CNS Drugs

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 431–447 | Cite as

The Triptan Formulations

How to Match Patients and Products
  • Alan M. Rapoport
  • Stewart J. Tepper
  • Marcelo E. Bigal
  • Fred D. Sheftell
Therapy in Practice

Abstract

The 5-HT1b/1d receptor agonists (the ‘triptans’) are migraine-specific agents that have revolutionised the treatment of migraine. They are usually the drugs of choice to treat a migraine attack in progress. Different triptans are available in various strengths and formulations, including oral tablets, orally disintegrating tablets, nasal sprays and subcutaneous injections. In Europe, sumatriptan is also available as a suppository.

Specific differences among the triptans exist, as evidenced by different pharmacological profiles including half-life, time to peak plasma concentrations, peak plasma concentrations, area under the concentration-time curve, metabolism and drug-drug interaction profiles. How or whether these differences translate to clinical efficacy and tolerability advantages for one agent over another is not well differentiated. However, delivery systems may play an important role in onset of action.

Given that the clinical distinctions among these agents are subtle, identification of the most appropriate triptan for an individual patient requires consideration of the specific characteristics of the patient and knowledge of patient preference, an accurate history of the efficacy of previous acute-care medications and individual features of the drug being considered. The selection of an acute antimigraine drug also depends upon the stratification of the patient’s migraine attack by peak intensity, time to peak intensity, level of associated symptoms such as nausea and vomiting, time to associated symptoms, comorbid diseases and concomitant treatments that might cause drug-drug interactions.

Individual patient response to the triptans seems to be idiosyncratic and possibly genetically determined. Therefore, a set of specific questions can be used to determine whether a currently used triptan is optimally effective, whether the dose needs to be increased or whether another triptan should be tried.

The clinician has in his/her armamentarium an ever-expanding variety of triptans, available in multiple formulations and dosages, which have good safety and tolerability profiles. Continued clinical use will yield familiarity with the various triptans, and it should become possible for the interested physician to match individual patient needs with the specific characteristics of a triptan to optimise therapeutic benefit. Use of the methods outlined in this review in choosing a triptan for an individual patient is probably more likely to lead to migraine relief than making an educated guess as to which triptan is most appropriate.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted without financial support. The authors have participated in research and/or lectures sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Pfizer and other major pharmaceutical companies.

