Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Sumatriptan”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
PubMed2000

Comparison of naratriptan and sumatriptan in recurrence-prone migraine patients. Naratriptan International Recurrence Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, crossover study was undertaken to compare the incidence of headache recurrence after treatment with naratriptan or sumatriptan in migraine patients with a history of frequent headache recurrence (recurrence in > or =50% of successfully treated attacks). BACKGROUND: Although the selective 5-hydroxytryptamine, (5-HT1) agonist sumatriptan is effective and well tolerated for acute treatment of migraine in most patients, headache recurrence within 24 hours of initial successful treatment with sumatriptan and other medications has been reported in approximately 35% of patients. The novel 5-HT1 agonist naratriptan possesses pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic characteristics that may address the issue of headache recurrence. METHODS: Men and women aged 18 to 65 years with a > or =1-year history of migraine with or without aura were randomly assigned to treat 1 moderate or severe migraine attack in a nonclinical setting with one 2.5-mg naratriptan tablet and 1 attack with one 100-mg sumatriptan tablet. A pain-free interval of > or =24 hours was required between attacks. At 4 hours, patients not using rescue medication and experiencing headache recurrence could take a second, identical dose of study medication to treat recurrence. No more than 2 tablets of study medication were permitted in any 24-hour period. RESULTS: A total of 253 patients treated > or =1 migrane attack and were included in the safety analysis; the 225 patients who treated both attacks were included in the efficacy analysis. Of the 164 naratriptan-treated and 181 sumatriptan-treated patients experiencing headache relief after > or =1 attack, headache recurrence 4 to 24 hours after treatment was reported by 74 naratriptan-treated patients (45%) and 101 sumatriptan-treated patients (57%; not statistically significant). (One naratriptan- and 3 sumatriptan-treated patients who experienced headache relief did not record recurrence status and were not included in the denominator for the percentage calculation.) In a subset of patients experiencing headache relief after 2 attacks, headache recurrence 4 to 24 hours after initial dosing was reported by 55 naratriptan- and 77 sumatriptan-treated patients (41% and 57%, respectively; P = 0.005). The overall incidence of adverse events was 22% after treatment with naratriptan and 33% after treatment with sumatriptan. This incidence did not increase after use of a second dose of naratriptan (20%) or sumatriptan (31%). CONCLUSION: These data suggest that naratriptan is a long-acting and well-tolerated addition to currently available medications for the treatment of acute migraine.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1999

Magnitude of 5-HT1B and 5-HT1A receptor activation in guinea-pig and rat brain: evidence from sumatriptan dimer-mediated [35S]GTPgammaS binding responses.

The present study reports on G-protein activation by recombinant 5-HT receptors and by native 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B receptors in guinea-pig and rat brain using agonist-stimulated [35S]GTPgammaS binding responses mediated by a new 5-HT ligand, a dimer of sumatriptan. Dimerization of sumatriptan increased the binding affinity for h 5-HT1B (pKi: 9.22 vs. 7.79 for sumatriptan), h 5-HT1D (9.07 vs. 8.08) and also h 5-HT1A receptors (7.80 vs. 6.40), while the binding affinity for h 5-ht1E (6.67 vs. 6.19) and h 5-ht1F (7.37 vs. 7.78) receptors was not affected. Sumatriptan dimer (10 microM) stimulated [35S]GTPgammaS binding mainly in the superficial gray layer of the superior colliculi, hippocampus and substantia nigra of guinea-pig and rat coronal brain sections. This fits with the labelling by the 5-HT1B/1D receptor antagonist [3H] GR 125743. The observed [35S]GTPgammaS binding responses in the substantia nigra are likely to be mediated by stimulation of the 5-HT1B receptor subtype, since they were antagonized by the 5-HT1B inverse agonist SB 224289 (10 microM), and not by the 5-HT2A/1D antagonist ketanserin (10 microM). Quantitative assessment of the [35S]GTPgammaS binding responses in the substantia nigra of rat showed highly efficacious responses for both sumatriptan dimer and its monomer. In contrast, less efficacious agonist responses (51+/-10% and 35+/-13%, respectively) were measured in the guinea-pig substantia nigra. This may suggest that the G-protein coupling efficacy of 5-HT1B receptors is different between the substantia nigra of both species. In addition, the sumatriptan dimer also activated guinea-pig and rat hippocampal 5-HT1A receptors with high efficacy in contrast to sumatriptan. Therefore, dimerization of sumatriptan can be considered as a new approach to transform a partial 5-HT1A agonist into a more efficacious agonist. In conclusion, the sumatriptan dimer stimulates G-protein activation via 5-HT1B receptors besides 5-HT1A receptors in guinea-pig and rat brain. The magnitude of the 5-HT1B receptor responses is superior for sumatriptan and its dimer in rat compared to guinea-pig substantia nigra.

