Search

Background: Novel abortive treatments for migraine, ditans and gepants, have promising implications in triptan-insufficient responders with minimal existing comparative data. Our study aims to synthesize evidence through a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the comparative efficacy of lasmiditan, rimegepant and ubrogepant in triptan-insufficient responders. Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and EBSCO Open Dissertations up to May 2024. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared novel abortive treatments, including lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant, in migraine patients who self-reported insufficient response to triptans. Outcomes are represented using relative risks with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank each medication. Results: A total of five phase 3 RCTs involving 3,004 patients were included in the analysis. All three agents were significantly superior to placebo for two-hour pain freedom (RR = 1.93, 95% CI [1.52, 2.46]), freedom from the most bothersome symptoms at two hours (RR = 1.55, 95% CI [1.37, 1.75]), and pain relief at two hours (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [1.35, 1.58]). No statistically significant differences in efficacy outcomes were observed among the three agents. However, lasmiditan 200 mg had the highest cumulative probability for two-hour pain freedom and relief (SUCRA 0.9, 0.8, respective), while rimegepant led in relieving the most bothersome symptoms (SUCRA 0.7). Conclusion: Lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant are effective for acute treatment of migraine in triptan-insufficient responders, with high-dose lasmiditan showing the highest efficacy for pain control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Novel abortive treatments for migraine, ditans and gepants, have promising implications in triptan-insufficient responders with minimal existing comparative data. Our study aims to synthesize evidence through a systematic review and network meta-analysis to assess the comparative efficacy of lasmiditan, rimegepant and ubrogepant in triptan-insufficient responders. Method We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and EBSCO Open Dissertations up to May 2024. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared novel abortive treatments, including lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant, in migraine patients who self-reported insufficient response to triptans. Outcomes are represented using relative risks with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to rank each medication. Results A total of five phase 3 RCTs involving 3,004 patients were included in the analysis. All three agents were significantly superior to placebo for two-hour pain freedom (RR = 1.93, 95% CI [1.52, 2.46]), freedom from the most bothersome symptoms at two hours (RR = 1.55, 95% CI [1.37, 1.75]), and pain relief at two hours (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [1.35, 1.58]). No statistically significant differences in efficacy outcomes were observed among the three agents. However, lasmiditan 200 mg had the highest cumulative probability for two-hour pain freedom and relief (SUCRA 0.9, 0.8, respective), while rimegepant led in relieving the most bothersome symptoms (SUCRA 0.7). Conclusion Lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant are effective for acute treatment of migraine in triptan-insufficient responders, with high-dose lasmiditan showing the highest efficacy for pain control.

The combined use of lasmiditan and triptan is unexplored in medical literature. This study aimed to investigate whether the intake of lasmiditan following triptan improves migraine pain. Following triptan intake, if headache relief was less than 50% at 1 h, patients took 50 mg of lasmiditan within 2 h of migraine onset. Patients recorded headache intensity and adverse events (AEs) caused by lasmiditan at 1, 2, and 4 h after the intake of an additional 50 mg of lasmiditan. A significant reduction in pain scale was observed post 50 mg lasmiditan intake (p < 0.001, t-test). Pain relief was reported for 32 migraine attacks (80%) at 1 h after additional lasmiditan intake. Although AEs were observed in 63% of the patients who took an additional lasmiditan, most were mild and resolved 1 h after lasmiditan intake. Our study revealed the significant headache relief provided by an additional lasmiditan for patients who did not achieve satisfactory results following initial triptan intake for treating migraine. The AEs associated with this treatment strategy were mild and lasted for a short time. This study suggested that the combination of triptan and lasmiditan is promising for the treatment of migraine and should be studied in a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

