects. In addition, intranasal analgesia also has a rapid onset and quick absorption. Fentanyl and ketamine are two intranasal drugs that appear promising and may be taken simply and safely while providing effective pain relief. Intravenous is simple to administer, non-invasive, rapid onset, and quick absorption; it might be a viable choice in a variety of situations to reduce patient suffering or delays in pain management.

Efficacy and safety of intranasal agents for the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intranasal agents may be ideal for the treatment of migraine patients. Many new acute intranasal-specific therapies have been developed, but few of them have been directly compared. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the efficacy and safety of various intranasal agents for the treatment of acute migraine in adult patients.

METHODS

The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and PubMed were searched from inception to 15 August 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using intranasal agents (no restrictions on dose, formulation, dosing regimen or timing of the first dose) to treat adult patients with acute migraine were included. The primary efficacy endpoint was pain freedom at 2 h, and the primary safety endpoint was adverse events (AEs). The analysis process followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (21 RCTs, 9738 participants) were included. Compared to the placebo, 5 mg of zolmitriptan using a conventional liquid nasal spray device was the most effective for pain freedom at 2 h [odds ratio (OR): 4.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.43 to 6.43] and 24 h (OR: 5.49, 95% CI: 3.58 to 8.42) among all the interventions. Butorphanol nasal spray 1 mg was the most effective (OR: 8.62, 95% CI: 1.11 to 66.92) for pain freedom at 1 h, but with low-quality evidence. DFN-02 presented the highest freedom from nausea (OR: 4.95, 95% CI: 1.29 to 19.01) and phonophobia (OR: 5.36, 95% CI: 1.67 to 17.22) at 2 h, albeit with lower odds of achieving complete pain freedom. ROX-828 showed the highest improvement in freedom from photophobia at 2 h (OR: 4.03, 95% CI: 1.66 to 9.81). Dihydroergotamine nasal spray was significantly associated with the highest risk of AEs (OR: 9.65, 95% CI: 4.39 to 21.22) and was not recommended for routine use. Zavegepant nasal spray demonstrated the lowest risk of AEs (OR: 2.04, 95% CI: 1.37 to 3.03). The results of sensitivity analyses for the primary endpoints (pain freedom at 2 h and AEs) were generally consistent with those of the base case model.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with other new intranasal-specific therapies in treating migraine attacks, zolmitriptan nasal spray 5 mg was the most effective agent for pain freedom at 2 h. Zavegepant nasal spray 10 mg had the fewest adverse side effects.

Access to the CNS: Strategies to overcome the BBB

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) limits the access of substances to the central nervous system (CNS) which hinders the treatment of pathologies affecting the brain and the spinal cord. Nowadays, research is focus on new strategies to overcome the BBB and can treat the pathologies affecting the CNS are needed. In this review, the different strategies that allow and increase the access of substances to the CNS are analysed and extended commented, not only invasive strategies but also non-invasive ones. The invasive techniques include the direct injection into the brain parenchyma or the CSF and the therapeutic opening of the BBB, while the non-invasive techniques include the use of alternative routes of administration (nose-to-brain route), the inhibition of efflux transporters (as it is important to prevent the drug efflux from the brain and enhance the therapeutic efficiency), the chemical modification of the molecules (prodrugs and chemical drug delivery systems (CDDS)) and the use of nanocarriers. In the future, knowledge about nanocarriers to treat CNS diseases will continue to increase, but the use of other strategies such as drug repurposing or drug reprofiling, which are cheaper and less time consuming, may limit its transfer to society. The main conclusion is that the combination of different strategies may be the most interesting approach to increase the access of substances to the CNS.

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.

Pharmacological strategies to treat attacks of episodic migraine in adults

INTRODUCTION

Migraine patients prioritize early complete relief of headache and associated symptoms, sustained freedom of pain, and good tolerability. One major obstacle for the successful use of drug treatment of migraine attack is that the speed of action of triptans, 5-HT_1B/1D receptor agonists, is delayed.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the author discusses the following features of acute migraine drugs: pharmacology; pharmacokinetics, and absorption of drugs during migraine attacks. Next, dose-response curves for effect; and the delayed onset of action is reviewed. In the more clinical part of the review, the following items are discussed: overall clinical judgments; comparison of triptans; comparison of triptans with NSAIDs; early intervention with triptans; medication-overuse headache; comments on the effect of gepants; and the general principle of acute migraine therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

The delay in the onset of effect of acute migraine drugs is likely due to a complex antimigraine system involving more than one site of action. Investigations into the mechanisms of the delay should have a high priority, both in studies with animals, migraine models, and in migraine patients during attacks. Non-oral administration of antimigraine drugs resulting in early absorption of drugs should be developed as they possibly also can increase E_max.