Animals↗
PubMed2001

The efficacy and safety of sc alniditan vs. sc sumatriptan in the acute treatment of migraine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

This double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, multinational, phase-III trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of a single subcutaneous injection of placebo, 2 doses of alniditan (1.4 mg and 1.8 mg) and 6 mg of sumatriptan in subjects with acute migraine. A total of 114 investigators from 13 different countries screened 2021 subjects. In total 924 patients were treated with placebo (157), alniditan 1.4 mg (309), alniditan 1.8 mg (141) and sumatriptan 6 mg (317). The lower number of subjects in the alniditan 1.8 mg group is due to the termination of this trial arm after the incidence of a serious adverse event and a subsequent protocol amendment. The number of subjects who were pain free at 2 h (primary endpoint) was: 22 (14.1%) with placebo, 174 (56.3%) with alniditan 1.4 mg, 87 (61.7%) with alnditan 1.8 mg and 209 (65.9%) with sumatriptan 6 mg. Alniditan 1.4 mg was significantly better (P < 0.001) than placebo and sumatriptan was significantly better (P = 0.015) than alniditan 1.4 mg. The number of responders (reduction of headache severity from moderate or severe headache before treatment to mild or absent at 2 h), was 59 (37.8%) on placebo, 250 (80.9%) on alniditan 1.4 mg, 120 (85.1%) on alniditan 1.8 mg, and 276 (87.1%) on sumatriptan. Response was significantly higher (P < 0.001) with alniditan 1.4 mg than with placebo, and significantly lower (P = 0.036) with alniditan 1.4 mg than with sumatriptan. Recurrence rates were: 22 (37.3%) with placebo, 87 (34.8%) with alniditan 1.4 mg, 35 (29.2%) with alniditan 1.8 mg and 108 (39.1%) with sumatriptan. Adverse events occurred in 577/924 (62.4%) subjects, i.e. in 62/157 (39.5%) with placebo, 214/309 (69.3%) with alniditan 1.4 mg, 91/141 (64.5%) with alniditan 1.8 mg and 210/317 (66.2%) with sumatriptan 6 mg. Sumatriptan was significantly better than alniditan 1.4 mg for pain free at 2 h. The difference, however, was small and clinically not important. For alniditan, a dose-dependent adverse event relationship was seen. The safety profile of alniditan 1.4 mg was similar to that of sumatriptan.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1994

Oral sumatriptan: effect of a second dose, and incidence and treatment of headache recurrences.

Oral sumatriptan in a dose of 100 mg aborts about 60% of migraine attacks within 2 h, but the headache may recur within 24 h. We investigated: (i) the incidence of headache recurrence after oral sumatriptan (ii) whether a second tablet of sumatriptan at 2 h increases initial efficacy and/or (iii) prevents headache recurrence and (iv) whether a further tablet of sumatriptan treats headache recurrence. In a randomized parallel-group clinical trial, 1246 patients treated one to three migraine attacks (with or without aura), with 100 mg oral sumatriptan. Two hours later they all took a double-blind randomized second table of sumatriptan (group I) or placebo (group II). Patients who initially improved, but then experienced headache recurrence took a further double-blind randomized tablet of sumatriptan or placebo. Proportions of patients who improved from moderate/severe headache to mild/none were similar in groups I and III at 2 h (55 vs 56%) and 4 h (80 vs 77%). Incidences of headache recurrence (moderate/severe-any grade of headache) and median times to headache recurrence were also similar: 22-32% at 16 h in group I and 25-33% at 16.5 h in group II. Sumatriptan was superior to placebo in treating headache recurrence: 74 vs 49% (p = 0.017) in group I and 70 vs 30% (p = 0.0001) in group II. Thus, one-fourth of patients experience headache recurrence at about 16 h after successful treatment of a migraine attack with 100 mg oral sumatriptan. A second tablet of sumatriptan at 2 h does not increase initial efficacy and neither prevents nor delays headache recurrence.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

