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 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

Oral sumatriptan for acute migraine.

BACKGROUND: Migraine is a common neurovascular disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of disabling headache, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, and, in some patients, neurological aura symptoms. Sumatriptan is one of a class of selective serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT1B/1D) agonists (triptans) thought to relieve migraine attacks by several mechanisms, including cranial vasoconstriction and peripheral and central neural inhibition. OBJECTIVES: To describe and assess the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the efficacy and tolerability of oral sumatriptan for the treatment of a single acute attack of migraine in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2001), MEDLINE (1966 through November 2001), and reference lists of articles and books. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included double-blind RCTs comparing oral sumatriptan (100 mg, 50 mg, 25 mg) with placebo, no intervention, other drug treatments, behavioral therapy, or physical therapy for the treatment of an acute attack of migraine in adults. Trials comparing different doses of sumatriptan or dosing regimens were also included. Outcomes considered were: 2-hour pain-free response, headache relief/headache intensity, and functional disability; headache recurrence; and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were abstracted by one reviewer and over-read by the other. The two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. Information on adverse events was collected from trial reports. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-five trials involving 16,200 participants were included. Methodological quality was generally good. Sixteen trials were placebo comparisons and showed that sumatriptan in doses of 100 mg (14 trials), 50 mg (five trials), and 25 mg (three trials) provided significantly better pain-free response (100 mg and 25 mg only), headache relief, and relief of disability at 2 hours. Numbers-needed-to-treat (NNTs) for pain-free response at 2 hours were 5.1 (3.9 to 7.1) for the 100-mg dose (n = 2221) and 7.5 (2.7 to 142) for the 25-mg dose (n = 131); there was no significant difference between the 50-mg dose and placebo for this outcome (n = 127). For headache relief at 2 hours, NNTs were 3.4 (3.0 to 4.0), 3.2 (2.4 to 5.1), and 3.4 (2.3 to 6.6) for sumatriptan 100 mg (n = 2940), 50 mg (n = 420), and 25 mg (n = 226), respectively. Precise estimates of the efficacy of the 50- and 25-mg doses relative to the 100-mg dose could not be obtained. Adverse events were more common with sumatriptan 100 mg than with placebo (risk difference [RD] = 0.14 [0.09 to 0.20]; number-needed-to-harm [NNH] = 7.1 [5.0 to 11.1]; n = 3172). RDs for the 50- and 25-mg vs. placebo comparisons were not statistically significant. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Oral sumatriptan has been shown to be an effective drug for the treatment of a single acute attack of migraine. It is well tolerated, though minor adverse events were not uncommon in the included trials. Other triptans were generally similar in efficacy and adverse events. Among non-triptan drugs, ergotamine + caffeine was significantly less effective than sumatriptan, and other drugs have been insufficiently studied to draw firm conclusions.

Administration, Oral↗

Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between butorphanol tartrate nasal spray and sumatriptan succinate.

The pharmacokinetics of butorphanol tartrate given in a nasal spray with and without the co-administration of sumatriptan succinate were studied in 24 healthy men and women. In this crossover design study, all subjects received 2 treatments: a single 1-mg dose of butorphanol nasal spray and a 1-mg dose of butorphanol nasal spray plus a single 6-mg subcutaneous (SC) dose of sumatriptan. There was a two-week washout period between sessions. Serial blood samples were collected and plasma samples analyzed using validated radioimmunoassay and high-performance liquid chromatography/electrochemical procedures to determine the concentrations of unchanged butorphanol and sumatriptan, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences for butorphanol between the 2 treatments on any of the following pharmacokinetic parameters: Cmax, tmax, AUC, t1/2, CL/f, and Vz/f. Similarly, the pharmacokinetic parameters obtained for sumatriptan (given with butorphanol nasal spray) were comparable with the literature values obtained for a single 6-mg SC dose of sumatriptan. These data show a lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between butorphanol nasal spray and sumatriptan. Butorphanol nasal spray and sumatriptan were well tolerated. The adverse experience profiles of butorphanol nasal spray were comparable between the treatments, with and without sumatriptan. It can be concluded that regimens of butorphanol nasal spray and sumatriptan need not be changed for either pharmacokinetic or safety considerations when the two compounds are co-administered in treating acute migraine attacks.