Onset of action in placebo-controlled migraine attacks trials: A literature review and recommendation

BACKGROUND

Migraine patients want acute treatment to provide complete relief of the migraine attack within 30 minutes. Traditionally, "speed of onset of effect" is evaluated by estimating the time-point for first statistical separation of drug and placebo. The estimated onset of effect can be a few percent difference of patients being pain free in very large randomised, controlled trials. This difference, however, can be clinically irrelevant.

METHODS

Placebo-controlled randomised, controlled trials with pain freedom results from 30 min to 2-4 hours were retrieved from the literature. For each time-point, the therapeutic gain (drug minus placebo) (TG) was calculated. Therapeutic gain for being pain free of 5% was chosen for the definition of "onset of action", since this is approximately 1/3 of the 16% TG and 1/4 of 21% of TG for sumatriptan 50 mg and 100 mg, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 22 time-effect curves based on randomised, controlled trials were analysed. Based on the "onset of action" of 5% pain freedom, the evaluated drugs and administration forms can be classified as follows: i) Early time to onset, ≤30 min (three randomised, controlled trials); ii) medium time to onset, 60 min (nine randomised, controlled trials); iii) delayed time to onset, 90-120 min (10 randomised, controlled trials).

CONCLUSION

Only three non-oral administration forms with a triptan (subcutaneous sumatriptan and nasal zolmitriptan) resulted in an "onset of action" at ≥30 min; in the future, early onset of action should be a priority in the development of new drugs or new administration-forms for the treatment of acute migraine attacks.

Pain freedom after 2 hours should be the primary outcome in controlled trials treating migraine attacks

Background

Pain freedom after 2 hours is the recommended primary endpoint by the International Headache Society in randomized trials investigating drug treatment of acute migraine attacks. In order to demonstrate an early effect of a drug, some drug companies, however, have promoted headache relief (improvement from severe or moderate pain to mild or no pain) at earlier time points than 2 hours as outcome parameter.

Methods and results

We analyzed the relationship between pain freedom and headache relief in acute migraine trials and observed that persistent mild headache constituted 90% of headache relief after 0.5 hour and 40% of headache relief after 2 hours.

Conclusion

Headache relief at 2 hours should in our view only be used as an outcome measure for comparison with historic data. Prior to 2 hours, headache relief varies with time from intake and the therapeutic gain is very small. Therefore, pain freedom should be used at these early time points.

Making Better Dose Decisions: Using Exposure-Response Modeling to Integrate Efficacy Outcome of Two Phase IIb Clinical Trials of Ubrogepant for Migraine Treatment

Ubrogepant (MK‐1602) is a novel, oral, calcitonin gene‐related peptide receptor antagonist in clinical development with positive phase III outcomes for acute treatment of migraine. This paper describes the population exposure‐response (E‐R) modeling and simulations, which were used to inform the phase III dose‐selection rationale, based on ~ 800 participants pooled across two phase IIb randomized dose‐finding clinical trials. The E‐R model describes the placebo and ubrogepant treatment effects based on migraine pain end points (2‐hour pain relief and 2‐hour pain freedom) at various dose levels. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate various assumptions of placebo response in light of the high placebo response observed in one phase II trial. A population pharmacokinetic model describing the effect of formulations was included in the E‐R simulation framework to assess potential dose implications of a formulation switch from phase II to phase III. Model‐based simulations predict that a dose of 25 mg or higher is likely to achieve significantly better efficacy than placebo with desirable efficacy levels. The understanding of E‐R helped support the dose selection for the phase III clinical trials.

