Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2014 May 28;2014(5):CD009108.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009108.pub2.

Sumatriptan (all routes of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults - overview of Cochrane reviews

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Sumatriptan (all routes of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults - overview of Cochrane reviews

Christopher J Derry et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Migraine is a highly disabling condition for the individual and also has wide-reaching implications for society, healthcare services, and the economy. Sumatriptan is an abortive medication for migraine attacks, belonging to the triptan family. It is available for administration by four different routes: oral, subcutaneous, intranasal, and rectal.

Objectives: To summarise evidence from four Cochrane intervention reviews on the efficacy and tolerability of sumatriptan in the treatment of acute migraine attacks in adults by four routes of administration (oral, subcutaneous, intranasal, and rectal) compared with both placebo and active comparators.

Methods: The included reviews were written by the authors of this overview; no additional searching was carried out. All included reviews were conducted according to a standard protocol and reported a standard set of outcomes. From each individual review we extracted results for pain relief at different levels, and adverse events. No additional statistical comparison was undertaken as part of the overview. We focused on the most important findings for doses and routes licensed in North America or Europe (oral 25 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg; subcutaneous 4 mg, 6 mg; intranasal 5 mg, 10 mg, 20 mg; rectal 25 mg).

Main results: Included reviews provided data for 18 different dose and route of administration combinations in 52,236 participants. Data for the primary outcomes sought were generally well reported, and involved adequate numbers of participants to give confidence in the results, except for the rectal route of administration, where numbers were low.Subcutaneous administration was the most effective, with pain reduced from moderate or severe to none by two hours in almost 6 in 10 people (59%) taking 6 mg sumatriptan, compared with approximately 1 in 7 (15%) taking placebo; the number needed to treat (NNT) was 2.3 (95% confidence interval 2.1 to 2.4) with 2522 participants in the analysis. The most commonly used doses of oral, rectal, and intranasal sumatriptan also provided clinically useful pain relief, with the oral 50 mg dose providing complete relief of pain in almost 3 in 10 people (28%) compared with about 1 in 10 (11%) after placebo (NNT 6.1 (5.5 to 6.9) in 6447 participants). Subcutaneous administration provided more rapid pain relief than the other routes. Taking medication early, when pain was mild, was more effective than waiting until the pain was moderate or severe.The most effective dose of sumatriptan for each route of administration for the outcome of headache relief (pain reduced from moderate or severe to none or mild) at two hours was oral 100 mg (NNT 3.5 (3.2 to 3.7) in 7811 participants), subcutaneous 6 mg (NNT 2.1 (2.0 to 2.2) in 2738 participants), intranasal 20 mg (NNT 3.5 (3.1 to 4.1) in 2020 participants), and rectal 25 mg (NNT 2.4 (1.9 to 3.4) in 240 participants).Adverse events were generally of mild or moderate severity, of short duration, and more common with subcutaneously administered sumatriptan and higher doses of oral and intranasal sumatriptan than with other dose and route combinations.

Authors' conclusions: Sumatriptan is an effective abortive treatment for acute migraine attacks, but is associated with increased adverse events relative to placebo. The route of administration influences efficacy, particularly within the first hour after administration. Subcutaneous sumatriptan shows the greatest efficacy in terms of pain relief, but at the expense of relatively high levels of adverse events, and with a high financial cost compared with other routes. Information about the relative efficacy of the different routes of administration for different outcomes should help to inform decisions about the suitability of sumatriptan as a migraine treatment, as well as about the most appropriate way to administer the treatment for individual patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors of this overview are also the authors of the four included individual reviews.

SD and RAM have received research support from charities, government, and industry sources at various times. RAM has consulted for various pharmaceutical companies and has received lecture fees from pharmaceutical companies related to analgesics and other healthcare interventions. CD has no interests to declare. Support for this review came from the Oxford Pain Relief Trust.

