Sumatriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine

Neurology ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1225-1230 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Ryan ◽  
A. Elkind ◽  
C. C. Baker ◽  
W. Mullican ◽  
S. DeBussey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Migraine Attack ◽  
Nasal Spray ◽  
Acute Treatment ◽  
International Headache Society ◽  
Migraine Treatment ◽  
Multicenter Studies ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Migraine Medication

Background: Sumatriptan nasal spray may be particularly useful for patients whose nausea and vomiting preclude them from using oral migraine medication or for patients who prefer not to use an injectable migraine medication. The objective of this study was to evaluate in two clinical studies the efficacy and tolerability of the intranasal form of sumatriptan in the acute treatment of a single migraine attack. International Headache Society-diagnosed adult migraineurs in two randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter studies (n = 409 and 436) used sumatriptan nasal spray 20 mg, 10 mg, or placebo (2:1:1) for the acute treatment of a single migraine attack at home. Predose and at predetermined postdose intervals, patients recorded headache severity (none, mild, moderate, severe); time to meaningful relief; clinical disability (none, mildly impaired, severely impaired, bed rest required); presence/absence of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia; and the occurrence of adverse events. Two hours postdose in the two studies, moderate or severe baseline pain was reduced to mild or none in 62 to 63% of patients treated with sumatriptan 20 mg, 43 to 54% of patients treated with sumatriptan 10 mg, and 29 to 35% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05 20 mg versus placebo for both studies and 10 mg versus placebo for study 1). Onset of relief relative to placebo began as early as 15 minutes postdose(sumatriptan 20 mg, study 2). Clinical disability at 2 hours postdose was reported as mildly impaired or normal in 72 to 74% of patients treated with sumatriptan 20 mg, 56 to 68% of patients treated with sumatriptan 10 mg, and 47 to 58% of placebo-treated patients (p < 0.05 20 mg versus placebo for both studies). Similar efficacy rates were observed for nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. The most common adverse event in the active treatment groups was disturbance of taste (bad, bitter, or unpleasant taste). Aside from this event, the pattern and incidence of adverse events did not differ among treatment groups. From these results we determined that sumatriptan nasal spray is a rapidly effective, well-tolerated migraine treatment. The 20-mg dose was effective in treating the entire migraine symptom complex, and the 10-mg dose was less consistently effective.

scholarly journals P.027 Efficacy and Safety of Eptinezumab Initiated During a Migraine Attack: Results from the RELIEF Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (s3) ◽  
pp. S27-S28
Author(s):  
PK Winner ◽  
P McAllister ◽  
G Chakhava ◽  
J Ailani ◽  
L Mehta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Migraine Attack ◽  
Rapid Onset ◽  
Migraine Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Bothersome Symptom ◽  
Post Infusion ◽  
Headache Pain

Background: Eptinezumab is approved for migraine prevention, with demonstrated rapid onset of preventive benefit. RELIEF evaluated the efficacy and safety of eptinezumab initiated during a migraine attack. Methods: RELIEF (NCT04152083; parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled) randomized adults with migraine (4-15d/mo in 3mo prior to screening) to eptinezumab 100mg or placebo, administered IV within 1-6h of qualifying migraine onset. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were time to headache pain freedom and time to absence of most bothersome symptom (MBS). Results: Eptinezumab (n=238) compared with placebo (n=242) achieved significantly faster headache pain freedom (median 4h vs 9h; hazard ratio=1.54, P=0.0006) and absence of MBS (2h vs 3h; 1.75, P<0.0001). At 2h, 23.5% and 12.0% (P=0.0009) of eptinezumab-treated and placebo patients, respectively, reported headache pain freedom, and 55.5% and 35.8% (P<0.0001) reported absence of MBS. Significantly fewer eptinezumab-treated patients used rescue medication within 24h (31.5% vs 59.9%; P<0.0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 10.9% eptinezumab-treated and 10.3% placebo patients; no serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions: Infusion of the preventive migraine treatment, eptinezumab, during a migraine resulted in rapid and sustained freedom from headache pain and MBS vs placebo, starting 2h post-infusion, decreasing need for acute medication within 24h post-infusion. No notable safety findings were identified.