Intranasal Nanoparticulate Systems as Alternative Route of Drug Delivery

There is always a need for alternative and efficient methods of drug delivery. The nasal cavity can be considered as a non-invasive and efficient route of administration. It has been used for local, systemic, brain targeting, and vaccination delivery. Although many intranasal products are currently available on the market, the majority is used for local delivery with fewer products available for the other targets. As nanotechnology utilization in drug delivery has rapidly spread out, the nasal delivery has become attractive as a promising approach. Nanoparticulate systems facilitate drug transportation across the mucosal barrier, protect the drug from nasal enzyme degradation, enhance the delivery of vaccines to the lymphoid tissue of the nasal cavity with an adjuvant activity, and offer a way for peptide delivery into the brain and the systemic circulation, in addition to their potential for brain tumor treatment. This review article aims at discussing the potential benefit of the intranasal nanoparticulate systems, including nanosuspensions, lipid and surfactant, and polymer-based nanoparticles as regards productive intranasal delivery. The aim of this review is to focus on the topicalities of nanotechnology applications for intranasal delivery of local, systemic, brain, and vaccination purposes during the last decade, referring to the factors affecting delivery, regulatory aspects, and patient expectations. This review further identifies the benefits of applying the Quality by Design approaches (QbD) in product development. According to the reported studies on nanotechnology-based intranasal delivery, potential attention has been focused on brain targeting and vaccine delivery with promising outcomes. Despite the significant research effort in this field, nanoparticle-based products for intranasal delivery are not available. Thus, further efforts are required to promote the introduction of intranasal nanoparticulate products that can meet the requirements of regulatory affairs with high patient acceptance.

Why is the therapeutic effect of acute antimigraine drugs delayed? A review of controlled trials and hypotheses about the delay of effect

In randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of oral drug treatment of migraine attacks, efficacy is evaluated after 2 hours. The effect of oral naratriptan 2.5 mg with a maximum blood concentration (Tmax ) at 2 hours increases from 2 to 4 hours in RCTs. To check whether such a delayed effect is also present for other oral antimigraine drugs, we hand-searched the literature for publications on RCTs reporting efficacy. Two triptans, 3 nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), a triptan combined with an NSAID and a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist were evaluated for their therapeutic gain with determination of time to maximum effect (Emax ). Emax was compared with known Tmax from pharmacokinetic studies to estimate the delay to pain-free. The delay in therapeutic gain varied from 1-2 hours for zolmitriptan 5 mg to 7 hours for naproxen 500 mg. An increase in effect from 2 to 4 hours was observed after eletriptan 40 mg, frovatriptan 2.5 mg and lasmiditan 200 mg, and after rizatriptan 10 mg (Tmax  = 1 h) from 1 to 2 hours. This strongly indicates a general delay of effect in oral antimigraine drugs. A review of 5 possible effects of triptans on the trigemino-vascular system did not yield a simple explanation for the delay. In addition, Emax for triptans probably depends partly on the rise in plasma levels and not only on its maximum. The most likely explanation for the delay in effect is that a complex antimigraine system with more than 1 site of action is involved.

Efficacy of triptans for the treatment of acute migraines: a quantitative comparison based on the dose-effect and time-course characteristics

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to establish a pharmacodynamic model to quantitatively compare the efficacy characteristics of seven kinds of triptans and their different dosage forms in the treatment of acute migraines.

METHODS

Clinical studies of triptans in the treatment of acute migraines were comprehensively searched in the public databases. Pharmacodynamic models were established to describe the dose-effect and time-course of each kind of triptan for the proportion of patients who became pain free or had pain relief.

RESULTS

A total of 92 articles involving 47,376 subjects were included in the analysis. After eliminating the placebo effect, oral eletriptan (40 mg) had the highest efficacy among all oral drugs at the maximum approved dose, and the proportion of patients who became pain free and had pain relief were 30.9% and 37.9% at 2 h, respectively. However, oral naratriptan (2.5 mg) had the lowest efficacy, and the proportion of patients who became pain free and had pain relief was 10.3% and 21.6% at 2 h, respectively. The efficacy of subcutaneous administration was significantly higher than that of oral administration, and the efficacy of nasal spray administration was comparable to that of oral administration. Regarding the dose-effect, the efficacy of the sumatriptan nasal spray significantly increased within the FDA (Food and Drug Administration)-approved dose range. When the dose was increased from 5 to 20 mg of sumatriptan nasal spray, the proportion of patients who became pain free and had pain relief increased by 16.8% and 18.3% at 2 h, respectively. Regarding the time-course, the time of onset of subcutaneous sumatriptan (6 mg) was the fastest, and the fraction of patients who were pain free at 2 h accounted for 90.6% of that at 4 h.