Administration, Intranasal↗

Oral sumatriptan compared with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine.

This multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral sumatriptan, given as a new film-coated tablet, with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine. Patients were randomised unequally (1:2) to receive placebo or sumatriptan. Eighty-eight patients received placebo (plus an optional dose 2 h later if the headache persisted plus a further optional dose for recurrence within 24 h) and 162 patients received sumatriptan 100 mg (plus an optional 100 mg dose at 2 h and an optional 100 mg dose within 24 h). Sumatriptan was significantly more effective than placebo at relieving headache (defined as reduction in severity from severe or moderate pain to mild or no pain) at 2 h (51% versus 31%, P = 0.003) and 4 h (71% versus 35%, P < 0.001). Fewer sumatriptan-treated patients required a second dose compared with placebo-treated patients (49% versus 74%, P < 0.001). More sumatriptan-treated patients were completely pain free compared with placebo-treated patients at both 2 h (24% versus 12%) and 4 h (48% versus 18). Patients receiving sumatriptan reported earlier onset of headache relief than patients receiving placebo. Headache relief in sumatriptan-treated patients was similar, irrespective of the type of migraine (with or without aura) or the time of treatment < or = 4 h or > 4 h after onset of migraine). Sumatriptan was more effective than placebo at relieving nausea, vomiting and photophobia/phonophobia. Few patients were evaluable for treatment of headache recurrence, and statistical analysis was not possible.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Acute Disease↗

Comparison of contractile responses to donitriptan and sumatriptan in the human middle meningeal and coronary arteries.

Donitriptan is a potent, high efficacy agonist at 5-HT(1B/1D) receptors. We investigated the contractile effects of donitriptan and sumatriptan on human isolated blood vessels of relevance to therapeutic efficacy in migraine (middle meningeal artery) and coronary adverse events (coronary artery). Furthermore, using the concentration-response curves in the middle meningeal artery, we predicted the plasma concentration needed for the therapeutic effect of donitriptan. Both donitriptan and sumatriptan contracted the middle meningeal artery with similar apparent efficacy (E(max): 103+/-8% and 110+/-12%, respectively), but the potency of donitriptan (pEC(50): 9.07+/-0.14) was significantly higher than that of sumatriptan (pEC(50): 7.41+/-0.08). In the coronary artery, the contraction to donitriptan was biphasic with a significantly higher maximal response (E(max): 29+/-6%) than sumatriptan (E(max): 14+/-2%; pEC(50): 5.71+/-0.16), yielding two distinct pEC(50) values (8.25+/-0.16 and 5.60+/-0.24). Incubation with the 5-HT(2) receptor antagonist ketanserin (10 microM) eliminated the low affinity component of the concentration-response curve of donitriptan and the resultant E(max) and pEC(50) were 9+/-2% and 7.33+/-0.21, respectively. Ketanserin was without effect on the sumatriptan-induced contraction. Based on the middle meningeal artery contraction, concentrations (C(max)) of donitriptan that may be expected to have a therapeutic efficacy equivalent to that of 50 and 100 mg sumatriptan are predicted to be around 2.5 and 4.3 nM, respectively. Such concentrations are likely to induce only a small coronary artery contraction of 2.9+/-1.5% and 3.8+/-2.0%, respectively; these are not different from those by C(max) concentrations of sumatriptan (1.7+/-0.4% or 2.2+/-0.4%). The present results suggest that, like sumatriptan, donitriptan exhibits cranioselectivity and would be effective in aborting migraine attacks with a similar coronary side-effect profile as sumatriptan.

