SynthesisThe journal of headache and pain2025
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.
Synthesis in The journal of headache and pain, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nose-to-Brain Nanocarriers for Migraine Management: A Comprehensive Review of Drug Delivery Strategies and Translational Challenges.Current medical science · 2026Review
- Quality by design based development and optimization of a thermoreversible in situ intranasal gel of zavegepant for nose to brain delivery in migraine therapy.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Formulation considerations in enhancing olfactory mucosal deposition for nose-to-brain drug delivery.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026Review
- Identifying cardiac safety signals of disproportionate reporting for CGRP antagonists: evidence from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Patient-Reported Outcomes During the Acute Treatment of Migraine with Zavegepant Nasal Spray: Results from a 52-Week, Open-Label Study.Pain and therapy · 2026Article
- Clinical evaluation of zavegepant for the acute treatment of migraine.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe latest randomized controlled trial (RCT) revealed that zavegepant, a new nasal inhalation calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, has a clear efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. However, whether the efficacy of this new nasal inhalation drug is better than other oral CGRP receptor antagonists remained to be confirmed. Therefore, we designed this network meta-analysis (NMA) to provide a reference for the clinical application of zavegepant.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science up to December 1, 2024. RCTs using CGRP receptor antagonists (excluding non-randomized, non-English or no extractable data trials) to treat adult patients suffering from acute migraine were included. STATA 18.0 and R STUDIO were used for the statistical analysis.
resultsA total of 15 randomized clinical trials with 11,179 patients were included. Compared with the placebo, zavegepant 10 mg demonstrated a significantly higher efficiency for pain freedom at 2 h (relative risk (RR) = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.28-1.82, I
conclusionZavegepant 10 mg can quickly relieve symptoms and has no significant difference in safety compared with oral drugs, which can provide rapid and safe efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. However, compared with other oral CGRP receptor antagonists, zavegepant 10 mg by nasal inhalation has no obvious advantage in long-term symptom relief rate.
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.