The combined use of lasmiditan and triptan is unexplored in medical literature. This study aimed to investigate whether the intake of lasmiditan following triptan improves migraine pain. Following triptan intake, if headache relief was less than 50% at 1 h, patients took 50 mg of lasmiditan within 2 h of migraine onset. Patients recorded headache intensity and adverse events (AEs) caused by lasmiditan at 1, 2, and 4 h after the intake of an additional 50 mg of lasmiditan. A significant reduction in pain scale was observed post 50 mg lasmiditan intake (p < 0.001, t-test). Pain relief was reported for 32 migraine attacks (80%) at 1 h after additional lasmiditan intake. Although AEs were observed in 63% of the patients who took an additional lasmiditan, most were mild and resolved 1 h after lasmiditan intake. Our study revealed the significant headache relief provided by an additional lasmiditan for patients who did not achieve satisfactory results following initial triptan intake for treating migraine. The AEs associated with this treatment strategy were mild and lasted for a short time. This study suggested that the combination of triptan and lasmiditan is promising for the treatment of migraine and should be studied in a randomized placebo-controlled trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Migraine is a form of primary headache that affects at least 10% of the world's population. In addition to advising patients to modify their lifestyles, the management of migraine includes terminating ongoing attacks and/or preventing attacks from occurring. Pharmacological agents of both nonspecific (for example, non-narcotic analgesics), and specific actions can be used for the abortive treatment of this form of headache. Specific treatments include, in particular, serotoninergic agents: triptans (selective 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists), ditans (selective 5-HT1F-mimetics) and ergot alkaloids (non-selective modulators of various subtypes of 5-HT receptor). This review presents the currently known results from many basic and applied studies of drugs from these groups, identifying the neuronal and vascular components of their anti-migraine pharmacodynamics. Significant quantities of these data were obtained in vivo in a variety of experimental models of migraine based on the trigeminovascular theory of its pathogenesis. Other information is based on ex vivo work on isolated tissues and cell cultures. Analysis of results from these studies yielded evidence in favor of the notion that the anti-migraine potential of members of all of these pharmacological classes is mediated by similar mechanisms, whereby neurotropic activity dominates over direct intervention in vascular tone. Special attention is paid to uncertain and controversial issues in this area, whose successful solution is key to further progress in the pharmacotherapy of migraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The objective of this analysis was to gain new insights into the patient characteristics and other factors associated with lasmiditan usage and clinical outcomes under conditions resembling the real-world setting. Methods This was a post hoc analysis of data from the 12-month, open-label extension (OLE) of the phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled CENTURION trial, which examined the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan as acute treatment across four migraine attacks. Patients completing the main study who treated ≥ 3 attacks could continue in the OLE. The initial lasmiditan dose was 100 mg, with dose adjustments to 50 mg or 200 mg allowed at the investigator’s discretion. Patient and clinical characteristics were summarized by dosing pattern and completion status. Safety was assessed based on adverse event (AE) frequency by number of doses. Results In total, 445 patients treated ≥ 1 migraine attacks with lasmiditan during the OLE, 321 of whom (72.1%) completed the study. Forty-seven percent of patients remained on the 100-mg initial dose during the OLE whereas 20.2% used both 100 mg and 50 mg, 30.6% used both 100 mg and 200 mg, and 6 (1.3%) used multiple dose levels. All dosing patterns were associated with clinical and patient-reported improvement; however, the 100-mg group had the highest proportion of patients reporting improvement in the Patient Global Impression of Change – Migraine Headache Condition (56.5% vs 33.4%–52.2%). In comparison, all three groups that made dose adjustments had higher rates of completion compared to the 100-mg group (72.1%–83.3% vs 68.9%). The frequency of AEs decreased with continued use of lasmiditan. Concomitant triptans and lasmiditan use did not increase AE frequency. Conclusions Based on high persistence and patient satisfaction rates, the 100-mg dose appears optimal for most patients. For those who adjusted dose levels, dose adjustments appeared beneficial to improve efficacy or tolerability, retaining patients on treatment. Collectively, the data suggest that patients who experienced efficacy continued to use lasmiditan regardless of the occurrence or frequency of AEs, and continued use appeared associated with fewer AEs. Trial registration European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT): 2018–001661-17; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03670810; registration date: September 12, 2018. Graphical Abstract