CONCLUSIONS

This study evaluated the efficacy characteristics of seven kinds of triptans and their different dosage forms. The present findings provide necessary quantitative information for migraine medication guidelines.

Treatment of migraine attacks and prevention of migraine: Guidelines by the German Migraine and Headache Society and the German Society of Neurology

In collaboration with some of the leading headache centres in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, we have established new guidelines for the treatment of migraine attacks and the prevention of migraine. A thorough literature research of the last 10 years has been the basis of the current recommendations. At the beginning, we present therapeutic novelties, followed by a summary of all recommendations. After an introduction, we cover topics like drug therapy and practical experience, non-effective medication, migraine prevention, interventional methods, non-medicational and psychological methods for prevention and therapies without proof of efficacy.

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.

Considerations for management of migraine symptoms in the primary care setting

Migraine is a common disabling brain disorder that affects one in seven US citizens annually. The burden of migraine is substantial, both in economic terms and for individual patients and their close family members. Initial medical consultations for migraine are usually with a primary care physician (PCP), and it is predominantly managed in a primary care setting; therefore, PCPs need a thorough understanding of migraine and the treatment options. This review provides an overview of the prevalence, symptoms, burden, and diagnosis of migraine with a focus on adults. Important aspects of migraine management, such as medication overuse and chronic migraine, are highlighted and insight is provided into factors for consideration when prescribing acute/abortive treatment for migraine to ensure that individual patients receive optimal pharmaceutical management. The effects of associated symptoms, e.g. nausea/vomiting, on treatment efficacy are pertinent in migraine; however, many therapy options, including alternative delivery systems, are available, thus facilitating the selection of optimal treatment for an individual patient.

The pharmacokinetics and clinical efficacy of AVP-825: a potential advancement for acute treatment of migraine

INTRODUCTION

Oral triptans have dominated the prescription market for acute treatment of migraine for nearly 25 years. Today, patients often express dissatisfaction with prescribed acute treatment in part because they do not have confidence that the therapy will provide consistent efficacy over time. Major limitations to sustained successful use of oral triptans are their relatively slow onset of meaningful clinical benefit and variable absorption/efficacy due to impaired gastrointestinal function during migraine. AVP-825, a new intranasal delivery system for sumatriptan , may be an effective alternative to oral triptans.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews AVP-825, which deposits low-dose sumatriptan powder deep into the vascular mucosa of the posterior nose, allowing rapid absorption of drug into the systemic circulation. Studies suggest that AVP-825 is a highly effective, well-tolerated acute treatment for episodic migraine.

EXPERT OPINION

Oral triptans are limited in providing effective patient-centered outcomes to migraine patients. Failed or suboptimal abortive treatment of migraine is a major driver of migraine chronification and increases in healthcare costs. AVP-825 is an easy to use, novel, breath-powered intranasal delivery system that provides early onset of efficacy with low systemic drug exposure and few triptan-associated adverse events. AVP-825 will be a welcomed therapeutic tool for the acute treatment of migraine.

The acute treatment of migraine in adults: the american headache society evidence assessment of migraine pharmacotherapies