Placebo Adverse Events in Headache Trials: Headache as an Adverse Event of Placebo

Cephalalgia ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (7) ◽  
pp. 496-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
U Reuter ◽  
M Sanchez del Rio ◽  
JA Carpay ◽  
CJ Boes ◽  
SD Silberstein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Sleep Disturbance ◽  
Migraine Attack ◽  
Active Drug ◽  
Ergot Alkaloids ◽  
Migraine Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs

We analysed the adverse events of placebo in acute and preventive randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies for migraine treatment. Fifty-seven trials (oral triptans, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, nasal ergot alkaloids and preventive agents) were included. From 10 to 30% of subjects reported adverse events after placebo. Most common were features associated with a migraine attack, such as nausea, phono- and photophobia. Other frequent complaints resembled those of the active drug (e.g. chest pressure in triptan trials). A third group of adverse events appeared to be coincidental (e.g. sleep disturbance). Adverse events following placebo are probably related to the drug under study and the symptomatology of migraine; some have no obvious explanation.

scholarly journals High-Dose, Short-Duration, Early Valacyclovir Therapy for Episodic Treatment of Cold Sores: Results of Two Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Studies

2003 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 1072-1080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Spotswood L. Spruance ◽  
Terry M. Jones ◽  
Mark M. Blatter ◽  
Mauricio Vargas-Cortes ◽  
Judy Barber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Day Treatment ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Herpes Labialis ◽  
Lesion Development ◽  
Multicenter Studies ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Cold Sore ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Cold Sores

ABSTRACT Oral valacyclovir is better absorbed than oral acyclovir, increasing acyclovir bioavailability three- to fivefold. This provides the opportunity to explore whether high systemic acyclovir concentrations are effective in the treatment of cold sores (herpes labialis). Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were conducted. Subjects were provided with 2 g of valacyclovir twice daily for 1 day (1-day treatment), 2 g of valacyclovir twice daily for 1 day and then 1 g of valacyclovir twice daily for 1 day (2-day treatment), or a matching placebo and instructed to initiate treatment upon the first symptoms of a cold sore. In study 1, the median duration of the episode (primary endpoint) was reduced by 1.0 day (P = 0.001) with 1-day treatment and 0.5 days (P = 0.009) with 2-day treatment compared to placebo. Similarly, the mean duration of the episode was statistically significantly reduced by 1.1 days with 1-day treatment and 0.7 days with 2-day treatment compared to placebo. The proportion of subjects in whom cold sore lesion development was prevented and/or blocked was increased by 6.4% (P = 0.096) with 1-day treatment and 8.5% (P = 0.061) with 2-day treatment compared to placebo. The time to lesion healing and time to cessation of pain and/or discomfort were statistically significantly reduced with valacyclovir compared to placebo. In study 2, results similar to those in study 1 were obtained. AEs were similar across treatment groups. These studies provide evidence supporting a simple, 1-day valacyclovir treatment regimen for cold sores that is safe and effective. The 1-day valacyclovir regimen offers patients a unique and convenient dosing alternative compared to available topical therapies.

scholarly journals A.07 Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant for the acute treatment of migraine: a single-attack phase 3 study, ACHIEVE I

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (s1) ◽  
pp. S9-S10 ◽  
Author(s):  
DW Dodick ◽  
RB Lipton ◽  
J Ailani ◽  
K Lu ◽  
H Lakkis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Migraine Attack ◽  
Initial Dose ◽  
Acute Treatment ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Safety Population ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Attack Phase ◽  
Headache Pain ◽  
Cgrp Receptor Antagonist

Background: To evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ubrogepant, an oral CGRP receptor antagonist, for acute treatment of a single migraine attack. Methods: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-attack, phase 3 study (NCT02828020). Patients randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, ubrogepant 50mg, or ubrogepant 100mg had 60 days to treat one migraine attack (moderate/severe pain intensity). Co-primary efficacy endpoints: pain freedom 2 hours post initial dose and absence of most bothersome migraine-associated symptom (MBS). Results: 1672 patients were randomized (safety population: n=1436; mITT population: n=1327). Mean age: 40.7 years; white (82.4%); female (87.5%). A significantly greater percentage of ubrogepant- than placebo-treated patients achieved pain freedom 2 hours post initial dose (50mg: 19.2%, adjusted P=0.0023; 100mg: 21.2%, adjusted P=0.0003; placebo: 11.8%). A significantly greater percentage of ubrogepant patients achieved absence of MBS (50mg: 38.6%, adjusted P=0.0023, 100mg: 37.7%, adjusted P=0.0023; placebo: 27.8%). The adverse event (AE) profile of ubrogepant was similar to placebo. The most common AEs (incidence ≥2% in any treatment group) within 48 hours of initial or optional second dose were nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth (all with incidence &lt;5%). Conclusions: Both co-primary endpoints were met, with clinically meaningful effects on migraine headache pain and MBS. Ubrogepant was well tolerated, with no identified safety concerns.