Introduction: Vascular and mitochondrial dysfunction are well-established consequences of multiple central nervous system (CNS) disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases and traumatic injuries. We previously reported that 5-hydroxytryptamine 1F receptor (5-HT1FR) agonism induces mitochondrial biogenesis (MB) in multiple organ systems, including the CNS. Methods: Lasmiditan is a selective 5-HT1FR agonist that is FDA-approved for the treatment of migraines. We have recently shown that lasmiditan treatment induces MB, promotes vascular recovery and improves locomotor function in a mouse model of spinal cord injury (SCI). To investigate the mechanism of this effect, primary cerebral microvascular endothelial cells from C57bl/6 mice (mBMEC) were used. Results: Lasmiditan treatment increased the maximal oxygen consumption rate, mitochondrial proteins and mitochondrial density in mBMEC, indicative of MB induction. Lasmiditan also enhanced endothelial cell migration and tube formation, key components of angiogenesis. Trans-endothelial electrical resistance (TEER) and tight junction protein expression, including claudin-5, were also increased with lasmiditan, suggesting improved barrier function. Finally, lasmiditan treatment decreased phosphorylated VE-Cadherin and induced activation of the Akt-FoxO1 pathway, which decreases FoxO1-mediated inhibition of claudin-5 transcription. Discussion: These data demonstrate that lasmiditan induces MB and enhances endothelial cell function, likely via the VE-Cadherin-Akt-FoxO1-claudin-5 signaling axis. Given the importance of mitochondrial and vascular dysfunction in neuropathologies, 5-HT1FR agonism may have broad therapeutic potential to address multiple facets of disease progression by promoting MB and vascular recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Remedia is the property of Medical Tribune CZ, s.r.o. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: The objective of this analysis was to gain new insights into the patient characteristics and other factors associated with lasmiditan usage and clinical outcomes under conditions resembling the real-world setting. Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of data from the 12-month, open-label extension (OLE) of the phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled CENTURION trial, which examined the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan as acute treatment across four migraine attacks. Patients completing the main study who treated ≥ 3 attacks could continue in the OLE. The initial lasmiditan dose was 100 mg, with dose adjustments to 50 mg or 200 mg allowed at the investigator's discretion. Patient and clinical characteristics were summarized by dosing pattern and completion status. Safety was assessed based on adverse event (AE) frequency by number of doses. Results: In total, 445 patients treated ≥ 1 migraine attacks with lasmiditan during the OLE, 321 of whom (72.1%) completed the study. Forty-seven percent of patients remained on the 100-mg initial dose during the OLE whereas 20.2% used both 100 mg and 50 mg, 30.6% used both 100 mg and 200 mg, and 6 (1.3%) used multiple dose levels. All dosing patterns were associated with clinical and patient-reported improvement; however, the 100-mg group had the highest proportion of patients reporting improvement in the Patient Global Impression of Change – Migraine Headache Condition (56.5% vs 33.4%–52.2%). In comparison, all three groups that made dose adjustments had higher rates of completion compared to the 100-mg group (72.1%–83.3% vs 68.9%). The frequency of AEs decreased with continued use of lasmiditan. Concomitant triptans and lasmiditan use did not increase AE frequency. Conclusions: Based on high persistence and patient satisfaction rates, the 100-mg dose appears optimal for most patients. For those who adjusted dose levels, dose adjustments appeared beneficial to improve efficacy or tolerability, retaining patients on treatment. Collectively, the data suggest that patients who experienced efficacy continued to use lasmiditan regardless of the occurrence or frequency of AEs, and continued use appeared associated with fewer AEs. Trial registration: European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT): 2018–001661-17; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03670810; registration date: September 12, 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Migraine is a heavily debilitating disease that ranks second place in Global Burden Disease. It is estimated that around 1 billion of people suffer from it. It also has a significant negative impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients and can affect their social, occupational, academic and familial life. Thus, it is crucial that all of the patients receive an effective treatment. Objectives This article aims to review the most recent advances in treatment of migraine. Methods A Literature review of articles published in Pubmed between 2000 and 2024 using the following words ‘migraine’, ‘treatment advances’, ‘CGRP receptor antagonists’, ‘serotonin receptor agonists’, ‘lasmiditan’, ‘zavegepant’, ‘rimegepant’. Results Literature search provides several concepts of advances in migraine treatment. Apart from behavioral treatment, new drugs targeting calcitonin gene related receptors (CGRP) and serotonin receptors agonists are emerging. Conclusion Migraine is a debilitating disease which significantly reduces health related quality of life in patients. New drugs targeting calcitonin gene related receptors (CGRP) and serotonin receptors agonists give a chance for more effective and tailored treatment.