Adult↗

The 5-HT1D receptor antagonist GR-127,935 prevents inhibitory effects of sumatriptan but not CP-122,288 and 5-CT on neurogenic plasma extravasation within guinea pig dura mater.

The aim of this study was to examine whether GR-127,935, a 5-HT1B/1D receptor antagonist, blocks the inhibitory effects of sumatriptan, CP-122,288 and 5-carboxamidotryptamine (5-CT) on plasma protein extravasation, within guinea pig and rat dura matter, following electric stimulation of the trigeminal ganglion. Binding studies first established that GR-127,935 shows a 500-fold selectivity for 5-HT1D binding sites (labeled by [3H]L-694,247) versus 5-HT1F binding sites (labeled by [3H]sumatriptan in the presence of 50 nM 5-carboxamidotryptamine) in guinea pig forebrain homogenates (pKD +/- SD = 7.0 +/- 0.2 at 5-HT1F sites and 9.7 +/- 0.1 at 5-HT1D sites). In guinea pigs, GR-127,935 showed partial agonist activity and inhibited dural plasma protein extravasation. Increasing doses of GR-127,935 reversed the effect of sumatriptan, but did not affect the action of 5-CT and CP-122,288 (at a dose as high as 2 mumol/kg). Sumatriptan, CP 122,288 and 5-CT dose-responsively inhibited plasma protein extravasation. At a dose of 2 mumol/kg (but not at 0.2 mumol/kg), GR-127,935 right-shifted the dose-response curve of sumatriptan. No significant rightward shift was observed in the dose-response of CP-122,288 and 5-CT. In rats, GR-127,935 did not show any significant partial agonist activity. A dose of 0.2 mumol/kg was sufficient to right-shift the dose-response curve of sumatriptan. These data suggest that sumatriptan inhibits neurogenic inflammation via 5-HT1D alpha receptors in guinea pigs and 5-HT1D beta (5-HT1B) receptors in rats. Additional receptor subtypes are likely to be involved in the inhibition of plasma extravasation by CP-122,288 and 5-CT. Pertussis toxin reduced the inhibitory effects of both sumatriptan and 5-CT, but not of muscimol, known to act at GABAA receptors. These results suggest that 5-CT, as well as sumatriptan, act at a receptor linked to an inhibitory G-protein.

Animals↗

Sumatriptan: economic evidence for its use in the treatment of migraine, the Canadian comparative economic analysis.

The objective of this study was to evaluate economic and health effects of sumatriptan relative to customary therapy in Canada. The relationship between treatment and functionality was established based on analysis of existing data from a multinational study. A Monte Carlo model was developed to simulate 1 year for each of customary therapy and six sumatriptan formulations. Costs are expressed in 1998 Canadian dollars. Sumatriptan is expected to reduce the time spent with migraine symptoms and resulting time lost. Under customary therapy, the annual cost of lost time is estimated at pound908 ($1973). With sumatriptan, these costs ranged from pound406 ($882) with subcutaneous sumatriptan to pound577 ($1254) with nasal sumatriptan 10 mg, saving pound331-502 ($719-1091) in the annual cost of time lost. All these benefits are expected to be obtained at an additional drug cost ranging from pound869 ($1889) for subcutaneous sumatriptan to pound278 ($605) for sumatriptan suppository. The cost of sumatriptan treatment is significantly offset by a substantial reduction of costs associated with time lost due to migraine symptoms.

Canada↗

A pharmacokinetic interaction study between butorphanol and sumatriptan nasal sprays in healthy subjects: importance of the timing of butorphanol administration.

