, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 171-174
Date: 29 Aug 2012

The Authors’ Reply

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access
This is an excerpt from the content

We welcome the opportunity to respond to Dr Tfelt-Hansen’s comments about our review of transdermal sumatriptan.[1] Patients rate complete pain relief as the most important goal of treatment,[2] and we consider that the 2-hour, pain-free rate for transdermal sumatriptan (18%; p = 0.0092 vs placebo[3] ) to be similar to that of oral sumatriptan 50 mg (23%). [We chose the 50 mg dose of oral sumatriptan to compare with transdermal sumatriptan because the meta-analysis as published by Goadsby and colleagues[4] shows no difference in pain-free rates at 2 hours between sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg tablets. We would like to point out that any comparison between two forms of a medication that is not direct in one head-to-head trial is never adequate.[5] ] However, pain free is only one of several efficacy measures that are important to patients, along with rapid onset[2] (a key predictor of patient satisfaction with treatment[6,7] ). We are further encouraged by the results for pain relief at 1 h ...