Figures

1
1
Sumatriptan versus placebo. Calculated NNTs for a pain‐free response after a specified time, in participants treating moderate or severe migraine pain. Results for the five most commonly used dose and route of administration combinations, listed in rank order. PF2: pain‐free at two hours; PF1: pain‐free at one hour; 24h SPF: 24‐hour sustained pain‐free. Oral doses are shown with blue bars, subcutaneous doses are shown with red bars, intranasal doses are shown with yellow bars, and rectal doses are shown with green bars.
2
2
Sumatriptan versus placebo. Calculated NNTs for headache relief after a specified time, in participants treating moderate or severe migraine pain. Results for the five most commonly used dose and route of administration combinations, listed in rank order. HR2 (headache relief at two hours); HR1 (headache relief at one hour); 24h SHR (24‐hour sustained headache relief). Oral doses are shown with blue bars, subcutaneous doses are shown with red bars, intranasal doses are shown with yellow bars, and rectal doses are shown with green bars.
3
3
Sumatriptan versus placebo. Calculated NNHs for any adverse event within 24 hours of dosing, in participants treating moderate or severe migraine pain. Results for four of the five most commonly used dose and route of administration combinations (adverse event information for rectal sumatriptan not available), listed in rank order. Oral doses are shown with blue bars, subcutaneous doses are shown with red bars, and intranasal doses are shown with yellow bars.
4
4
Placebo response rates for the primary efficacy outcomes, by route of administration. Response rates of each outcome are grouped by colour to facilitate comparison between different routes of administration. Proportion of placebo‐treated participants pain‐free at two hours are shown with blue bars, pain‐free at one hour with purple bars, 24‐h sustained pain‐free with green bars, headache relief at two hours with red bars, headache relief at one hour with yellow bars, and 24‐h sustained headache relief with a pink bar.
5
5
Sumatriptan versus placebo. Calculated NNTs for relief of migraine‐associated symptoms and functional disability after two hours, in participants treating moderate or severe migraine pain. Results for the five most commonly used dose and route of administration combinations, listed in rank order. Oral doses are shown with blue bars, subcutaneous doses are shown with red bars, intranasal doses are shown with yellow bars, and rectal doses are shown with green bars.

Update of

  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009108

References

References to included reviews

Derry 2012a
    1. Derry CJ, Derry S, Moore RA. Sumatriptan (oral route of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008615] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Derry 2012b
    1. Derry CJ, Derry S, Moore RA. Sumatriptan (subcutaneous route of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009665] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Derry 2012c
    1. Derry CJ, Derry S, Moore RA. Sumatriptan (intranasal route of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009663] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Derry 2012d
    1. Derry CJ, Derry S, Moore RA. Sumatriptan (rectal route of administration) for acute migraine attacks in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009664] - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Additional references