Sumatriptan and butorphanol nasal sprays are commonly used agents for the management of migraine headaches. Under certain circumstances, these two agents may be administered closely in time. However, the possibility of a pharmacokinetic interaction and the safety of this regime have not been examined. In this crossover design study, 24 healthy subjects received the following four treatments, each separated by at least 7 days: 1 mg butorphanol (Stadol NS7); 20 mg sumatriptan (Imitrex Nasal Spray); or both formulations together with butorphanol administered either 1 or 30 min after sumatriptan. Serial plasma samples were collected for 24 h post-dose and analysed for butorphanol and/or sumatriptan by HPLC-MS/MS. Butorphanol plasma concentrations were reduced when it was administered 1 min (mean 28.6% decrease in AUC(0-infinity)), but not 30 min, after sumatriptan. The pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan were not substantially altered by butorphanol. The combination of nasally administered sumatriptan and butorphanol appeared safe. However, if butorphanol nasal spray is administered <30 min after sumatriptan nasal spray, the analgesic effect of butorphanol may be diminished due to reduced nasal absorption resulting from probable transient vasoconstriction of nasal blood vessels by sumatriptan.

Administration, Intranasal↗

Impact of sumatriptan on workplace productivity, nonwork activities, and health-related quality of life among hospital employees with migraine.

This prospective, open-label study evaluated the effects of subcutaneous sumatriptan versus usual therapy on workplace productivity, activity time outside of work, and health-related quality of life in 43 men or women who were hospital employees diagnosed with migraine according to international Headache Society criteria. Patients treated migraines with their usual therapy for 12 to 18 weeks followed by subcutaneous sumatriptan for 6 months. Health-related quality of life measurements obtained at baseline, after usual therapy, and after sumatriptan therapy included the Short Form-36 Health Survey and the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. Patient daily diaries were used to capture data on migraine symptoms and on Lost Workplace Productivity and Non-workplace Activity Time. Traditional clinical efficacy measures were obtained to support the pharmacoeconomic data. Clinical data showed that the percentage of treated migraine days per patient on which the patient experienced relief (moderate or severe pain reduced to mild or none) was 75% with sumatriptan and 25% with usual therapy. The mean time to meaningful relief was 1.1 hours during the sumatriptan phase and 4.2 hours during the usual therapy phase. Lost Workplace Productivity and Nonworkplace Activity Time was 35% lower with sumatriptan therapy (1.5 hours) compared with usual therapy (2.3 hours). Time missed from work due to symptoms, time worked with symptoms, and time normal activities were carried on with symptoms were each lower during sumatriptan therapy compared with usual therapy. Scores on each of the three Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire dimensions and on the Role-Emotional dimension of the Short Form-36 were significantly more favorable after sumatriptan than after usual therapy (P < 0.05). These data demonstrate that treatment of migraines with sumatriptan for 6 months following usual therapy for 12 to 18 weeks was associated with improvement in clinical efficacy, reduction in lost workplace productivity and nonworkplace activity time, and enhancement of key dimensions of health-related quality of life among employees of a large university hospital.

Activities of Daily Living↗

Effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan in 5- to 12-year-old children.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the tolerability and effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan in the treatment of migraine in 5- to 12-year-old children. BACKGROUND: Although headaches are a common disorder and occur in up to 10.6% of children, many of the new migraine abortive agents have not been well evaluated in this population. It has recently been reported that nasal sumatriptan is effective in the treatment of migraine in adolescents. In younger children, it is yet to be characterized. In addition, many children have significant amounts of vomiting with their migraines, limiting their use of oral medications. DESIGN AND METHODS: Children with headache were evaluated by a child neurologist, child psychologist, and pediatric nurse practitioner. Clinical and International Headache Society diagnoses were established for each child. Patients with headaches that were either unresponsive to oral medications or had significant vomiting were treated with nasal sumatriptan. Initial administration and tolerability were performed in the Headache Center at Cincinnati's Children's Hospital Medical Center. Patients or their parents were contacted to assess the overall effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan after home administration. RESULTS: Ten patients aged between 5 and 12 years (mean, 9.9 years) received either a 5-mg (n = 2) or 20-mg (n = 8) dose of sumatriptan. All 10 patients had a clinical diagnosis of migraine; 7 met the International Headache Society criteria for migraine. The mean age of headache onset was 6.6 years. A total of 57 headaches were treated; 47 (82.5%) responded to sumatriptan. Of the patients who treated headaches, the mean number of headaches treated was 5.2, while the mean number of responsive headaches was 4.3. One patient had no response, 2 patients had a 50% response, and 6 patients had 100% response to the nasal sumatriptan. Three patients reported persistent "bad taste." CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates that nasal sumatriptan may be effective in aborting migraine in young children (aged 5 to 12 years). It also suggests that there may be subgroups for which it works well. This information suggests that double-blind, placebo-controlled studies are necessary to determine the overall effectiveness of nasal sumatriptan in this age group.