Abstract Objective To compare the outcomes associated with the use of lasmiditan, rimegepant, ubrogepant, and zavegepant for the acute management of migraine headaches. Methods We searched four electronic databases from database inception to August 31, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that report efficacy and safety for the acute treatment of migraine. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane tool, and the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA approach. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses (NMA) to summarise the evidence. Data were analyzed using R-4.3.1. Results A total of 18 eligible studies including 10 different types of interventions with 22,429 migraine patients were included. NMA results showed that compared to ubrogepant (25 mg and 50 mg) and zavegepant, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits an elevated probability of achieving pain relief within a 2-hour interval. Similarly, relative to zavegepant, rimegepant (75 mg) and ubrogepant (50 mg and 100 mg) demonstrate an enhanced likelihood of sustaining pain relief over a 24-hour period. Furthermore, in contrast to ubrogepant (25 mg) and lasmiditan (50 mg), rimegepant (75 mg) presents a heightened probability of achieving freedom from photophobia within 2 h. Regarding safety, lasmiditan carries the highest risk of adverse events, which are associated with an increased incidence of adverse effects, including dizziness, somnolence, asthenia, paresthesia, and fatigue. Conclusions In this NMA, a spectrum of evidence ranging from very low to high levels underscores the favorable efficacy and tolerability of rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 100 mg, positioning them as potential candidates for the acute management of migraine. Concurrently, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits notable efficacy, albeit accompanied by an increased susceptibility to adverse events. These findings should still be approached with caution, primarily due to the intrinsic limitations associated with indirect comparisons.

Objective: To compare the outcomes associated with the use of lasmiditan, rimegepant, ubrogepant, and zavegepant for the acute management of migraine headaches. Methods: We searched four electronic databases from database inception to August 31, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that report efficacy and safety for the acute treatment of migraine. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane tool, and the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA approach. We conducted frequentist network meta-analyses (NMA) to summarise the evidence. Data were analyzed using R-4.3.1. Results: A total of 18 eligible studies including 10 different types of interventions with 22,429 migraine patients were included. NMA results showed that compared to ubrogepant (25 mg and 50 mg) and zavegepant, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits an elevated probability of achieving pain relief within a 2-hour interval. Similarly, relative to zavegepant, rimegepant (75 mg) and ubrogepant (50 mg and 100 mg) demonstrate an enhanced likelihood of sustaining pain relief over a 24-hour period. Furthermore, in contrast to ubrogepant (25 mg) and lasmiditan (50 mg), rimegepant (75 mg) presents a heightened probability of achieving freedom from photophobia within 2 h. Regarding safety, lasmiditan carries the highest risk of adverse events, which are associated with an increased incidence of adverse effects, including dizziness, somnolence, asthenia, paresthesia, and fatigue. Conclusions: In this NMA, a spectrum of evidence ranging from very low to high levels underscores the favorable efficacy and tolerability of rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 100 mg, positioning them as potential candidates for the acute management of migraine. Concurrently, lasmiditan (100 mg and 200 mg) exhibits notable efficacy, albeit accompanied by an increased susceptibility to adverse events. These findings should still be approached with caution, primarily due to the intrinsic limitations associated with indirect comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lasmiditan is an in vitro inhibitor of P‐glycoprotein (P‐gp) and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) efflux transporters. We aimed to confirm predictions from physiologically based pharmacokinetic models of lasmiditan, and assess the safety and tolerability of rosuvastatin and dabigatran co‐administered with lasmiditan. In this open‐label, post‐marketing drug–drug interaction, phase 1 clinical trial, eligible participants were adults aged 21‐70 years with a body mass index of 18.5‐35.0 kg/m2. Part 1 (P‐gp, 150 mg dabigatran etexilate with 200 mg lasmiditan) and part 2 (BCRP, 10 mg rosuvastatin