Trial reportJournal of neurology2007
Patient preference in migraine therapy. A randomized, open-label, crossover clinical trial of acute treatment of migraine with oral almotriptan and rizatriptan.
Trial report in Journal of neurology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient Preferences and Values in Decision Making for Migraines: A Systematic Literature Review.Pain research & management · 2021Pooled it
- A PRISMA-compliant systematic review of the endpoints employed to evaluate symptomatic treatments for primary headaches.The journal of headache and pain · 2018Pooled it
- Survey of migraine sufferers with dogs to evaluate for canine migraine-alerting behaviors.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2013Article
- Preferences related to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and its treatment.Patient preference and adherence · 2011Article
- Are the current IHS guidelines for migraine drug trials being followed?The journal of headache and pain · 2010Review
- Rizatriptan for the acute treatment of migraine: Consistency, preference, satisfaction, and quality of life.Patient preference and adherence · 2009Article
- Key points in migraine prophylaxis: patient perspective.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2009Review
- Prophylaxis of migraine: general principles and patient acceptance.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2008Article
- The pharmacological management of migraine, part 1: overview and abortive therapy.P & T : a peer-reviewed journal for formulary management · 2008Article
- Times to pain relief and pain freedom with rizatriptan 10 mg and other oral triptans.International journal of clinical practice · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess patient preference for almotriptan 12.5 mg vs rizatriptan 10 mg for the acute treatment of migraine.
methodsRandomized, multicenter, open-label, crossover trial in which triptan-naïve patients treated two moderate/severe migraine attacks, the first with one triptan and the second with the other: 183 patients took rizatriptan followed by almotriptan and 189 treated in the reverse order. Patient preference was assessed with a self-administered questionnaire.
resultsOf those recording a preference (209), 54.5% preferred almotriptan, but statistical significance was not achieved. The main reason for preference for one or the other triptan was efficacy: 43% of patients preferring almotriptan gave faster headache relief as the reason and 34% cited faster return to normal activities. The corresponding values for rizatriptan were 47% and 38%. A significantly greater proportion of those preferring almotriptan cited fewer adverse events (AEs) as the reason. Almotriptan and rizatriptan were of comparable efficacy and both treatments were well tolerated; 9% of patients experienced AEs probably or possibly related to study medication after almotriptan vs 14% after rizatriptan. Almotriptan was associated with a significantly lower incidence of triptan-associated AEs in triptan-naïve patients (8.5% vs 18% with rizatriptan).
conclusionPhysicians should use information from meta-analyses and preference studies like this one to aid in the selection of a triptan with a high likelihood of providing rapid, sustained relief from pain coupled with an absence of AEs. About 55% of patients recording a preference in this trial preferred almotriptan, perhaps because of its combination of good efficacy and lower incidence of triptan-associated AEs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.