Administration, Intranasal↗

Efficacy of a fixed combination of indomethacin, prochlorperazine, and caffeine versus sumatriptan in acute treatment of multiple migraine attacks: a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of a fixed combination of indomethacin, prochlorperazine, and caffeine suppositories with sumatriptan suppositories in the treatment of 2 consecutive migraine attacks of moderate or severe intensity in a multicenter, randomized, crossover study. BACKGROUND: A fixed combination of indomethacin, prochlorperazine, and caffeine is the most commonly used drug for the acute treatment of migraine in Italy. No studies have been published comparing the efficacy of this combination with sumatriptan, the most widely prescribed of the triptans. METHODS: One hundred twelve patients with migraine with or without aura according to the diagnostic criteria of the International Headache Society were randomized to treat 2 migraine attacks with a fixed combination of indomethacin, prochlorperazine, and caffeine and 2 migraine attacks with sumatriptan. Both drugs were rectally administered in a single dose for each attack. Patients were asked to take study medication as soon as possible at the onset of a headache. RESULTS: Of the 112 patients, 88 were compliant to the protocol. More attacks became pain-free at 2 hours postdose (primary end point) on the combination than on sumatriptan (49% versus 34%; P<.01), while there was no difference in the relief of headache at 2 hours postdose (71% versus 65%). The combination was statistically superior to sumatriptan in the time to a pain-free response (a higher percentage of attacks became pain-free from 0.5 hours postdose to 5 hours postdose), in alleviation of nausea, and in a sustained pain-free response (pain-free at 2 hours postdose with no use of rescue medication or relapses within 48 hours). Moreover, a significant consistent response was achieved for the combination compared with sumatriptan across (higher percentage of patients pain-free at 2 hours postdose in the first, second, third, and fourth treated attack) and within patients (pain-free in 2 of 2 treated attacks in 35% of patients taking the combination and 20% of patients on sumatriptan). Both drugs were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study, analyzed according to the more recent guidelines for controlled trials in migraine, showed that a fixed combination of indomethacin, prochlorperazine, and caffeine is significantly more effective than sumatriptan in the acute treatment of migraine attacks. It is notable that the combination is less expensive than sumatriptan per unit dose.

Acute Disease↗

Intranasal sumatriptan in post-ECT headache: results of an open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Significant headaches occur in up to 45% of patients receiving electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) as a result of treatment. Headaches may at times be severe and affect patient compliance with this treatment modality. The 5-HT(1B/1D) receptor agonist sumatriptan has been reported to be effective for post-ECT headache in several case reports. The aim of the present open-label study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of intranasal sumatriptan for post-ECT headache. METHOD: Patients undergoing ECT who experienced moderate-to-severe post-ECT headache were enrolled in the study. Patients were asked to rate their headache severity and describe headache characteristics using a standard headache diary. Headaches rated as severe or moderate were treated with 20 mg of intranasal sumatriptan. Additional headache ratings were recorded at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2 hours after sumatriptan administration and compared with baseline values. RESULTS: Eight female patients (ages 34-45 years old) participated in the trial and experienced a total of 13 post-ECT headaches, which were treated with intranasal sumatriptan. Of the headaches treated, six (46.2%) were described as severe and seven (53.8%) were characterized as moderate in severity. Twelve (92.3%) of the treated headaches responded by the 2 hour posttreatment time point and 11 (84.6%) had responded within 1 hour. Comparisons made at the 1- and 2-hour time point revealed a statistically significant improvement from baseline (p = 0.002). Of the 12 headaches that responded, 6 (50%) were reported as no pain and 5 (38.5%) were reported as only mild pain at 1 hour following treatment. At the 2-hour assessment, an additional headache, which had previously not responded, was rated at mild resulting in six (50%) headaches with complete resolution of pain and six (50%) with a decrease in pain symptoms from moderate or severe to mild. Overall, sumatriptan treatment was well tolerated, and no significant adverse effects or changes in vital signs were recorded. In no case was a second dose of sumatriptan given. The most common complaint was the taste of the medication (n = 4), which was not treatment limiting. No patient withdrew from the study due to an adverse event. CONCLUSION: Intranasal sumatriptan spray may be an effective, well-tolerated, and prompt treatment for patients experiencing moderate-to-severe post-ECT headache. Preventing post-ECT headache may contribute to patient compliance with the ECT treatment modality. Additionally, the known pharmacologic effects of sumatriptan and the generally positive results found in the present study suggest that ECT-induced headache is vascular in origin. Further placebo-controlled, double-blind studies are needed to confirm our open-label results.