The study aims to provide an updated assessment of the evidence for individual pharmacological therapies for acute migraine treatment. Pharmacological therapy is frequently required for acutely treating migraine attacks. The American Academy of Neurology Guidelines published in 2000 summarized the available evidence relating to the efficacy of acute migraine medications. This review, conducted by the members of the Guidelines Section of the American Headache Society, is an updated assessment of evidence for the migraine acute medications. A standardized literature search was performed to identify articles related to acute migraine treatment that were published between 1998 and 2013. The American Academy of Neurology Guidelines Development procedures were followed. Two authors reviewed each abstract resulting from the search and determined whether the full manuscript qualified for review. Two reviewers studied each qualifying full manuscript for its level of evidence. Level A evidence requires at least 2 Class I studies, and Level B evidence requires 1 Class I or 2 Class II studies. The specific medications - triptans (almotriptan, eletriptan, frovatriptan, naratriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan [oral, nasal spray, injectable, transcutaneous patch], zolmitriptan [oral and nasal spray]) and dihydroergotamine (nasal spray, inhaler) are effective (Level A). Ergotamine and other forms of dihydroergotamine are probably effective (Level B). Effective nonspecific medications include acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (aspirin, diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen), opioids (butorphanol nasal spray), sumatriptan/naproxen, and the combination of acetaminophen/aspirin/caffeine (Level A). Ketoprofen, intravenous and intramuscular ketorolac, flurbiprofen, intravenous magnesium (in migraine with aura), and the combination of isometheptene compounds, codeine/acetaminophen and tramadol/acetaminophen are probably effective (Level B). The antiemetics prochlorperazine, droperidol, chlorpromazine, and metoclopramide are probably effective (Level B). There is inadequate evidence for butalbital and butalbital combinations, phenazone, intravenous tramadol, methadone, butorphanol or meperidine injections, intranasal lidocaine, and corticosteroids, including dexamethasone (Level C). Octreotide is probably not effective (Level B). There is inadequate evidence to refute the efficacy of ketorolac nasal spray, intravenous acetaminophen, chlorpromazine injection, and intravenous granisetron (Level C). There are many acute migraine treatments for which evidence supports efficacy. Clinicians must consider medication efficacy, potential side effects, and potential medication-related adverse events when prescribing acute medications for migraine. Although opioids, such as butorphanol, codeine/acetaminophen, and tramadol/acetaminophen, are probably effective, they are not recommended for regular use.

Pharmacological Acute Migraine Treatment Strategies: Choosing the Right Drug for a Specific Patient

Background:

In our targeted review (Section 2), 12 acute medications received a strong recommendation for use in acute migraine therapy while four received a weak recommendation for use. Strong recommendations were made to avoid use of two other medications, except for exceptional circumstances. Two anti-emetics received strong recommendations for use as needed.

Objective:

To organize the available acute migraine medications into acute migraine treatment strategies in order to assist the practitioner in choosing a specific medication(s) for an individual patient.

Methods:

Acute migraine treatment strategies were developed based on the targeted literature review used for the development of this guideline (Section 2), and a general literature review. Expert consensus groups were used to refine and validate these strategies.

Results:

Based on evidence for drug efficacy, drug side effects, migraine severity, and coexistent medical disorders, our analysis resulted in the formulation of eight general acute migraine treatment strategies. These could be grouped into four categories: 1) two mild-moderate attack strategies, 2) two moderate-severe attack or NSAID failure strategies, 3) three refractory migraine strategies, and 4) a vasoconstrictor unresponsive-contraindicated strategy. In addition, strategies were developed for menstrual migraine, migraine during pregnancy, and migraine during lactation. The eight general treatment strategies were coordinated with a “combined acute medication approach” to therapy which used features of both the “stratified” and the “step care across attacks” approaches to acute migraine management.

Conclusions:

The available medications for acute migraine treatment can be organized into a series of strategies based on patient clinical features. These strategies may help practitioners make appropriate acute medication choices for patients with migraine.

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.

Intranasal zolmitriptan for the treatment of acute migraine

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, tolerability, and patient acceptance of zolmitriptan nasal spray (NS).

BACKGROUND

Gastroparesis may delay or diminish the absorption of oral triptans, and nausea or vomiting may do the same and/or make it difficult to take a tablet. Some migraineurs require or prefer faster relief than oral medications provide. Injectable triptans provide the fastest drug delivery into the bloodstream, but many patients are reluctant to use them. Nasal sprays may address some of the problems with tablets and injectables while still providing rapid absorption of drug.

METHODS

Non-systematic review.