Acute treatment of migraine attacks: efficacy and safety of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, diclofenac-potassium, in comparison to oral sumatriptan and placebo. The Diclofenac-K/Sumatriptan Migraine Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Migraine attacks are often treated with simple analgesics or with ergotamine-containing preparations alone or in combination with anti-emetics. Although also sometimes used to treat migraine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have not been systematically evaluated in controlled clinical trials, particularly in comparison with the newer drug sumatriptan. Sumatriptan is a specific migraine treatment which has recently become among the most widely prescribed acute migraine therapies. However, while effective, it has low oral bioavailability and some problematic adverse effects. Diclofenac-potassium is a potent NSAID available as a fast-acting oral tablet, which has been shown to be safe and effective in several other acute pain indications. In the clinical trial reported here, the efficacy and safety of diclofenac-potassium in the acute treatment of migraine attacks has been tested in comparison with oral sumatriptan and placebo. METHODS: Single oral doses of 50 mg and 100 mg diclofenac-potassium were compared to a single oral dose of 100 mg sumatriptan and placebo in a double-blind randomized crossover trial in 156 adult patients suffering from migraine attacks, with or without aura, selected according to the International Headache Society diagnostic criteria. The primary efficacy criterion was migraine headache pain recorded on a visual analog scale at 2 h after dosing. Secondary endpoints included pain at other time points up to 8 h and the presence of accompanying symptoms (nausea, vomiting, photophobia, phonophobia). FINDINGS: Diclofenac-potassium was more effective than placebo in reducing migraine headache pain at 2 h after dosing, which was the primary endpoint. Secondary analyses showed that diclofenac-potassium provided significant pain relief from 60 min after dosing and for all remaining endpoints in the 8-h observation period. Both 50 and 100 mg doses of diclofenac-potassium were similarly effective. A similar effect was shown with sumatriptan; however, significant superiority to placebo was seen only from the 90-min time point. Diclofenac-potassium was generally superior to placebo or sumatriptan in reducing accompanying symptoms, particularly nausea. Diclofenac-potassium seemed to be as well tolerated as placebo, with fewer adverse events reported than after sumatriptan treatment and with more patients assessing the overall tolerability of diclofenac-potassium better than that of sumatriptan. INTERPRETATION: Compared with placebo and the reference therapy sumatriptan, diclofenac-potassium is an effective, fast-acting, and well-tolerated acute oral therapy for migraine attacks, with advantages over oral sumatriptan in terms of onset of analgesic effect, reduction of accompanying symptoms, and tolerability profile. It may therefore be useful as an alternative oral therapy for migraine attacks.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

Efficacy and safety of intravenous acetylsalicylic acid lysinate compared to subcutaneous sumatriptan and parenteral placebo in the acute treatment of migraine. A double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, multicenter, parallel group study. The ASASUMAMIG Study Group.

Two-hundred-and-seventy-eight patients with acute migraine attacks with or without aura were treated in 17 centers with 1.8 g lysine acetylsalicylate i.v. (Aspisol; = 1 g acetylsalicylic acid), 6 mg sumatriptan s.c. or placebo using a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, multicenter parallel group study design. Two-hundred-and-seventy-five of them fulfilled the criteria for efficacy analysis, corresponding to 119 patients treated with lysine acetylsalicylate (L-ASA), 114 with sumatriptan and 42 with placebo injections. Both treatments were highly effective compared to placebo (p < 0.0001) in decreasing headache from severe or moderate to mild or none (verbal rating scale, VRS, placebo = 23.8%). Sumatriptan showed a significantly (p = 0.001) better response (91.2%) compared to L-ASA (response 73.9%). Of the patients in the L-ASA-group, 43.7% were pain-free after 2 h; 76.3% after sumatriptan and 14.3% after placebo. It took patients on average 12.6 (L-ASA), 8.2 (sumatriptan), and 19.4 h (placebo) to be able to work again. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in recurrence of headache in responders within 24 h (18.2% L-ASA, 23.1% sumatriptan, 20% placebo). Accompanying symptoms (nausea, vomiting; photophobia, phonophobia, and visual disturbances) improved with both verum treatments to a similar extent. L-ASA was significantly better tolerated than sumatriptan (adverse events L-ASA 7.6%, sumatriptan 37.8%). In conclusion, subcutaneous sumatriptan and lysine acetylsalicylate i.v. are effective treatments for patients suffering from migraine attacks. Sumatriptan is more effective, but resulted in more adverse events.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Costs and outcomes of early versus delayed migraine treatment with sumatriptan.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on costs and outcomes of early migraine treatment with sumatriptan while pain is mild versus sumatriptan treatment of moderate to severe pain. BACKGROUND: Migraines result in substantial pain, impairment, and costs. Recent clinical studies have shown that early treatment with sumatriptan when migraine pain is mild is more effective than sumatriptan treatment when pain is moderate to severe. DESIGN/METHODS: We developed a decision analytical model to assess the costs and outcomes per treated migraine attack, comparing early treatment while pain is mild versus delayed treatment when pain may become moderate/severe using 50 and 100 mg of sumatriptan. Parameters for the model were derived from published literature and analysis of migraine patient diary data. For each patient group the model determined the duration of mild and moderate/severe migraine pain, the proportion of patients pain free at 4 hours after initial therapy with no recurrence, medical care costs, and work loss costs (from migraine-related absenteeism and decreased productivity) during a 24-hour period. Total costs were calculated as the sum of medical care costs plus work loss costs. RESULTS: Early treatment with sumatriptan when migraine pain is mild resulted in substantially decreased total costs per treated attack as compared with treatment when pain is moderate/severe. Early treatment also resulted in decreased time with headache pain, an increased proportion of patients pain free at 4 hours without recurrence, and decreased physician and emergency department visits. Treatment with 100 mg sumatriptan resulted in better outcomes than did treatment with 50 mg sumatriptan, but outcomes with either dose for early treatment of mild pain were superior to those for either dose in delayed treatment when pain may be moderate/severe. CONCLUSIONS: Model-based results indicate that on a treated attack basis, early treatment of migraine with sumatriptan while pain is mild leads to decreased costs and improved outcomes compared to delayed sumatriptan treatment.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed1995