Administration, Intranasal↗

Sumatriptan is an agonist at 5-HT receptors on myenteric neurones in the guinea-pig gastric antrum.

Sumatriptan, a 5-hydroxytryptamine(1D) (5-HT(1D))-receptor agonist used in the treatment in migraine, inhibits gastric motility via the enteric nervous system. As no studies have reported enteric neuronal 5-HT(1D) receptors, we used conventional intracellular recordings to characterize the actions of sumatriptan on 145 guinea-pig antral myenteric neurones. In 24 of 29 neurones with a 5-HT(1P) receptor-mediated depolarizing response to 5-HT, application of sumatriptan caused a dose-dependent depolarization, accompanied by increased membrane resistance and enhanced excitability. Depolarizing responses to sumatriptan occurred both in cholinergic and in nitrergic neurones. Sumatriptan did not mimic the 5-HT(3) receptor-mediated fast-depolarizing responses or 5-HT(1A) receptor-mediated inhibitory responses to 5-HT. Sumatriptan had no effect on neurones not responding to 5-HT. The depolarizing response to sumatriptan was inhibited by renzapride, but not by 5-HT(1-7) receptor antagonists. We conclude that sumatriptan behaves as an agonist at the 5-HT(1P) receptor on myenteric neurones in the guinea-pig gastric antrum. The actions of sumatriptan on gastric motility seem to be attributable to a direct action on enteric neurones.

Animals↗

A clinical trial of trimethobenzamide/diphenhydramine versus sumatriptan for acute migraines.

BACKGROUND: Although various classes of medication are used to treat acute migraine in the emergency department (ED), no treatment offers complete pain relief without side effects or recurrence of headache. Consequently, even though several antiemetic medications as well as SQ sumatriptan have demonstrated efficacy and tolerability for the ED treatment of migraine, there remains a need for more effective parenteral therapies. Open-label studies suggest that the combination of trimethobenzamide and diphenhydramine (TMB/DPH) may provide effective relief in a high proportion of migraineurs. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that ED patients with acute migraine, given intramuscular TMB/DPH, would have a larger reduction in their pain scores than patients given SQ sumatriptan. METHODS: This was an ED-based, randomized, double-blind, "double-dummy" clinical trial comparing 2 parenteral treatments for acute migraine headaches. Subjects received a combination of TMB 200 mg and DPH 25 mg as a single intramuscular injection or 6 mg of SQ sumatriptan. Pain scores, disability scores, associated symptoms, and adverse effects were assessed for 2 hours in the ED and by telephone 24 hours after medication administration. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in reduction of pain intensity as measured by a validated numerical rating scale 2 hours after medication administration. This study was designed to detect superiority of TMB/DPH; therefore, a 1-tailed t-test was used. An interim analysis was planned to terminate the trial if predetermined endpoints in the primary outcome variable were reached. RESULTS: The trial was stopped by the data monitoring committee after 40 subjects were enrolled because a substantial benefit in the primary outcome was found favoring sumatriptan. Baseline pain scores were comparable between the 2 groups. By 2 hours, sumatriptan subjects had improved by a mean of 6.1 and the TMB/DPH subjects had improved by a mean of 4.4 (95% CI for difference of 1.7: -0.1 to 3.4). By 24 hours after medication administration, sumatriptan subjects had a mean improvement from baseline of 4.9 as compared to 5.3 for TMB (95% CI for difference of -0.4: -2.4 to 1.6). The need for rescue medication was comparable between the groups. No serious or frequent adverse effects were noted in either group. CONCLUSIONS: SQ sumatriptan is probably superior to TMB/DPH for treating the pain of acute migraine at 2 hours. However, TMB/DPH was well-tolerated, efficacious, and relieved pain comparably to sumatriptan at 24 hours. TMB/DPH might have a role in select populations in which sumatriptan is contraindicated or likely to be ineffective.