References

  1. 1.
    Cady RK. Treatment strategies for migraine headache. JAMA 2001; 285: 1014–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Humphrey PPA, Feniuk W, Perren MJ, et al. The pharmacology of the novel 5-HT1-like receptor agonist, GR 43175. Cephalalgia 1989; 9: 23–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peroutka SJ, McCarthy BG. Sumatriptan (GR43175) interacts selectively with 5-HT1B and 5-HT1D binding sites. Eur J Pharmacol 1989; 163: 133–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society. Classification and diagnostic criteria for headache disorders, cranial neuralgias and facial pain. Cephalalgia 1988; 8Suppl. 7: 1–96Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Humphrey PP. How it started. Cephalalgia 2001; 21Suppl. 1: 2–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tepper SJ, Rapoport AM. The triptans: a summary. CNS Drugs 1999; 12: 403–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fowler PA, Lacey LF, Thomas M, et al. The clinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and metabolism of sumatriptan. Eur Neurol 1991; 31: 291–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Subcutaneous Sumatriptan International Study Group. Treatment of migraine attacks with sumatriptan. N Engl J Med 1991; 325: 316–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Visser WH, Vriend RH, Jaspers MW, et al. Sumatriptan in clinical practice: a 2-year review of 453 migraine patients. Neurology 1996; 47: 46–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cady RK, Wendt JK, Kirchner JR, et al. Treatment of acute migraine with subcutaneous sumatriptan. JAMA 1991; 265: 2831–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldestein J, Ryan R, Jiang K, et al. Crossover comparison of rizatriptan 5 mg and 10 mg versus sumatriptan 25 mg and 50 mg in migraine: the Rizatriptan Protocol 046 Study Group. Headache 1998; 38: 737–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oral Sumatriptan Dose-Defining Study Group. Sumatriptan: an oral dose-defining study. Eur Neurol 1991; 31: 300–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Halpern MT, Lipton RB, Cady RK, et al. Cost-effectiveness of sumatriptan therapy: early vs delayed treatment [abstract]. Cephalalgia 2001; 21: 336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cottrell CK, Gibson JG, Waller SW, et al. The timing of triptan use and its effect on migraine-related disability [abstract]. Cephalalgia 2001; 21: 339–40Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mansbach H. Sumatriptan: looking back and looking forward. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 183–9Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dahlõf CGH. Characteristics of different routes of administration. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 80–90Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tfelt-Hansen P. Efficacy and adverse events of subcutaneous, oral, and intranasal sumatriptan used for migraine treatment: a systematic review based on number needed to treat. Cephalalgia 1998; 18: 532–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cutler N, Mushet GR, Davis R, et al. Oral sumatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: evaluation of three dose strengths. Neurology 1995; 45Suppl. 7: 5–9Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Salonen R, Ashford E, Dahlof C. Intranasal sumatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: International Intranasal Sumatriptan Study Group. J Neurol 1994; 241: 463–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    The Finnish Sumatriptan Group. A placebo-controlled study of intranasal sumatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine. Eur Neurol 1991; 31: 332–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ryan R, Elkind A, Baker CC, et al. Sumatriptan nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine: results of two clinical studies. Neurology 1997; 49: 1225–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kunka RL, Hussey EK, Shaw S, et al. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of sumatriptan suppositories following single and multiple doses in healthy volunteers. Cephalalgia 1997; 17(4): 532–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tepper SJ, Cochran A, Hobbs S, et al. Sumatriptan suppositories for the acute treatment of migraine. Int J Clin Pract 1998: 1: 31–5Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gõbel H. A placebo-controlled, dose-defining study of sumatriptan suppositories in the acute treatment of migraine. Front Headache Res 1997; 6: 203–6Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Henriksson A. Safety and efficacy of sumatriptan suppositories in the acute treatment of migraine attacks [abstract]. Cephalalgia 1995; 15Suppl. 14: 235Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lipton RB, Pascual J, Goadsby PJ, et al. Effect of rizatriptan and other triptans on the nausea symptom of migraine: a post hoc analysis. Headache 2001; 41: 754–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ferrari MD, James MH, Bates D, et al. Oral sumatriptan: effect of a second dose, and incidence and treatment of headache recurrences. Cephalalgia 1994; 14: 330–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tepper SJ, Allen C, Sanders E, et al. Co-prescription of triptans with potentially interacting medications: a cohort study involving 240,268 patients [abstract]. Headache 2002; 42: 397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tepper SJ. Triptans and the potential for drug interactions. Primary Care Spec Ed 2002; 6: 1–5Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Putnam GP, O’Quinn S, Bolden-Watson CE, et al. Migraine polypharmacy and the tolerability of sumatriptan: a large scale, prospective study. Cephalalgia 1999; 19: 668–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Torres G. Zolmitriptan offers doctors and patient choices for effective treatment of migraine. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 190–8Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Clement EM, Franklin M. Simultaneous measurement of zolmitriptan and its major metabolites N-desmethylzolmitriptan and zolmitriptan N-oxide in human plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography with coulometric detection. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 2002; 766: 339–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rapoport AM, Ramadan NM, Adelman JU, et al. Optimizing the dose of zolmitriptan (Zornig, 311C90) for the acute treatment of migraine: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose range-finding study: the 017 Clinical Trial Study Group. Neurology 1997; 49: 1210–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Solomon GD, Cady RK, Klapper JA, et al. Clinical efficacy and tolerability of 2.5 mg zolmitriptan for the acute treatment of migraine. Neurology 1997; 49: 1219–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    International 311C90 Long-term Study Group. The long-term tolerability and efficacy of oral zolmitriptan (ZOMIG, 311C90) in the acute treatment of migraine: an international study. Headache 1998; 38: 173–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Geraud G, Olesen J, Pfaffenrath V, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of zolmitriptan and sumatriptan: issues in migraine trial design. Cephalalgia 2000; 20: 30–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gallagher RM. Comparison of zolmitriptan and sumatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine [abstract]. Cephalalgia 1999; 19: 358Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Becker WJ. Zolmitriptan versus sumatriptan comparison trial. Headache 2001; 41: 321–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tepper SJ, Donnan GA, Dowson AJ, et al. A long-term study to maximize migraine relief with Zomig. Curr Med Res Opin 1999; 15: 254–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dowson AJ, MacGregor EA, Purdy RA, et al. Zolmitriptan orally disintegrating tablet is effective in the acute treatment of migraine. Cephalalgia 2002; 22: 101–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dowson AJ, MacGregor EA, Purdy A. Efficacy and safety of zolmitriptan 2.5 mg orally disintegrating tablet for the acute treatment of migraine [abstract]. Cephalalgia 2000; 20: 342Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Edmeads J, Millson DS. Tolerability profile of zolmitriptan (Zomig; 311C90), a novel dual central and peripheral HT1B/ 1D agonist. Cephalalgia 1997; 17: 41–52PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Homer JJ, Maughan J, Burniston M. A quantitative analysis of the intranasal delivery of topical nasal drugs to the middle meatus: spray versus drop administration. J Laryngol Otol 2002; 116: 10–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dowson AJ, Boes-Hansen S, Farkkila AM. Zolmitriptan nasal spray is fast-acting and highly effective in the acute treatment of migraine [abstract]. Eur J Neurol 2001; 7Suppl. 