Michael Ames

Pain-free efficacy after treatment with sumatriptan in the mild pain phase of menstrually associated migraine.

OBJECTIVE To estimate the efficacy of sumatriptan 50-mg and 100-mg tablets in menstrually associated migraine when treatment is administered during the mild pain phase. METHODS A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-attack study was conducted. Menstrually associated migraine was defined as any migraine beginning on or between day -2 and day 4, with day 1 = first day of flow. Patients had at least a 1-year history of migraine as defined by International Headache Society criteria and reported regularly occurring menstrually associated migraines typically having a mild pain phase. Patients treated attacks within 1 hour of the onset of pain but only if the pain was mild at onset and while the pain was still mild. RESULTS In the 349 women with menstrually associated migraine, sumatriptan was significantly more effective than placebo: 61% and 51% of patients who used sumatriptan 100 mg and 50 mg, respectively, were pain-free 2 hours after treatment compared with 29% of patients who used placebo (P <.001 for both comparisons). At 2 hours, 51% and 45% of patients who used sumatriptan 100 mg and 50 mg were free of pain and associated symptoms (photophobia, phonophobia, nausea, vomiting) compared with 25% of placebo patients (P <.001 for both comparisons). Adverse events were low for sumatriptan 100 and 50 mg, and both doses were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION Sumatriptan 50-mg and 100-mg tablets are generally well tolerated and effective in providing pain-free relief and relief of the associated symptoms of menstrually associated migraine when administered in the mild pain phase.

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.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Naratriptan for Short‐Term Prevention of Menstrually Related Migraine: Data From Two Randomized, Double‐Blind, Placebo‐Controlled Studies

Background.—In a pilot study, naratriptan was significantly more effective than placebo in preventing menstrually related migraine (MRM) when given as 1 mg twice daily for 5 days beginning 2 days before the predicted onset of MRM for up to 4 menstrual cycles.

Intravenous ondansetron for the control of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting

This randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial was conducted in 9 countries to assess the safety and efficacy of 2 doses of intravenous ondansetron (8 and 16 mg) for the control of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting. A total of 2574 nonsurgical patients who presented with pain requiring treatment with an opioid analgesic agent participated in this trial. The most common presenting painful condition was back or neck pain, reported by approximately one third of patients. A total of 520 patients (317 females, 203 males) developed nausea or vomiting after opioid administration and were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of 1 of 3 study treatments: placebo (n = 94), ondansetron 8 mg (n = 215), or ondansetron 16 mg (n = 211). Ondansetron 8 and 16 mg led to complete control of emesis in 134 of 215 patients (62.3%) and 145 of 211 patients (68.7%), respectively. Results with both doses were significantly better than those seen with placebo (43 of 94 patients [45.7%]). Complete control of nausea was achieved in 6.8% of placebo patients, 14.8% of ondansetron 8-mg-treated patients, and 19.4% of ondansetron 16-mg treated patients; only ondansetron 16 mg was significantly better than placebo (P = 0.007). Significantly more patients who received ondansetron 8 mg than patients who received placebo were satisfied/very satisfied with their antiemetic treatment, as assessed by 4 patient-satisfaction questions. Significantly more patients who received ondansetron 16 mg compared with placebo were satisfied/very satisfied on 2 of 4 satisfaction questions. In conclusion, based on the observed incidence of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting in this study, it may be more appropriate to treat symptoms on occurrence rather than administering antiemetic agents prophylactically. The results of this study demonstrate that intravenous ondansetron in doses of 8 or 16 mg is an effective antiemetic agent for the control of opioid-induced nausea and vomiting in nonsurgical patients requiring opioid analgesia for pain.

Sumatriptan/Naproxen sodium for migraine: efficacy, health related quality of life, and satisfaction outcomes.

Objective.—To describe the pain relief, satisfaction, and health‐related quality of life results of moderate or severe migraines treated with a sumatriptan/naproxen sodium combination tablet.

Open-label, long-term tolerability of naratriptan for short-term prevention of menstrually related migraine.

Background.—Although naratriptan is not approved for prophylactic use in migraine, naratriptan has been shown to be significantly more effective than placebo for short‐term prevention of menstrually related migraine (MRM). The tolerability of naratriptan administered intermittently for prophylaxis for MRM over the long term has not been assessed.

Prevalence of migraine and response to sumatriptan in patients self-reporting tension/stress headache.