Lamotrigine versus Placebo in the Prophylaxis of Migraine with and Without aura

Cephalalgia ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
TJ Steiner ◽  
LJ Findley ◽  
AWC Yuen
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Sodium Channels ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Glutamate Release ◽  
Migraine Prophylaxis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Spreading Cortical Depression ◽  
High Incidence ◽  
Cortical Depression

Lamotrigine blocks voltage-sensitive sodium channels, leading to inhibition of neuronal release of glutamate. Release of glutamate may be essential in the propagation of spreading cortical depression, which some believe is central to the genesis of migraine attacks. This study compared safety and efficacy of lamotrigine and placebo in migraine prophylaxis in a double-blind randomized parallel-groups trial. A total of 110 patients entered; after a 1-month placebo run-in period, placebo-responders and non-compliers were excluded, leaving 77 to be treated with lamotrigine ( n=37) or placebo ( n=40) for up to 3 months. Initially lamotrigine therapy was commenced at the full dose of 200 mg/day, but, following a high incidence of skin rashes, a slow dose-escalation was introduced: 25 mg/day for 2 weeks, 50 mg/day for 2 weeks, then 200 mg/day. Attack rates were reduced from baseline means of 3.6 per month on lamotrigine and 4.4 on placebo to 3.2 and 3.0 respectively during the last month of treatment. Improvements were greater on placebo and these changes, not statistically significant, indicate that lamotrigine is ineffective for migraine prophylaxis. There were more adverse events on lamotrigine than on placebo, most commonly rash. With slow dose-escalation their frequency was reduced and the rate of withdrawal for adverse events was similar in both treatment groups.

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

Cephalalgia ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (12) ◽  
pp. 1885-1895
Author(s):  
Peer Tfelt-Hansen ◽  
Janus Kaufmann Lindqvist ◽  
Thien Phu Do
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
International Headache Society ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Migraine Treatment ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Acute Administration ◽  
Drug Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Number Of Patients

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.

Acute treatment of migraine with the selective 5-HT1F receptor agonist lasmiditan – A randomised proof-of-concept trial

Cephalalgia ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 1170-1178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel D Ferrari ◽  
Markus Färkkilä ◽  
Uwe Reuter ◽  
Alison Pilgrim ◽  
Charles Davis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Acute Treatment ◽  
Neural Mechanism ◽  
Dose Finding ◽  
Stopping Rules ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Proof Of Concept ◽  
Post Dose ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Clinical Experiments

Introduction: Lasmiditan (COL-144; LY573144) is a novel, highly selective and potent agonist at 5-HT1F receptors that lacks vasoconstrictor activity. Preclinical and early clinical experiments predict acute antimigraine efficacy of COL-144 that is mediated through a non-vascular, primarily neural, mechanism. Subjects and methods: In a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind, group-sequential, adaptive treatment-assignment, proof-of-concept and dose-finding study, we treated 130 subjects in-hospital during a migraine attack. Subjects were allocated to an intravenous dose level of lasmiditan or placebo in small cohorts. The starting dose was 2.5 mg. Subsequent doses were adjusted, up or down, according to the safety and efficacy seen in the preceding cohort. The primary outcome measure was headache response defined as improvement from moderate or severe headache at baseline to mild or no headache at 2 h post-dose. The study was designed to explore the overall dose response relationship but was not powered to differentiate individual doses from placebo, nor to detect effect differences for other migraine symptoms. Results: Forty-two subjects received placebo and 88 received lasmiditan in doses of 2.5–45 mg. Subjects were observed in the clinic for 4 h after treatment and used a diary card to record symptoms and adverse events for up to 24 h. The study was terminated when the 20 mg dose met predefined efficacy stopping rules. Of subjects treated in the 10, 20, 30 and 45 mg lasmiditan dose groups, 54–75% showed a 2 h headache response, compared to 45% in the placebo group ( P = 0.0126 for the linear association between response rates and dose levels). Patient global impression at 2 h and lack of need for rescue medication also showed statistically significant linear correlations with dose. Lasmiditan was generally well tolerated. Adverse events were reported by 65% of subjects on lasmiditan and by 43% on placebo and were generally mild. Dizziness, paresthesia and sensations of heaviness (usually limb) were more common on lasmiditan. Conclusions: At intravenous doses of 20 mg and higher, lasmiditan proved effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Further studies to assess the optimal oral dose and full efficacy and tolerability profile are under way. The non-vascular, neural mechanism of action of lasmiditan may offer an alternative means to treat migraine especially in patients who have contra-indications for agents with vasoconstrictor activity. The clinicaltrials.gov identifier for this study is NCT00384774.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document