with 200 mg lasmiditan) employed similar designs: a single dose of probe substrate administered on day −2 with pharmacokinetic evaluation; 1‐week washout; lasmiditan administered on days 8 and 9 alone; lasmiditan co‐administered with a single dose of probe substrate on day 10, with pharmacokinetic evaluation of probe substrate and lasmiditan. Sixty‐six participants were included in part 1 and 30 participants were included in part 2. Following dabigatran co‐administration with lasmiditan, versus dabigatran alone, 90% confidence intervals for geometric least‐squares (LS) mean ratios of area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0–∞) and maximum observed drug concentration (Cmax) were not contained within the non‐effect boundaries (0.80 to 1.25). Dabigatran AUC0–∞ increased by 25% and Cmax increased by 22%. The median time of maximum observed drug concentration (tmax) for dabigatran was 2.0 to 3.0 hours. Following rosuvastatin co‐administration with lasmiditan, versus rosuvastatin alone, 90%CIs for geometric LS mean ratios of AUC0–∞ and Cmax were contained within non‐effect boundaries (0.80‐1.25). Rosuvastatin AUC0–∞ increased by 15% and Cmax increased by 7%. The median tmax for rosuvastatin was 4.0 hours. Results suggest that lasmiditan has a weak effect on P‐gp substrates and no clinically relevant effect on BCRP substrates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lasmiditan is an agonist of 5HT1F receptor, acute migraine is treated and oral dose is safe and effective. No analytical methods were reported on Lasmiditan Drug. Objectives: The goal of the current project is to create a quick, effective, and reproducible LC/MS/MS method for the estimation of Lasmiditan. The mobile phase was used Acetonitrile: 0.1% formic acid (70:30) in the developed method, and it was running down a C18 column (SP) with dimensions of 150 mm, 4.6 mm i.d., and 3.5 µm at a rate of 1 mL/minute. The [M+H]+ ion m/z ratio for the substance was observed in the mass spectrum was 378.24. The drug had a retention time of 2.3 minutes. The linearity range was found to be in between 12.50 ng/mL and 75 ng/mL. The regression coefficient value was found to be 0.999, which is good satisfactory value for linearity. The LOD and LOQ for baseline measurement and detection were 0.66 ng/mL and 2.22 ng/mL, respectively; the method was shown good accuracy and precision levels, and it was proved through the assay values. The method was proved as robust after deliberated changes in parameters of flow rate (±0.2mL) and organic phase (±3 mL) in mobile phase composition and values were found to be 99.50%-100.73% & 99.10%- 101.83% respectively. Conclusion: The LC/MS/MS method is more advanced and sensitive to determine the drugs at nanograms level. Hence developed method used for the regular assay. This is more sensitive, selective, and rapid for identification and quantification of LMT in the bulk and Pharmaceutical formulation. Keywords: Lasmiditan, LC/MS/MS, Acetonitrile, Formic acid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionVascular and mitochondrial dysfunction are well-established consequences of multiple central nervous system (CNS) disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases and traumatic injuries. We previously reported that 5-hydroxytryptamine 1F receptor (5-HT1FR) agonism induces mitochondrial biogenesis (MB) in multiple organ systems, including the CNS.MethodsLasmiditan is a selective 5-HT1FR agonist that is FDA-approved for the treatment of migraines. We have recently shown that lasmiditan treatment induces MB, promotes vascular recovery and improves locomotor function in a mouse model of spinal cord injury (SCI). To investigate the mechanism of this effect, primary cerebral microvascular endothelial cells from C57bl/6 mice (mBMEC) were used.ResultsLasmiditan treatment increased the maximal oxygen consumption rate, mitochondrial proteins and mitochondrial density in mBMEC, indicative of MB induction. Lasmiditan also enhanced endothelial cell migration and tube formation, key components of angiogenesis. Trans-endothelial electrical resistance (TEER) and tight junction protein expression, including claudin-5, were also increased with lasmiditan, suggesting improved barrier function. Finally, lasmiditan treatment decreased phosphorylated VE-Cadherin and induced activation of the Akt-FoxO1 pathway, which decreases FoxO1-mediated inhibition of claudin-5 transcription.DiscussionThese data demonstrate that lasmiditan induces MB and enhances endothelial cell function, likely via the VE-Cadherin-Akt-FoxO1-claudin-5 signaling axis. Given the importance of mitochondrial and vascular dysfunction in neuropathologies, 5-HT1FR agonism may have broad therapeutic potential to address multiple facets of disease progression by promoting MB and vascular recovery.