Contractile responses to sumatriptan in isolated bovine pulmonary artery rings: relationship to tone and cyclic nucleotide levels.

We examined responses to the 5-hydroxytryptamine 1D (5-HT1D)-receptor agonist sumatriptan in bovine pulmonary artery rings (2-3 mm ID). The effects of agonist-induced tone and agents that alter intracellular cyclic AMP [cyclic AMP]i or [cyclic GMP]i on responses to sumatriptan were investigated. At resting tension, responses to sumatriptan were slight or not evident. In the presence of tone induced by U46619, responses to sumatriptan (1 nM-30 mM) were greatly potentiated, as were responses to the alpha2-adrenoceptor agonist UK14304. Responses to the alpha 1-adrenoceptor agonist phenylephrine (PE) were potentiated only slightly. In the presence of U46619, addition of the adenylyl cyclase activator, forskolin (1 nM-0.1 microM or isoprenaline (ISO 1 microM) induced relaxations and increases in [cyclic AMP]i and resulted in further potentiation of the contractile response to sumatriptan. Addition of 0.1 microM sodium nitroprusside (SNP) inhibited sumatriptan-induced contractions. Whereas sumatriptan alone did not significantly affect [cyclic AMP]i, in the presence of U46619 it decreased [cyclic AMP]i. This effect of sumatriptan was further enhanced in the presence of forskolin. Sumatriptan increased [cyclic GMP]i. Using a nitric oxide (NO) synthase inhibitor and vessels denuded of endothelium, we showed that the increased [cyclic GMP]i in response to sumatriptan was endothelium-dependent and mediated by NO. This increase in [cyclic GMP]i was not observed in the presence of U46619. By measuring cyclic AMP and cyclic GMP phosphodiesterase (PDE) levels, we demonstrated that the point of "cross-talk" between cyclic nucleotides may not be at the level of total PDE activity. These results highlight the important role of [cyclic AMP], [cyclic GMP]i, and endothelium function in the control of 5-HT1D receptor-mediated vasoconstriction, which is dependent on a decrease in [cyclic AMP]i in the absence of an increase in [cyclic GMP]i.

15-Hydroxy-11 alpha,9 alpha-(epoxymethano)prosta-5↗
PubMed1995

How does sumatriptan perform in clinical practice?

The patient's opinion on sumatriptan treatment has been obtained from 351 migraineurs (299F and 52M) by means of a telephone survey. The results are based on the patient's cumulative experience of more than 20,000 subcutaneous injections and more than 2,000 tablet doses. The average period during which subcutaneous sumatriptan (12 mg/ml, 0.5 ml) was used was 19.1 +/- 0.4 months and 84% of the patients had used more than 10 injections. The average number of migraine attacks per month was 3.0 +/- 0.1, injections per attack 1.7 +/- 0.1, and number of tablets (100 mg) per attack 1.8 +/- 0.2. Attack duration was decreased from on average 38.4 +/- 2.1 h to 2.3 +/- 0.5 h by subcutaneous sumatriptan and to 3.4 +/- 1.0 by orally administered sumatriptan. The average degree of efficiency at work with migraine was 76.3 +/- 1.9% on sumatriptan compared with 26.6% on other treatment options; 85% said that sumatriptan was much better than previous conventional therapies tested. During their experience with sumatriptan, 89% of the migraineurs reported altogether 1,058 adverse events (average 3.6 +/- 01, range 1 to 12) in connection with subcutaneous sumatriptan treatment. The three most frequent were drowsiness/sedation (49%), chest symptoms (40%) and injection site symptoms (37%). Among the table users, 87% reported altogether 122 adverse events (average 2.6 +/- 0.3, range 1 to 11). Seventy-eight percent of the responders responded to subcutaneous sumatriptan sometimes (22% always, 15% every second attack, 40% seldom) experienced a recurrence of their headache within 24 h. The average number of recurrences was 1.7 +/- 0.1 and the average time to recurrence 13.0 +/- 0.6 h (range 1.5-24 h). It is concluded that the selected group of migraineurs found sumatriptan to be very effective in reducing the symptoms of their migraine attacks, but also to cause several adverse events, in many cases, with short-lasting effect.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