Acute Disease↗

Effect of sumatriptan, a 5HT1 agonist, on the frequency of transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations and gastroesophageal reflux in healthy subjects.

OBJECTIVE: Meals increase the rate of transient lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxations, in part by gastric distension. The 5HT1 agonist sumatriptan reduces fasting fundic tone, prolongs the meal-induced fundic relaxation, and delays gastric emptying. We therefore hypothesized that sumatriptan might have a significant effect on the rate of postprandial transient LES relaxations and gastroesophageal reflux. We aimed to study the effect of sumatriptan on postprandial transient LES relaxations and reflux in healthy subjects. METHODS: Esophageal manometry and pH monitoring were performed in 13 healthy volunteers for 30 min before and 90 min after a semiliquid meal (790 kcal). Sumatriptan 6 mg subcutaneous (s.c.) or s.c. placebo were administered on separate days 30 min after the meal. RESULTS: Sumatriptan significantly increased postprandial LES pressure from 11.0 +/- 1.2 mm Hg to 17.6 +/- 1.2 mm Hg (p < 0.05). However, reflux events were not diminished. In the contrary, reflux was more frequent after sumatriptan than after placebo (3 [1.5-4.5]/30 min vs 2 [0-3]/30 min, p < 0.05). Transient LES relaxations were more frequent after sumatriptan, particularly in the second 30-min period after drug administration (3 [2.5-5]/30 min vs 2 [1.5-2]/30 min, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Sumatriptan prevents the natural decay in rate of transient LES relaxations that occurs after a meal and favors the occurrence of gastroesophageal reflux despite increasing LES pressure. The sustained postprandial high rate of transient LES relaxations after sumatriptan may be a consequence of a prolonged fundus relaxation and retention of meal in the proximal stomach.

Adolescent↗

The efficacy of subcutaneous sumatriptan in the treatment of recurrence of migraine headache.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy of a second subcutaneous dose of 6 mg sumatriptan in the treatment of recurrence of headache after successful treatment of a migraine attack with an initial 6 mg dose. METHODS: In a prospective, randomised, placebo controlled, double blind, parallel group study, 803 patients were treated for one to three migraine attacks with severe or moderate headache with a subcutaneous injection of 6 mg sumatriptan. Any subsequent recurrence of migraine headache was treated with a randomised second injection of sumatriptan or placebo. Recurrence was defined as a headache of moderate or severe intensity occurring 1-24 hours after the initial dose in a patient whose headache had been relieved by sumatriptan (reduction of headache severity from severe or moderate to mild or none after one hour). RESULTS: Headache recurrence was reported by 10%-15% of patients. At each attack, 6 mg sumatriptan given subcutaneously was significantly (P < 0.0005) more effective than placebo at relieving recurrent headache after one hour (84%-93% v 31%-50% of patients); 76%-83% of patients reported headache relief one hour after the initial dose of sumatriptan. Sumatriptan was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Up to 15% of patients with migraine experience significant recurrence of headache after successful treatment with subcutaneous sumatriptan, and this recurrence is effectively treated by a further dose of subcutaneous sumatriptan.