Christopher C Anderson,&ast; Juliana H VanderPluym&ast; Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Juliana H VanderPluym, Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 13400 E Shea Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85259, USA, Tel +1 480-301-8000, Email vanderpluym.juliana@mayo.eduAbstract: Migraine is a common neurological disorder that is present in a large proportion of the global population. It is estimated to occur in around 20.7% of women and 10.7% of men in the United States. The pathophysiology of migraine is a major focus of research, and medications have been developed to interrupt the processes that generate headache and other bothersome symptoms of migraine attacks. The triptan class of medications acts as a direct agonist at the 5-HT1B/D receptor but its use is limited by contraindications for those with coronary or cerebrovascular disease. Lasmiditan is a first-in-class agonist at the 5-HT1F serotonin receptor that does not appear to generate vasoconstriction. This article reviews the design, development, and place in therapy for lasmiditan. A narrative review of the literature using the Ovid MEDLINE database was performed. The rationale behind the development of lasmiditan and pre-clinical, proof-of-concept, Phase II, pivotal, Phase III trials and post-hoc data is covered. Additionally, the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan when compared to other acute treatments in migraine is described, including lasmiditan’s side effect profile and status as a Schedule V substance. Further, head-to-head studies of lasmiditan compared with other acute treatments are required.Keywords: lasmiditan, ditan, 5-HT1F agonist, migraine, rescue therapy, acute treatment

Background: Serotonin syndrome (SS) symptoms overlap with adverse events associated with lasmiditan, a 5-HT (serotonin)1F receptor agonist for acute treatment of migraine. Because SS symptoms are heterogeneous, diagnosis can be challenging, and potential cases observed with lasmiditan treatment led to questions about SS pathophysiology. Here, we provide an overview of the potential risk of SS based on experience with lasmiditan. Methods: Results of eight phase 2 and phase 3 lasmiditan trials (n = 5,916) and a controlled intravenous trial of lasmiditan (n = 88) were analyzed for symptomatology consistent with SS. Post-marketing surveillance data from lasmiditan's US launch date (January 2020) until data cut-off (April 2021) were also examined. Established Sternbach and Hunter diagnostic criteria were used for formal determination of SS. Results: Of 6,004 lasmiditan-treated clinical trial patients, 15 reported ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event consistent with signs and symptom(s) of SS. After review, one case met Sternbach and Hunter criteria, two cases potentially met Sternbach criteria, and three cases reported as SS had limited/no information to determine if either criterion was met. During post-marketing surveillance (approximately 13,400 lasmiditan prescriptions), 17 cases with symptom complexes consistent with SS were reported; 3/17 cases had adequate case descriptions to apply predefined criteria. Of these, two met Sternbach and Hunter criteria, and one met Sternbach criteria. Conclusion: Awareness of clinical symptomatology and diagnostic criteria of SS can help clinicians with recognition of rare instances of SS that may occur with lasmiditan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Farmacia is the property of Societatea de Stiinte Farmaceutice Romania and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Migraine constitutes the world's second-leading cause of disability. Triptans, as serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptor agonists, remain the first-line treatment, despite discouraged use in individuals at high cardiovascular risk. Lasmiditan, a selective lipophilic 5-HT1F agonist without vasoconstrictive effects, is an emerging option. We aimed to investigate the safety profile of lasmiditan in the WHO pharmacovigilance database (VigiBase®) using a comparative disproportionality analysis with triptans. VigiBase® was queried for all reports involving lasmiditan and triptans. Disproportionality analyses relied on the calculation of the information component (IC), for which 95% confidence interval (CI) lower bound positivity was required for signal detection. We obtained 826 reports involving lasmiditan. Overall, 10 adverse drug reaction classes were disproportionately reported with triptans, while only neurological (IC 1.6; 95% CI 1.5–1.7) and psychiatric (IC 1.5; 95% CI 1.3–1.7) disorders were disproportionately reported with lasmiditan. Sedation, serotonin syndrome, euphoric mood, and autoscopy had the strongest signals. When compared with triptans, 19 out of 22 neuropsychiatric signals persisted. The results of our analysis provide a more precise semiology of the neuropsychiatric