Sumatriptan is effective in the treatment of menstrual migraine: a review of prospective studies and retrospective analyses.

Menstrual migraine may be debilitating, long-lasting, and refractory to treatment. Because the efficacy and tolerability of abortive and prophylactic treatment options for menstrual migraine have generally not been evaluated in controlled clinical trials, treatment choices are often made on the basis of personal experience and anecdotal reports. This article reviews evidence from retrospective analyses and prospective studies showing that sumatriptan injection and tablets are effective and well tolerated in menstrual migraine. (1) Sumatriptan injection 6 mg was as effective in the treatment of menstrual migraine attacks as it was for nonmenstrual attacks in a retrospective analysis of data from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials (n = 1104). In the menstrual migraine group, 80% of women treated with sumatriptan injection 6 mg compared with 19% of placebo-treated patients reported headache relief 1 h postdose (p < 0.001). (2) Sumatriptan injection 6 mg was effective in the acute treatment of menstrual migraine attacks in a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, two-attack study (n = 226). Across the two attacks, 70-71% of patients treating menstrual migraine attacks with sumatriptan injection 6 mg compared with 22-24% of placebo-treated patients reported headache relief 1 h postdose (p < 0.001). (3) Sumatriptan tablets 100 mg were effective in the acute treatment of menstrual migraine attacks in a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study in women diagnosed with menstrual migraine (n = 115). For menstrual migraine attacks, headache relief 4 h postdose was reported by 67% of sumatriptan-treated patients compared with 33% of placebo-treated patients. Sumatriptan injection and tablets were generally well tolerated in these studies, in which adverse events were characteristic of those typically observed in sumatriptan acute migraine clinical trials. These data demonstrate that sumatriptan injection and tablets are effective and well tolerated in the treatment of menstrual migraine.

Female↗
PubMed2005

Treatment of cluster headache attacks with less than 6 mg subcutaneous sumatriptan.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous (SQ) sumatriptan 6 mg is effective in the treatment of acute cluster headache attacks. However, patients sometimes benefit from a dose less than 6 mg. OBJECTIVE: Therefore, we designed a prospective open study to evaluate how many patients benefit from a dose less than 6 mg SQ sumatriptan. METHODS: We enrolled 81 consecutive patients with cluster headache and recorded their use of SQ sumatriptan and oxygen. Patients regularly using SQ sumatriptan 6 mg were advised to treat attacks with doses less than 6 mg and with oxygen. Efficacy and side effects of the different treatment options (6 mg, 3 mg, 2 mg, and oxygen) were evaluated. RESULTS: As a result, 74% of the patients using SQ sumatriptan 3 mg showed efficacy and 89% reported efficacy after 2 mg. Seventy-nine percent reported side effects after the use of SQ sumatriptan 6 mg (29% severe side effects). After the use of 2 mg SQ sumatriptan, only 50% of the patients reported side effects, none of these were classified as severe. Patients' preference was 41% for 6 mg sumatriptan, 28% for doses less than 6 mg, and 31% for oxygen. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that sumatriptan in doses less than 6 mg can be effective in the acute treatment of cluster headache attacks. We suggest that patients should have experience in their individual efficacy of sumatriptan doses less than 6 mg.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2006

