ArticleThe journal of headache and pain2024
Comparison of gepant effects at therapeutic plasma concentrations: connecting pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics.
Article in The journal of headache and pain, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The efficacy and safety of zavegepant nasal inhalation versus oral calcitonin-gene related peptide receptor antagonists in the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the literature.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Pooled it
- Safety Profile of Zavegepant in the Treatment of Acute Migraine: Insights from the FDA Adverse Event Monitoring System Database.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Neuroinflammation and RAMP1: the Role of the Peripheral and Central Nervous System in Tumor Progression.Cell biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Review
- Head-to-head relief: ubrogepant, rimegepant, and zavegepant in migraine treatment.Pain management · 2025Review
- Blocking the CGRP Receptor: Differences across Human Vascular Beds.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOrally administered second-generation gepants are effective for the treatment of migraine. The intranasal administration of the third-generation gepant zavegepant might have additional benefits including a rapid onset of action, but it is not clear yet to which extent this has clinical relevance.
methodsWe examined the effect of zavegepant on the relaxations induced by calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) in human isolated middle meningeal arteries. Furthermore, we connected the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of gepants by combining data from clinical and basic research.
resultsWe showed that 10 nM zavegepant potently antagonized the functional response to CGRP. We also showed that all gepants are effective at inhibiting functional responses to CGRP at their therapeutic plasma concentrations.
conclusionsThe relatively low predicted potency of zavegepant to inhibit CGRP-induced relaxation at therapeutic systemic plasma concentrations may point to the relevance of local delivery to the trigeminovascular system through intranasal administration. This approach may have additional benefits for various groups of patients, including overweight patients.
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.