effects of lasmiditan, with symptoms such as autoscopy and panic attacks. The cardiovascular adverse drug reaction risk with triptans was confirmed. In contrast, caution is warranted with lasmiditan use in patients with neurological or psychiatric comorbidities or serotonin syndrome risk. Our study was hindered by pharmacovigilance flaws, and further studies should help in validating these results. Our findings suggest that lasmiditan is a safe alternative for migraine treatment, especially when the neuropsychiatric risk is outweighed by the cardiovascular burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundSerotonin syndrome (SS) symptoms overlap with adverse events associated with lasmiditan, a 5-HT (serotonin)1F receptor agonist for acute treatment of migraine. Because SS symptoms are heterogeneous, diagnosis can be challenging, and potential cases observed with lasmiditan treatment led to questions about SS pathophysiology. Here, we provide an overview of the potential risk of SS based on experience with lasmiditan.MethodsResults of eight phase 2 and phase 3 lasmiditan trials (n = 5,916) and a controlled intravenous trial of lasmiditan (n = 88) were analyzed for symptomatology consistent with SS. Post-marketing surveillance data from lasmiditan’s US launch date (January 2020) until data cut-off (April 2021) were also examined. Established Sternbach and Hunter diagnostic criteria were used for formal determination of SS.ResultsOf 6,004 lasmiditan-treated clinical trial patients, 15 reported ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event consistent with signs and symptom(s) of SS. After review, one case met Sternbach and Hunter criteria, two cases potentially met Sternbach criteria, and three cases reported as SS had limited/no information to determine if either criterion was met. During post-marketing surveillance (approximately 13,400 lasmiditan prescriptions), 17 cases with symptom complexes consistent with SS were reported; 3/17 cases had adequate case descriptions to apply predefined criteria. Of these, two met Sternbach and Hunter criteria, and one met Sternbach criteria.ConclusionAwareness of clinical symptomatology and diagnostic criteria of SS can help clinicians with recognition of rare instances of SS that may occur with lasmiditan.Clinical trial registrationNCT03670810, NCT00384774, NCT00883051, NCT02565186.

Background: Following the CENTURION phase 3 randomized controlled trial's four-month double-blind phase, this 12-month open-label extension collected data for up to one year about dose optimization, patterns of use, migrainerelated disability, and quality of life during lasmiditan treatment. Methods: Migraine patients -18 years completing the double-blind phase and treating -3 migraine attacks could continue into the 12-month open-label extension. The initial oral lasmiditan dose was 100 mg; the dose could subsequently be adjusted to 50 mg or 200 mg at the investigator's discretion. Results: 477 patients entered and 321 (72.1%) completed the extension; 445 (93.3%) treated -1 attack with lasmiditan. Of 11,327 attacks, 8654 (76.4%) were lasmiditan-treated (84.9% of these involved moderate or severe pain). By study end, 17.8%, 58.7%, and 23.4% of patients were taking lasmiditan 50, 100, and 200 mg, respectively. Mean improvements were observed in disability and quality of life. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was dizziness (35.7% of patients, 9.5% of attacks). Conclusions: During this 12-month extension, lasmiditan was associated with a high rate of study completion, most attacks were treated with lasmiditan, and patients reported improvements in migraine-related disability and quality of life. No new safety findings were observed with longer exposure. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03670810); European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database (EUDRA CT: 2018-001661-17). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We performed a random-effects network meta-analysis to study the efficacy and safety of newly developed drugs for the acute treatment of migraine attacks. Methods: MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase and The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to 11 February 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials examining all formulations of lasmiditan, rimegepant and ubrogepant for the acute treatment of adults with migraine, were included. Data were extracted following the PRISMA guidelines. Results: Seven studies (SAMURAI, SPARTAN, CENTURION, Study 302, Study 303, ACHIEVE I and II) involving n=12,859 patients were included. All treatments were superior in efficacy to placebo. Lasmiditan 200 mg showed the highest two-hour pain freedom, while two-hour freedom from most bothersome symptom was equally achieved by the higher doses of lasmiditan (100 and 200 mg), rimegepant and the higher doses of