Sumatriptan nasal spray in adolescent migraineurs: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, acute study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan nasal spray (NS) (5, 20 mg) versus placebo in the acute treatment of migraine in adolescent subjects. BACKGROUND: Currently, no triptan is approved in the United States for the treatment of migraine in adolescent subjects (12 to 17 years). In a previous randomized, placebo-controlled study of 510 adolescent subjects, sumatriptan NS at 5, 10, and 20 mg doses was well tolerated. However, the primary efficacy analysis for headache relief with 20 mg at 2 hours did not demonstrate statistical significance (P = .059). A second study was initiated to evaluate the efficacy of sumatriptan NS in this population. METHODS: This was a randomized (1:1:1), placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group study. Overall, 738 adolescent subjects (mean age: 14 years) with > or = 6-month history of migraine (with or without aura) self-treated a single attack of moderate or severe migraine. The primary endpoints were headache relief at 1 hour and sustained relief from 1 to 24 hours. Pain-free rates, presence/absence of associated symptoms, headache recurrence, and use of rescue medications were also assessed. Tolerability was based on adverse events (AEs) and vital signs. RESULTS: Sumatriptan NS 20 mg provided greater headache relief than placebo at 30 minutes (42% vs. 33%, respectively; P = .046) and 2 hours (68% vs. 58%; P = .025) postdose, but did not reach statistical significance at 1 hour (61% vs. 52%; P = .087) or for sustained headache relief from 1 to 24 hours (P = .061). Significant differences (P < .05) in favor of sumatriptan NS 20 mg over placebo were observed for several secondary efficacy endpoints including sustained relief from 2 to 24 hours. In general, sumatriptan NS 5 mg percentages were slightly higher than placebo but the differences did not reach statistical significance. Both doses of sumatriptan NS were well tolerated. No AEs were serious or led to study withdrawal. The most common event was taste disturbance (2%, placebo; 19%, sumatriptan NS 5 mg; 25%, sumatriptan NS 20 mg). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that sumatriptan may be beneficial to some adolescents and is generally well tolerated in the acute treatment of migraine in this population.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1997

Sumatriptan, a selective 5-HT1 receptor agonist, induces a lag phase for gastric emptying of liquids in humans.

Sumatriptan, a 5-hydroxytryptamine1 (5-HT1) receptor agonist at enteric neuronal 5-HT receptors, causes a relaxation of the gastric fundus and inhibition of antral contractile activity. The present study examined the effect of sumatriptan on gastric emptying of solids and liquids in humans. In eight healthy subjects the gastric emptying rate for liquids and solids was measured using the carbon-labeled glycine and octanoic acid breath test after subcutaneous administration of placebo or sumatriptan. Sumatriptan increased the gastric half-emptying time of liquids (P < 0.0005) and induced a prolonged lag phase for liquids (P < 0.0005) in all subjects. Sumatriptan increased gastric half-emptying time (P < 0.005) and the lag phase of solids (P < 0.05) in all subjects. In two healthy subjects gastric emptying of liquids and solids after subcutaneous administration of sumatriptan was studied by radioscintigraphy. Radioscintigraphy confirmed the delayed emptying and the prolonged lag phases after sumatriptan. In conclusion, sumatriptan delays gastric emptying of solids and liquids in healthy subjects. Moreover, sumatriptan induces a lag phase for liquids. The mechanism by which sumatriptan alters gastric emptying remains to be studied.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

The preclinical toxicological evaluation of sumatriptan.

1 Sumatriptan is a potent and selective 5-HT1 receptor agonist marketed for the treatment of migraine by both oral and subcutaneous routes. An extensive toxicological programme employing high doses of sumatriptan was carried out in a range of animal species. The studies evaluated both the local and systemic tolerance to single and repeated dosing, effects on all stages of reproduction, as well as the genotoxic and oncogenic potential of sumatriptan. 2 The administration of relatively high single and repeated doses of sumatriptan was well tolerated by both rodents and dogs by the oral, subcutaneous and intravenous routes. Behavioural effects, suggestive of involvement of the central nervous system, were the most obvious result of such doses and were generally more pronounced in dogs than rodents. The reason for this may be related to the higher plasma concentrations of the drug achievable in dogs. Additional observations restricted to dogs, were transient, and included tachycardia, facial oedema and breaks in the continuity of secretion films on the corneal surface. A tendency for an increase in weight gain was seen for rats, while a slight decrease was usually seen for dogs. The only pathological changes related to treatment with high concentrations of sumatriptan consisted of local reactions at the site of subcutaneous administration. 3 Sumatriptan is an indole; the structures of this chemical class show varying propensities for nitrosation. However, appropriate testing with sumatriptan failed to identify any mutagenic nitroso compounds. 4 Sumatriptan was neither genotoxic nor oncogenic. 5 Reproductive studies demonstrated that sumatriptan was not teratogenic and had no effect on peri- and postnatal development. Some embryotoxicity was observed, but only at maternally toxic doses. A slight decrease in the success of insemination was also noted at high oral doses in rats. 6 Results of the toxicological programme performed in support of migraine therapy with sumatriptan provide good assurance of safety for subcutaneous and oral use.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2000

Craniovascular selectivity of eletriptan and sumatriptan in human isolated blood vessels.