Adolescent↗

Intranasal sumatriptan in cluster headache: randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence-based acute treatments of cluster headache are limited to oxygen inhalation and subcutaneous sumatriptan. Intranasal sumatriptan is a new formulation with better tolerability than the subcutaneous route. Two open-label studies suggested efficacy of intranasal sumatriptan in cluster headache. METHODS: In a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized trial, patients with episodic or chronic cluster headache whose attacks lasted at least 45 minutes each treated one attack with 20 mg sumatriptan nasal spray and another one, at least 24 hours later, with matching placebo. They scored their headache on a five-point scale (very severe, severe, moderate, mild, or none) at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 minutes. The primary outcome measure was headache response (a decrease in pain from very severe, severe, or moderate to mild or none) at 30 minutes. Secondary outcome measures included pain-free rates, relief of associated symptoms, and rates of adverse events. Multilevel multivariate analysis was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Five study centers enrolled 118 patients in whom 154 attacks were treated: 77 with sumatriptan and 77 with placebo. The responder rates at 30 minutes were 57% for sumatriptan and 26% for placebo (p = 0.002). Pain-free rates at 30 minutes were 47% for sumatriptan and 18% for placebo (p = 0.003). Sumatriptan was also superior to placebo considering initial response, meaningful relief, and relief of associated symptoms. There were no serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Sumatriptan nasal spray is effective and well tolerated in the acute treatment of cluster headache attacks of at least 45 minutes' duration.

Administration, Intranasal↗

Sumatriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine. Results of two clinical studies.

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.

Acute Disease↗

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of sumatriptan nasal spray in the treatment of acute migraine in adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan nasal spray (NS; 5 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg) with placebo for the treatment of acute migraine in adolescents. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack study was conducted in 653 US adolescents (12-17 years of age). Patients with at least a 6-month history of migraine, who met International Headache Society criteria for migraine (with or without aura) were eligible for participation. Headache relief 2 hours postdose, complete relief, presence or absence of associated symptoms, headache recurrence, and use of rescue medications were recorded. The primary efficacy endpoint was headache relief 2 hours postdose sumatriptan NS (20 mg) versus placebo. Safety and tolerability were assessed by examining adverse events, changes in electrocardiograms, vital signs, physical examinations, and clinical laboratory tests. RESULTS: Headache relief 1 hour postdose was significantly greater for patients using 10 mg (56%) and 20 mg (56%) of sumatriptan NS compared with placebo (41%). Headache relief 2 hours postdose was significantly greater for patients using 5 mg of sumatriptan NS (66%) compared with placebo (53%), and approached statistical significance for 20 mg (63%) compared with placebo (53%). Complete relief 2 hours postdose was significantly greater for patients using 20 mg of sumatriptan NS compared with placebo (36% vs 25%, respectively). Each dose of sumatriptan (5 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg) was superior to placebo with respect to the cumulative percentages of patients first reporting headache relief within 2 hours of dosing (Kaplan-Meier). The sumatriptan 20-mg dose was superior to placebo with respect to the cumulative percentages of patients first reporting complete relief within 2 hours of dosing (Kaplan-Meier). Photophobia and phonophobia were significantly reduced 2 hours postdose for sumatriptan NS (20 mg), compared with placebo (36% vs 48% and 25% vs 44%, respectively). Taste disturbance was the most commonly reported adverse event (2%, 19%, 30%, and 26% for placebo, 5 mg, 10 mg, and 20 mg, respectively). No drug-related serious adverse events or clinically relevant changes in laboratory parameters, electrocardiograms, or vital signs were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Sumatriptan NS is effective and well-tolerated for the treatment of acute migraine in adolescents, with the 20-mg dose providing the best overall efficacy and tolerability profiles.

Acute Disease↗