RESULTS

Significant levels of zolmitriptan NS are detectable in plasma within 2-5 minutes, and the rapid absorption is due to early uptake through the nasal mucosa. In 2 randomized trials, users of zolmitriptan NS were significantly more likely than placebo recipients to be pain-free at 15 minutes post-dose, the first time point measured, and about half of patients had sustained response at 24 hours. Studies in which patients could treat a migraine of any severity have documented significant headache response or relief with zolmitriptan NS at 10 minutes. In one trial, the rate of total symptom relief was significantly better with the NS than with placebo from 30 minutes post-dose. The most common side effect of zolmitriptan NS is unusual taste. Patient satisfaction studies indicate that zolmitriptan NS is appreciated for its speed of onset, ease of use, reliability, and overall efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Zolmitriptan NS provides onset of headache relief within 10 minutes for some patients and quickly abolishes some of the major migraine symptoms. Good candidates are migraineurs whose episodes rapidly escalate to moderate-to-severe pain and those who have morning migraine, have a quick time to vomiting, or have failed oral triptans.

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.

A trans-cultural comparison of the organisation of care at headache centres world-wide

Background: The need to provide better outcomes for patients with headache, and to minimise the costs involved in doing so, has prompted the search for new modes of service delivery by exploring the service organisation and nursing role from various cultural, economic and global perspectives.

Materials and Methods: This study was based on comparisons with the UK headache service up to 2007, the point at which this study was set up. This UK service was based at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (NHNN, UCLH Trust). Data were obtained from US headache centres in 2008 and from centres in Copenhagen, Bangkok, Sydney and Porto Alegre in 2009.

Results: A comparison shows the key components of services at all centres showing the team structure and size of service. Prominent features at the centres included: team-working, regular meetings, educational input, good access and communication among team members, headache-trained neurologists, specialist nursing at most centres, and the input of psychological and physical therapists at some centres.

Conclusions: The problems of tertiary headache care are very similar throughout the world and seem to transcend ethnic, cultural and economic considerations.

Intranasal sumatriptan powder delivered by a novel breath-actuated bi-directional device for the acute treatment of migraine: A randomised, placebo-controlled study

Introduction: Intranasal sumatriptan is an option for the treatment of migraine; however, nasal delivery using conventional spray pumps is suboptimal.

Methods: Adult subjects ( n = 117) with migraine were enrolled in a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled study. A single migraine attack was treated in-clinic with sumatriptan 10 mg, sumatriptan 20 mg or placebo administered intranasally by a novel bi-directional powder delivery device when migraine was moderate or severe.

Results: A greater proportion of subjects who received sumatriptan were pain-free at 120 minutes compared with those who received placebo (10 mg/20 mg sumatriptan vs. placebo = 54%/57% vs. 25%, P < .05). Significant benefits were also observed for pain relief at 120 minutes (84%/80% vs. 44%, P < .001/.01) and as early as 60 minutes (73%/74% vs. 38%, P < .01) and for 48 hours sustained pain-free ( P < .05). Treatment-related adverse events were rare, with a metallic taste being the most commonly reported (10%/13%).

Conclusions: Sumatriptan nasal powder administered using the new device during a migraine attack was effective and well tolerated.

What can be learned from the history of recurrence in migraine? A comment

Recurrence was first recognised as a clinical problem in 1989 with the advent of sumatriptan. The history of recurrence in early sumatriptan randomised clinical trials is described. Recurrence has been ascribed to patient-dependent factors but experience with ergot alkaloids suggested that recurrence can also be treatment-dependent. Possible mechanisms for recurrence are discussed.

The triptans

The migraine-specific triptans have revolutionized the treatment of migraine and are currently the drugs of choice to treat a migraine attack in progress. Over the past 15 years, triptans were released in rapid succession, with each one demonstrating some specific pharmacokinetic properties that may be translated into clinical advantages. Triptans share many similarities, but also have important differences from one another. Accordingly, herein we discuss the class of the triptans. We first define the trigeminovascular system and its importance in migraine pain, then discuss the mechanism of action of the triptans and contrast the evidence supporting the use of different triptans. We close with our view of the future and hopes for the next generation of antimigraine therapies.

