ArticleHeadache2026
Study participant impression of use and satisfaction with STS101 (dihydroergotamine nasal powder): Results from the open-label ASCEND acute migraine study.
Article in Headache, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04406649 (An Open-Label, 12-Month Study to Evaluate the Safety and Tolerability of STS101), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
An Open-Label, 12-Month Study to Evaluate the Safety and Tolerability of STS101 (Dihydroergotamine Nasal Powder) in the Acute Treatment of Migraine
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Total Synthesis of 8-Hydroxy-dihydroergotamine, the Major Human Metabolite of Dihydroergotamine.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
Abstract
OBJECTIVE/
backgroundThis study was undertaken to assess participants' impression of use and satisfaction with STS101 in a long-term, open-label safety study. The ASCEND study assessed the safety and tolerability of STS101, an investigational drug-device combination of 5.2 mg dihydroergotamine in a single-use nasal delivery device for the acute treatment of migraine with/without aura, across 12 months.
methodsASCEND (NCT04406649) was an open-label, single-arm, prospective interventional study in adults (18-65 years) with history of migraine from September 2020 to January 2023. Participants could self-administer STS101 for ≤2 doses within 24 h to treat a single migraine attack and ≤12 doses/month. Data on patient global impression, ease-of-use impression, patient likelihood of use, and comparison of study medication with previously used migraine medication were collected at 3-, 6-, and 12-month timepoints. Participants' ratings were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. Exploratory efficacy parameters (freedom from pain and most bothersome symptom) were recorded in participants' electronic diaries.
resultsOverall, the majority of participants had favorable impressions of STS101, which were consistent across the assessments at 3-, 6-, and 12-month timepoints. STS101 was considered easy or very easy to use by 92.3%, 92.9%, and 91.2% of participants at months 3, 6, and 12, respectively. After 3, 6, and 12 months of use, 78.9%, 80.5%, and 73.7% of participants indicated they were likely or very likely to use STS101 if it was available. When asked at the 3-, 6-, and 12-month assessments to compare STS101 to their usual migraine medication, 63.9%, 74.1%, and 70.1% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that STS101 helped them return to normal faster than their usual medication. A total of 64.9%, 66.1%, and 69.3% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that STS101 worked faster and 67.0%, 73.7%, and 72.5% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that STS101 worked more consistently than their usual medication. Treatment with STS101 showed freedom from headache pain at 2, 4, 24, and 48 h postdose in 33.3%, 61.3%, 86.2%, and 91.1% of participants, respectively. Similar trends were seen in freedom from most bothersome symptom as reported by 53.3%, 78.0%, 91.9%, and 93.7% of participants at 2, 4, 24, and 48 h postdose, respectively.
conclusionParticipant impression data through 12 months suggest that STS101 was generally perceived as favorable by participants on multiple attributes. Most considered STS101 easy to use and indicated they would be likely to use the product if it were available. Exploratory efficacy evaluations indicated beneficial effects.
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.