BACKGROUND: Eletriptan is a 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist with proven efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. OBJECTIVE: To assess the craniovascular selectivity of eletriptan and sumatriptan in blood vessels predictive of therapeutic efficacy (human middle meningeal artery) and adverse coronary side effects (human coronary artery and human saphenous vein). METHOD: The authors obtained coronary artery from organ donors (n = 9), middle meningeal artery from patients (n = 11) undergoing craniotomy, and saphenous vein from patients (n = 9) undergoing coronary bypass surgery. Concentration-response curves to eletriptan and sumatriptan were constructed to obtain measurements of efficacy (maximum contraction, E(max)) and potency (concentration eliciting 50% of E(max), EC(50)). The contraction that is likely to be induced at the maximal free plasma concentration (C(max)) was determined by calculating C(max)/EC(50) ratios and by interpolation of the concentration-response curves. RESULTS: Eletriptan and sumatriptan induced concentration-dependent contractions of meningeal artery, coronary artery, and saphenous vein. Eletriptan was less potent than sumatriptan in coronary artery, whereas both compounds had similar potency in meningeal artery and saphenous vein. However, the potency of eletriptan and sumatriptan was higher in meningeal artery than in coronary artery (86-fold for eletriptan and 30-fold for sumatriptan) or saphenous vein (66- and 25-fold). The efficacy of eletriptan and sumatriptan was similar within tissues. The predicted contraction by eletriptan (40 mg and 80 mg) and sumatriptan (100 mg) at free C(max) observed in clinical trials was similar in meningeal artery, whereas in coronary artery and saphenous vein it was lower for 40 mg eletriptan than for sumatriptan. CONCLUSIONS: At therapeutic concentrations both eletriptan and sumatriptan contract middle meningeal artery more than coronary artery. This suggests that in patients with healthy coronary arteries, they have a limited propensity to cause adverse coronary side effects. However, both drugs remain contraindicated in patients with coronary artery disease.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Assessment of clinical, service, and cost outcomes of a conversion program of sumatriptan to rizatriptan ODT in primary care patients with migraine headaches.

OBJECTIVE: Managed care organizations can increase the value of drug therapy by negotiating discounts on drug acquisition costs with pharmaceutical manufacturers and promoting use of preferred drugs, including the conversion of patients to preferred medications. This investigation was designed to assess conversion success, migraine drug utilizations, and patient satisfaction with a clinical pharmacist-managed conversion program from sumatriptan to rizatriptan ODT, both formulary drugs. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in a managed care organization for patients aged 18 years or older who had picked up at least one outpatient prescription for any sumatriptan dosage form at the pharmacy between January 2002 and June 2002. Patients. pharmacy and medical data were reviewed to assess eligibility (e.g., no history of rizatriptan failure) for conversion from sumatriptan to rizatriptan orally disintegrating tablet (ODT). There was no copayment difference for members for rizatriptan ODT versus sumatriptan. A questionnaire was developed to assess 2 domains: (1) patient satisfaction with the medication conversion process and (2) preference for rizatriptan ODT or sumatriptan. A random sample of 315 patients who initiated conversion to rizatriptan ODT was surveyed. Electronic pharmacy claims were reviewed to determine the number of patients who were successfully converted from sumatriptan to rizatriptan ODT. Pharmacy expenditures and total health care utilization and expenditures in the 180 days prior to (baseline) and after the conversion (followup) to rizatriptan ODT were compared for the cohorts of subjects who were successfully converted and those patients who were not successfully converted. RESULTS: Therapeutic conversion from sumatriptan to rizatriptan ODT was attempted in 457 patients; 214 (47%) were successfully converted. The only difference between the 2 cohorts at baseline for the 6 months prior to attempted conversion was a higher mean number of sumatriptan doses per patient per month (PPPM) in the 243 failed conversions (mean 3.5, SD 2.9) compared with the 214 successful conversions (mean 2.8, SD 2.8, P =0.003). The median triptan doses increased by 1.0 PPPM in both cohorts (P =0.882), from 2.0 to 3.0 doses PPPM in the group of successful conversions and from 2.7 to 4.0 in the group of unsuccessful conversions. The survey response rate was 55% for both successful and for unsuccessful conversions. More than 90% of the patients in both cohorts were satisfied with the level of care provided by the clinical pharmacy staff during medication conversion, and there was no difference between the 2 cohorts in patient satisfaction (P=0.761). Rizatriptan ODT was preferred by 68.0% and 8.5% of successful and failed conversion subjects, respectively (P <0.001). Using representative group purchase prices, triptan expenditures for successful conversion subjects were reduced by a median of -2 dollars (6 %) PPPM while triptan expenditures for unsuccessful conversions increased by a median of 8 dollars (P <0.001). There were no differences for either cohort in median PPPM changes in migraine-related office visits (0.0 median change in office visits, P =0.748) or office-visit costs (0 dollars median change, P =0.861) for preconversion versus postconversion attempts Regression modeling identified that lower total counts of sumatriptan doses filled during baseline period was an independent predictor of successful conversion to rizatriptan ODT (P <0.001). There was an average of 3.5 triptan medication fills per patient for successful conversion during the 6-month follow-up period, with 78% of these subjects filling at least 2 prescriptions for rizatriptan ODT during this period. CONCLUSIONS: This conversion program for sumatriptan to rizatriptan ODT was successful in converting almost half of primary care patients to the preferred product despite the absence of a copayment incentive for members to agree to the conversion. There were no measurable medical or economic consequences of the conversion, and patient satisfaction with the quality of care was maintained. Future efforts are likely to have a higher success rate if focused on converting patients with less-severe migraine headaches, as measured by the need for baseline rescue medication, since lower acuity was the only independent predictor of successful conversion in this conversion program for 2 triptan drugs.

