Rational migraine management: optimising treatment with the triptans.
David Millson
Abstract
David Millson
Abstract
In the last two years, a number of 5-HT1B/1D agonist triptans with enhanced lipophilicity (TELs) relative to the first drug of this class, sumatriptan, have been approved for marketing in most countries of the world (naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan). In addition, at least three others are in advanced stage of clinical development (almotriptan, eletriptan, and frovatriptan). This paper sets out to review the recent data with the aim of identifying: 1) What are the critical differences between the TELs and sumatriptan? 2) How do the currently licensed TELs compare? 3) Is it possible to provide a rational approach to migraine therapy based on objective differences in the clinical profile of these new drugs? Recent randomised controlled and comparator data were reviewed, including the independent FDA assessment of rizatriptan. Critical differences for the new TELs (naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan) which may lead to more rational migraine management: Both rizatriptan (10 mg) and zolmitriptan (2.5 mg and 5.0 mg) have demonstrated superior efficacy to sumatriptan 100 mg, and 25 and 50 mg respectively. Therefore, for first line use either rizatriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate for moderate and severe headache. Rizatriptan has a more rapid onset of action than sumatriptan 100 mg. Both rizatriptan and zolmitriptan have a more rapid onset of action than naratriptan. Therefore, for a rapid onset of action either rizatriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate. Naratriptan would appear to have a lower recurrent headache rate than sumatriptan, rizatriptan or zolmitriptan. However, 24-hour efficacy rates for zolmitriptan 2.5 mg were significantly greater than for sumatriptan 25 mg and 50 mg and were not significantly different from naratriptan. Therefore, for headaches of long duration and with a tendency to recur (e.g. menstrual headaches) either naratriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate. Naratriptan has lower reported adverse event rates comparable with placebo. This would support the use of naratriptan 2.5 mg in patients who have demonstrated poor tolerance to the "triptan type" adverse events.
OpenAlex reports 7 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In the last two years, a number of 5-HT1B/1D agonist triptans with enhanced lipophilicity (TELs) relative to the first drug of this class, sumatriptan, have been approved for marketing in most countries of the world (naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan). In addition, at least three others are in advanced stage of clinical development (almotriptan, eletriptan, and frovatriptan). This paper sets out to review the recent data with the aim of identifying: 1) What are the critical differences between the TELs and sumatriptan? 2) How do the currently licensed TELs compare? 3) Is it possible to provide a rational approach to migraine therapy based on objective differences in the clinical profile of these new drugs? Recent randomised controlled and comparator data were reviewed, including the independent FDA assessment of rizatriptan. Critical differences for the new TELs (naratriptan, rizatriptan and zolmitriptan) which may lead to more rational migraine management: Both rizatriptan (10 mg) and zolmitriptan (2.5 mg and 5.0 mg) have demonstrated superior efficacy to sumatriptan 100 mg, and 25 and 50 mg respectively. Therefore, for first line use either rizatriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate for moderate and severe headache. Rizatriptan has a more rapid onset of action than sumatriptan 100 mg. Both rizatriptan and zolmitriptan have a more rapid onset of action than naratriptan. Therefore, for a rapid onset of action either rizatriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate. Naratriptan would appear to have a lower recurrent headache rate than sumatriptan, rizatriptan or zolmitriptan. However, 24-hour efficacy rates for zolmitriptan 2.5 mg were significantly greater than for sumatriptan 25 mg and 50 mg and were not significantly different from naratriptan. Therefore, for headaches of long duration and with a tendency to recur (e.g. menstrual headaches) either naratriptan or zolmitriptan would be appropriate. Naratriptan has lower reported adverse event rates comparable with placebo. This would support the use of naratriptan 2.5 mg in patients who have demonstrated poor tolerance to the "triptan type" adverse events.
Key concepts: Rizatriptan, Zolmitriptan, Triptans, Sumatriptan, Medicine, Migraine, Onset of action, Pharmacology