ubrogepant (50 and 100 mg). The odds of treatment-emergent adverse events were greatest with all doses of lasmiditan. Conclusion: Lasmiditan 200 mg was the most effective intervention in the treatment of migraine attacks, although it was associated with high degrees of dizziness, nausea and somnolence. Rimegepant showed slightly lower, but similar efficacy rates to lasmiditan. Ubrogepant had overall the best tolerability profile. These conclusions are limited by the absence of head-to-head comparisons, limitations of individual trials and of the meta-analysis methodology itself. PROSPERO trial registration: CRD42022308224 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In the absence of head-to-head trials, comprehensive evidence comparing onset of efficacy of novel agents for acute treatment of migraine is lacking. This study aimed to explore the relative efficacy of lasmiditan (serotonin [5-hydroxytryptamine] 1F receptor agonist) versus rimegepant and ubrogepant (calcitonin gene-related peptide antagonists) for the acute oral treatment of migraine through network meta-analysis (NMA). Methods Data included in the NMA were identified through a systematic literature search (conducted April 2018, updated May/December 2020) of phase II–IV, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic/episodic migraine with/without aura. Treatments included: lasmiditan 50, 100, 200 mg; rimegepant 75 mg; ubrogepant 25, 50, 100 mg. Pairwise treatment comparisons from Bayesian fixed-effect/random-effects NMA, adjusted by baseline risk where appropriate, were conducted. Comparisons were reported as odds ratios with 95% credible intervals. Early-onset efficacy endpoints included: pain freedom at 2 hours and pain relief at 1 and 2 hours. Adverse drug reaction (ADR) profiles were summarised. Heterogeneity and inconsistency in the network were explored; sensitivity analyses investigated robustness of findings. Results Across 12 RCTs included in the base case, females represented >80% of included patients (mean age 37.9–45.7 years). Odds of achieving both pain freedom and pain relief at 2 hours were higher with lasmiditan 100 and 200 mg versus rimegepant 75 mg and ubrogepant 25 and 50 mg. Results for pain relief at 1 hour were consistent with those at 2 hours, but fewer comparisons were available. There were no statistically significant differences between lasmiditan 50 mg and ubrogepant or rimegepant for any outcome. Sensitivity analyses were in the same direction as base case analyses. Most commonly reported ADRs (incidence ≥2%) were: dizziness, fatigue, paraesthesia, sedation, nausea/vomiting and muscle weakness with lasmiditan; nausea with rimegepant; and nausea, somnolence and dry mouth with ubrogepant. Conclusions The efficacy findings of this indirect comparison indicate that lasmiditan 100 mg or 200 mg might be an appropriate acute treatment option for patients with migraine seeking a fast onset of action. Differently from rimegepant and ubrogepant, lasmiditan use is associated with mainly neurological events, which are mostly mild or moderate in severity and self-limiting. 350/350 words

Background: For many years triptans have been the cornerstone of acute migraine treatment. Nevertheless, treatment with triptans may not always be initiated due to contraindications (seen in approximately one fifth of patients) or inadequate response (seen in approximately one third of patients). New acute therapies, including 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)1F receptor agonists, also known as ditans (lasmiditan) and small molecule antagonists of the calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor, also known as gepants (rimegepant and ubrogepant), may be an effective alternative. Methods: We searched Pubmed for keywords, summarized the literature and provided a comprehensive review on the place of next generation acute migraine specific treatments among triptans. Results and conclusion: Post-hoc analyses reported no differences in efficacy of gepants/ditans between responders and non-responders to triptans, but research is hampered by lack of consensus on the definition of non-responder. Due to (partially) overlapping mechanisms of action, it remains unknown whether combination therapy with lasmiditan, gepants and triptans will have added value over monotherapy. Preclinical studies and post-hoc analyses cautiously indicate that these new drugs are safe for patients with cardiovascular risk factors. However, long-term studies are needed to prove cardiovascular safety. The risk of developing medication overuse headache may differ between triptans, ditans and gepants, but further studies are needed to confirm this difference. Head-to-head randomized controlled trials of acute therapies and combinations of therapies are needed to determine their place in migraine treatment among established therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]