Female↗
PubMed2003

Pain-free results with sumatriptan taken at the first sign of migraine pain: 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan, 50-mg and 100-mg tablets, compared with placebo for treatment of migraine at the first sign of pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two identical multicenter randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack studies were conducted from May through November 2000 in adults (aged 18-65 years). Patients treated migraine at the first sign of pain, while pain was mild, but not more than 2 hours after onset with oral sumatriptan, 50 mg or 100 mg, or matching placebo. The primary end point was pain-free relief at 2 hours after treatment with 50 mg of sumatriptan compared with placebo. RESULTS: There were 354 patients in study 1 and 337 patients in study 2. Significantly more patients treated with sumatriptan, 50 mg and 100 mg, were completely free from pain 2 and 4 hours after treatment vs patients treated with placebo (at 2 hours, 50% and 57% vs 29%; at 4 hours, 61% and 68% vs 30%; for both, P < .001). Also, significantly more patients treated with sumatriptan, 50 mg and 100 mg, were migraine-free (no pain or associated symptoms) vs those treated with placebo at 2 and 4 hours after treatment (at 2 hours, 43% and 49% vs 24%; at 4 hours, 54% and 63% vs 28%; for both, P < .001). The incidence of overall adverse events was low with the 50- and 100-mg dose of sumatriptan (placebo, 7%; sumatriptan at 50 mg, 14%; sumatriptan at 100 mg, 16%). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of migraine at the first sign of pain with sumatriptan, 50-mg and 100-mg tablets, provides superior pain-free relief at 2 and 4 hours after treatment compared with placebo. Results of these studies suggest that sumatriptan at 100 mg may be more efficacious than at 50 mg when used in the early treatment paradigm. Because these studies were not powered to detect statistical differences between active doses, studies to investigate this finding are warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Characteristics and determinants of sumatriptan-associated chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Serious cardiac adverse reactions, including myocardial infarction, have been attributed to the antimigraine drug sumatriptan succinate. Chest pain is considered to be a relatively common adverse reaction to sumatriptan. DESIGN: Postmarketing study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was a part of a national cohort study on adverse reactions to sumatriptan, which was performed with the assistance of drug-dispensing general practitioners in the Netherlands. After data were collected on observed adverse reactions, the patients received a second questionnaire, with specific questions regarding the adverse event, and questions regarding medical history, other health complaints, and smoking habits. Furthermore, they had a physical examination and a blood cholesterol measurement. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients with chest pain associated with intake of sumatriptan were identified and compared with 229 consumers of sumatriptan without this adverse reaction. After multivariate analysis, young age, hypertension, general complaints of abdominal pain, and a family history of myocardial infarction were associated with an increased risk of chest pain attributed to sumatriptan. Hypertension in particular was a risk factor for sumatriptan-induced chest pain in men (relative risk, 8.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-40) compared with hypertension as a risk factor in women (relative risk, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-3.1). CONCLUSIONS: Young age, hypertension, general complaints of abdominal pain, and a family history of myocardial infarction are associated with an increased risk of chest pain attributed to sumatriptan. Sex is an effective modifier of risk factors of sumatriptan-induced chest pain. In particular, hypertension is a strong risk factor in men.

Adult↗