3: 82Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Abu-Shakra S, Wilmington DE, Yates RA, et al. Distribution and pharmacokinetics of zolmitriptan following administration by nasal spray [abstract]. Neurology 2002; 58: 91–2Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Salonen R. Naratriptan: the gentle triptan. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 228–35Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Klassen A, Elkind A, Asgharnejad M, et al. Naratriptan is effective and well tolerated in the acute treatment of migraine: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, study. Headache 1997; 37: 640–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mathew NT, Mahnaz A, Peykamian M, et al. Naratriptan is effective and well tolerated in the acute treatment of migraine: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Neurology 1997; 49: 1485–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Goadsby PJ, Asgharnejad M, Winter PD. Twenty-four hour maintenance of headache relief after treatment of migraine with naratriptan tablets: a review of data from controlled clinical trials [abstract]. Headache 1998; 38: 382Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Dahlõf C, Winter P, Whitehouse H, et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled comparison of oral naratriptan and oral sumatriptan in the acute treatment of migraine. Neurology 1997; 48Suppl. 3: 85–6Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bomhof MK, Legg N, Paz J. Comparison of rizatriptan 10 mg versus naratriptan 2.5 mg in migraine [abstract]. Headache 1999; 39: 344Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hargreaves RJ. Pharmacology and potential mechanisms of action of rizatriptan. Cephalalgia 2000; 20Suppl. 1: 2–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Allen C. Rizatriptan: clinical update. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 199–205Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Vyas KP, Halpin RA, Geer LA, et al. Disposition and pharmacokinetics of the antimigraine drug, rizatriptan, in humans. Drug Metab Dispos 2000; 28: 89–95PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Teall J, Tuchman M, Cutler N, et al. Rizatriptan (Maxalt) for the acute treatment of migraine and migraine recurrence: a placebo controlled, outpatient study. Headache 1998; 38: 281–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Diener HC, Pascual J, Vega P. Comparison of rizatriptan 10 mg versus zolmitriptan 2.5 mg in migraine [abstract]. Headache 1999; 39: 351Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Saxena PR. Pharmacodynamics of triptans. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 72–9Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Adelman JU, Lipton RB, Ferrari MD, et al. Comparison of rizatriptan and other triptans on stringent measures of efficacy. Neurology 2001; 57: 1377–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Tfelt-Hansen P, Ryan RE. Oral therapy for migraine: comparisons between rizatriptan and sumatriptan: a review of four randomized, double-blind clinical trials. Neurology 2000; 55Suppl. 2: 19–24Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Pascual J. Almotriptan. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 247–52Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fernandes FJ, Jansat JM, Cabarrocas X, et al. Absolute bioavailability of oral and subcutaneous almotriptan [abstract]. Cephalalgia 1999; 23: 363Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cabarrocas X, Zayas JM, Suris M. Equivalent efficacy of oral almotriptan, a new 5-HT agonist, compared with sumatriptan 100 mg. Headache 1998; 38: 377–8Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Pascual J, Falk J, Docekal P, et al. The tolerability and efficacy of almotriptan in long-term treatment of migraine. Eur Neurol 2001; 45(4): 206–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bardsley-Elliott A, Noble S. Eletriptan. CNS Drugs 1999; 12: 325–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gupta P, Napier CM, Purdy J, et al. In vitro profile of eletriptan, a new 5-HT1d —like receptor partial agonist [abstract]. Cephalalgia 1996; 16: 368Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Goadsby PJ, Ferrari MD, Olesen J, et al. Eletriptan in acute migraine: a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison to sumatriptan. Neurology 2000; 54: 156–63PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Stark R, Dahlõf C, Haughie S, et al. Efficacy, safety and tolerability of oral eletriptan in the acute treatment of migraine: results of a phase III, multicentre, placebo-controlled study across three attacks. Cephalalgia 2002; 22: 23–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Sandrini G, Färkkilä M, Burgess G, et al. Eletriptan vs sumatriptan: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple migraine attack study. Neurology 2002; 59: 1210–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Buchan P, Keywood C, Ward C. The pharmacokinetics of frovatriptan (VML 251/SB209509) in male and female subjects [abstract]. Func Neurol 1998; 13: 177Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Keywood C. Frovatriptan: simplifying clinical practice in migraine. In: Humphrey P, Ferrari M, Olesen J, editors. The triptans: novel drugs for migraine. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001: 253–61Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Geraud G. The acute treatment of migraine with frovatriptan. Monogr Clin Neurosci 2000; 17: 206–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Rapoport AM, Tepper SJ. Triptans are all different. Arch Neurol 2001; 58: 1479–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Tfelt-Hansen P, De Vries P, Saxena PR. Triptans in migraine: a comparative review of pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and efficacy. Drugs 2000; 60: 1259–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Welch KM, Saiers J, Salonen R. Triptans and coronary spasm. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2000; 68: 337–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    MacIntyre PD, Bhargava B, Hogg KJ, et al. Effect of subcutaneous sumatriptan, a selective 5HT1 agonist, on the systemic, pulmonary, and coronary circulation. Circulation 1993; 87: 401–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan M. Rapoport
    • 1
    • 2
  • Stewart J. Tepper
    • 2
    • 3
  • Marcelo E. Bigal
    • 2
    • 4
  • Fred D. Sheftell
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Neurology, College of Physicians and SurgeonsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.The New England Center for HeadacheStamfordUSA
  3. 3.Department of NeurologyYale University School of MedicineNew HavenUSA
  4. 4.Department of NeurologyAlbert Einstein College of MedicineNew YorkUSA
  5. 5.New York Medical CollegeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations