Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15270595›Full record

ReviewCNS drugs2004

Intranasal medications for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache.

Alan M Rapoport, Marcelo E Bigal, Stewart J Tepper, Fred D Sheftell

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in CNS drugs, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. A randomized, double-blind, parallel trial comparing capsaicin nasal spray with placebo in subjects with a significant component of nonallergic rhinitis.Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2011
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Pharmacogenetics in Primary Headache Disorders.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021
    Review
  10. Efficacy and Safety of Butorphanol Use in Patient-Controlled Analgesia: A Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alan M RapoportColumbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, New York, NY, USA. alanrapoport@nech.net
Marcelo E Bigal
Stewart J Tepper
Fred D Sheftell
Albert Einstein College of Medicine · USColumbia University · USNew England Institute for Neurology and Headache · USYale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intranasal medications for the treatment of headache have recently received increased attention. This paper reviews intranasal formulations of a variety of available medications (dihydroergotamine mesylate [dihydroergotamine mesilate], sumatriptan, zolmitriptan, butorphanol, capsaicin and lidocaine [lignocaine]) and one experimental medication (civamide, a cis-isomer of capsaicin) for the treatment of migraine and cluster headache. Although the efficacy of intranasal agents varies with the product used, intranasal delivery may be both convenient and more effective than other modes of drug delivery for a variety of reasons: (i) intranasal administration bypasses small bowel gastrointestinal tract absorption, which is often significantly delayed during the acute phase of a migraine attack; (ii) nauseated patients may prefer non-oral formulations as they decrease the chance of vomiting and are more rapidly effective; (iii) intranasal administration causes no pain or injection site reaction and is easier and more convenient to administer than injection or suppository and so may be used earlier in a migraine attack, resulting in better efficacy; (iv) intranasal medication produces the same number or fewer adverse events than injections; and (v) intranasal formulations offer a more rapid onset of action than oral medications, for some of the above reasons and, as such, may be more useful in patients with cluster headache, although this needs to be verified. However, it is important to emphasise that a preference study showed that most patients prefer oral tablets to an intranasal formulation. Also, some nasal preparations have significant adverse effects or are not well absorbed and therefore do not work consistently; others are more challenging to administer as a result of their delivery apparatus. Nevertheless, it is our opinion that nasal preparations increase therapeutic options and may result in faster response times and better efficacy than oral formulations and better patient satisfaction than injectable preparations.

Indexed as

Administration, IntranasalAnalgesicsCapsaicinCluster HeadacheHumansMigraine DisordersOxazolidinonesSerotonin Receptor AgonistsSumatriptanTryptaminesAnalgesicsCapsaicinOxazolidinonesSerotonin Receptor AgonistsSumatriptanTryptamineszolmitriptanzucapsaicin

Identifiers

PMID15270595
OpenAlexW2061537263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.