Clinical pharmacology of the serotonin receptor agonist, zolmitriptan

Migraine is a common, often disabling, neurovascular disease that has been shown to be associated with abnormal serotonergic activity. Drugs that modulate serotonin receptors are commonly used in the acute treatment of a migraine attack. Zolmitriptan, a 5-hydroxytryptophan(1B/1D) receptor agonist, is once such drug that is used in acute migraine therapy. Zolmitriptan is FDA approved for the treatment of acute migraine attacks and there is recent literature demonstrating its efficacy in the acute treatment of cluster attacks. It is rapidly absorbed and is detectable in the plasma within 2 - 5 min for the nasal spray formulation and within 15 min for the oral formulations. Zolmitriptan reaches peak plasma levels in 2 - 4 h and significant plasma levels are maintained for up to 6 h and lower levels for over 15 h. As zolmitriptan's metabolism is predominantly hepatic, patients with severe hepatic impairment should not receive zolmitriptan. However, only 25% of zolmitriptan is bound to plasma proteins and thus it is unlikely for drug interactions involving the displacement of highly protein-bound drugs. Zolmitriptan is generally very well tolerated and less than half of patients in clinical trials have reported adverse events, most of which are mild and transient, although rare serious cardiovascular events have been reported with all triptans. When patients are appropriately selected, zolmitriptan is both a safe and effective acute care migraine treatment. In this review the biological role of serotonin and its receptors is covered, followed by an in-depth review of the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of zolmitriptan. Finally, the clinical application of zolmitriptan's use in patients is dicussed.

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.

Effectiveness and Satisfaction with Zolmitriptan 5mg Nasal Spray for??Treatment of Migraine in??Real-Life Practice

OBJECTIVE

Addressing the needs of migraineurs by actively seeking patient feedback on disease-related disability and treatment satisfaction may lead to improved management and treatment outcomes. Patient feedback can be collected in postmarketing surveillance (PMS) studies. The objective of this PMS study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray in the acute treatment of migraine attacks.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients received zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray to treat migraine attacks of any severity and were followed up after a maximum of 4 months. Patients evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of zolmitriptan nasal spray, and were asked whether they wished to continue using zolmitriptan nasal spray and their preference compared with previous treatments. Physicians also assessed the efficacy and tolerability of zolmitriptan nasal spray.

RESULTS

A total of 1838 patients (84.8% females) participated in the study. Within 30 minutes of administration of zolmitriptan nasal spray, 85.0% of patients reported improvements in headache pain, with 25.1% reporting an improvement within 10 minutes. At 1 hour post-dose, 57.9% of patients were pain free and 61.7% were able to resume usual daily activities. Most patients (72.9%) rated zolmitriptan nasal spray as 'better' than previous therapy. The majority (88.8%) expressed a wish to continue using zolmitriptan nasal spray. Physicians evaluated the efficacy of zolmitriptan nasal spray as 'excellent' or 'good' in 89.4% of patients. Tolerability was evaluated as 'excellent' or 'good' in 91.6% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray provides favourable efficacy and tolerability in the acute treatment of migraine attacks. Most patients assessed zolmitriptan nasal spray as 'better' than previous treatment, with nearly all wishing to continue using it.

Non-oral formulations of triptans and their use in acute migraine

The introduction of triptans (5-HT (1B/1D) agonists) into clinical practice has expanded the therapeutic options for doctors treating migraine sufferers. The triptans are available in several different formulations such as conventional oral tablets, orally disintegrating wafers, subcutaneous injections, nasal sprays, and suppositories, which provide an excellent opportunity to tailor therapy to individual patients' needs. Although the oral formulations are the most popular with patients, they are not the most appropriate route of administration for drug delivery during the migraine attack. Due to gastrointestinal dysmotility, the intestinal absorption of any triptan administered orally may be impaired and treatment effects become inconsistent. For this reason, triptans preferably should be prescribed in a non-oral formulation (injection, nasal spray, or suppository). Parenteral administration of a triptan is more likely to provide relief of symptoms, even when it is used later in the course of the migraine attack.

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.

Intranasal zolmitriptan

Intranasal zolmitriptan has recently been launched in the US and Canada and is a novel formulation of the antimigraine drug zolmitriptan. This drug has been used extensively in its oral formulation. The intranasal formulation offers a more rapid onset of action. Pharmacokinetic studies have demonstrated that it is absorbed rapidly into the systemic circulation and traces can be seen in the brain within 5 min. The onset of efficacy in the Real Life Intranasal Zolmitriptan Exposure (REALIZE) study was measurable at 10 min and at 15 min in the US 22 study, which demonstrates rapid absorption and effect at the 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors. This article reviews the initial studies of intranasal zolmitriptan; three of the most recent studies will be examined in detail.