ABSTRACT Objective: This study was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of migraine and its responsiveness to migraine-specific therapy in patients with selfreported tension-type headache. Methods: Patients were adults (n = 423) consulting one of 54 North American study sites including primary care clinics, neurology clinics, and headache clinics. The study comprised an initial diagnosis phase to determine the headache diagnosis of patients entering the study with self-reported tension/stress headache, including that previously diagnosed by a health care provider. Patients reporting tension/stress headache were evaluated and diagnosed as having migraine with or without aura, probable migraine, tension-type headache, or another headache type. Exclusion criteria included prior diagnosis of migraine or probable migraine and the presence of headache for at least 15 days monthly during either of the 2 months before screening. The initial phase was followed by a randomized, double-blind treatment phase to evaluate the efficacy of sumatriptan 100 mg tablets for the treatment of a single migraine attack in those meeting International Headache Society (IHS) criteria for migraine during the diagnosis phase. Results: Of 423 patients reporting tension/stress headache at study entry, 84% (n = 357) were diagnosed at the clinic visit as fulfilling IHS criteria for migraine without aura or migraine with aura, and 65% (n = 276) were diagnosed with migraine only (i.e., with no other concurrent headache diagnosis). Three hundred thirty-two (332) patients entered the double-blind treatment phase. Headache relief rates 2 h post-dose, the primary efficacy endpoint, did not significantly differ between sumatriptan and placebo ( p = 0.099). However, improvements were significantly ( p < 0.05) greater with sumatriptan than placebo on several other headache-related efficacy measures. Conclusions: Migraine headache may go unrecognized in patients with self-reported tension headache. Among patients having self-reported tension headache and diagnosed with migraine during the study, response to acute treatment with sumatriptan was inconclusive. Improvement with sumatriptan versus placebo was observed for some measures and not for others. The results should be interpreted in the context of study limitations including use of patient self-reports to assess headache diagnosis and possible lack of representativeness arising from the predominantly white sample.

A multicenter, double-blind, randomized comparison of oral ondansetron 8 mg b.i.d., 24 mg q.d., and 32 mg q.d. in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with highly emetogenic chemotherapy

Abstract The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy and safety of orally administered ondansetron 8 mg b.i.d., 24 mg q.d., and 32 mg q.d. in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose cisplatin-based chemotherapy (cisplatin ≥50 mg/m2). This was a randomized, parallel-group, double-blind study conducted in North America. It was planned that all patients would receive one of the following orally administered ondansetron treatments 30 min before starting cisplatin dosing (administered over ≤3 h): 8 mg b.i.d. with 8 h between doses (124 patients), 24 mg q.d. (116 patients), and 32 mg q.d. (117 patients). Use of prophylactic corticosteroids was not permitted. During the 24-h study period, the highest complete response rate (no emesis, rescue antiemetic therapy, or withdrawal) occurred in patients who received ondansetron 24 mg q.d.: 76/115 or 66%, as against 68/124 (55%) after ondansetron 8 mg b.i.d. and 64/117 (55%) after ondansetron 32 mg q.d. Complete control of nausea (no nausea, no rescue, no withdrawal) occurred in more patients in the ondansetron 24 mg q.d. group (64/114, 56%) than in the ondansetron 8 mg b.i.d. group (43/121, 36%) or in the ondansetron 32 mg group (55/117, 50%). These results demonstrate that following highly emetogenic cisplatin-based chemotherapy (≥50 mg/m2), oral ondansetron 24 mg q.d. is more effective than 8 mg b.i.d. for overall control of nausea, and at least as effective if not more effective in the control of acute vomiting than 8 mg b.i.d. or 32 mg q.d. Ondansetron 24 mg q.d. was well tolerated, and no new or unexpected adverse events were identified.

An Interdepartmental Survey of Medical Information Services: Evaluating the Impact of an Open House

A survey was developed to evaluate how internal stakeholders at Glaxo Wellcome perceived the Medical Information Department before the department hosted an open house. The objective of the open house was to increase the visibility of the Medical Information Department by emphasizing its services. A postopen house survey was conducted to measure the impact of the open house by reassessing those perceptions. Approximately 1300 internal stakeholders were electronically mailed a survey prior to and again after the open house. The survey included a demographics section and questions regarding the services of medical information. A medical information open house was held at three different sites within the Research Triangle Park campus. Overall, the preopen house survey return rate was almost 20% (257) with a postopen house return rate of about 10% (125). Analysis of the surveys suggests that hosting an open house can raise awareness and change perceptions.