Ayzenberg 2012
    1. Ayzenberg I, Katsarava Z, Sborowski A, Chernysh M, Osipova V, Tabeeva G, et al. The prevalence of primary headache disorders in Russia: a countrywide survey. Cephalalgia 2012;32(5):373‐81. [DOI: 10.1177/0333102412438977] - DOI - PubMed
Bendtsen 2003
    1. Bendtsen L, Mattsson P, Zwart JA, Lipton RB. Placebo response in clinical randomized trials of analgesics in migraine. Cephalalgia 2003;23(7):487‐90. - PubMed
Bigal 2003
    1. Bigal ME, Bordini CA, Antoniazzi AL, Speciali JG. The triptan formulations: a critical evaluation. Arquivos de Neuro‐Psiquiatria 2003;61(2A):313‐20. - PubMed
Bigal 2008
    1. Bigal ME, Serrano D, Reed M, Lipton RB. Chronic migraine in the population: burden, diagnosis, and satisfaction with treatment. Neurology 2008;71(8):559‐66. [DOI: 10.1212/01.wn1.0000323925.29520.e7] - DOI - PubMed
Bloudek 2012
    1. Bloudek LM, Stokes M, Buse DC, Wilcox TK, Lipton RB, Goadsby PJ, et al. Cost of healthcare for patients with migraine in five European countries: results from the International Burden of Migraine Study (IBMS). Journal of Headache and Pain 2012;13(5):361‐78. [DOI: 10.1007/s10194-012-0460-7] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
BNF 2013
    1. British National Formulary. http://www.medicinescomplete.com/mc/bnf/current/PHP2854‐sumatriptan.htm (Accessed 30 October 2013). London: BMJ Group and Pharmaceutical Press, 2013; Vol. October.
Brandes 2009
    1. Brandes JL, Cady RK, Freitag FG, Smith TR, Chandler P, Fox AW, et al. Needle‐free subcutaneous sumatriptan (Sumavel DosePro): bioequivalence and ease of use. Headache 2009;49(10):1435‐44. - PubMed
Buse 2011
    1. Buse D, Manack A, Serrano D, Reed M, Varon S, Turkel C, et al. Headache impact of chronic and episodic migraine: results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study. Headache 2012;52(1):3‐17. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.02046.x] - DOI - PubMed
Cook 1995
    1. Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 1995;310(6977):452‐4. - PMC - PubMed
de Craen 2000
    1. Craen AJ, Tijssen JG, Gans J, Kleijnen J. Placebo effect in the acute treatment of migraine: subcutaneous placebos are better than oral placebos. Journal of Neurology 2000;247(3):183‐8. - PubMed
Diamond 2007
    1. Diamond S, Bigal ME, Silberstein S, Loder E, Reed M, Lipton RB. Patterns of diagnosis and acute and preventive treatment for migraine in the United States: results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study. Headache 2007;47(3):355‐63. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00631.x] - DOI - PubMed
Diener 2008
    1. Diener HC, Schorn CF, Bingel U, Dodick DW. The importance of placebo in headache research. Cephalalgia 2008;28(10):1003‐11. - PubMed
Ferrari 2002
    1. Ferrari MD, Goadsby PJ, Roon KI, Lipton RB. Triptans (serotonin, 5‐HT1B/1D agonists) in migraine: detailed results and methods of a meta‐analysis of 53 trials. Cephalalgia 2002;22(8):633‐58. [DOI: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.2002.00404.x] - DOI - PubMed
Gendolla 2008
    1. Gendolla A. Early treatment in migraine: how strong is the current evidence?. Cephalalgia 2008;28(Suppl 2):28‐35. - PubMed
Goadsby 2007
    1. Goadsby PJ. Recent advances in understanding migraine mechanisms, molecules and therapeutics. Trends in Molecular Medicine 2007;13(1):39‐44. [DOI: 10.1016/j.molmed.2006.11.005] - DOI - PubMed
Hazard 2009
    1. Hazard E, Munakata J, Bigal ME, Rupnow MF, Lipton RB. The burden of migraine in the United States: current and emerging perspectives on disease management and economic analysis. Value in Health 2009;12(1):55‐64. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00404.x] - DOI - PubMed
IHS 2000
    1. International Headache Society Clinical Trials Subcommittee. Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine: second edition. Cephalalgia 2000;20(9):765‐86. - PubMed
IHS 2013
    1. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society. The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (beta version). Cephalalgia 2013;33(9):629‐808. [DOI: 10.1177/0333102413485658] - DOI - PubMed
Johnston 2010
    1. Johnston MM, Rapoport AM. Triptans for the management of migraine. Drugs 2010;70(12):1505‐18. [DOI: 10.2165/11537990-000000000-00000] - DOI - PubMed
Law 2013
    1. Law S, Derry S, Moore RA. Sumatriptan plus naproxen for acute migraine attacks in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008541.pub2] - DOI - PubMed
Leonardi 2005
    1. Leonardi M, Steiner TJ, Scher AT, Lipton RB. The global burden of migraine: measuring disability in headache disorders with WHO's Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Journal of Headache and Pain 2005;6(6):429‐40. [DOI: 10.1007/s10194-005-0252-4] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Linde 2012
    1. Linde M, Gustavsson A, Stovner LJ, Steiner TJ, Barré J, Katsarava Z, et al. The cost of headache disorders in Europe: the Eurolight project. European Journal of Neurology 2012;19(5):703‐11. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2011.03612.x] - DOI - PubMed
Lipton 1999
    1. Lipton RB, Stewart WF. Acute migraine therapy: do doctors understand what patients with migraine want from therapy?. Headache 1999;39(Suppl 2):S20‐S26.
Lipton 2007
    1. Lipton RB, Bigal ME, Diamond M, Freitag F, Reed ML, AMPP Advisory Group, et al. Migraine prevalence, disease burden, and the need for preventive therapy. Neurology 2007;68(5):343‐9. - PubMed
Lucas 2006
    1. Lucas C, Géraud G, Valade D, Chautard MH, Lantéri‐Minet M. Recognition and therapeutic management of migraine in 2004, in France: results of FRAMIG 3, a French nationwide population‐based survey. Headache 2006;46(5):715‐25. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00430.x] - DOI - PubMed
Macedo 2006
    1. Macedo A, Farré M, Baños JE. A meta‐analysis of the placebo response in acute migraine and how this response may be influenced by some of the characteristics of clinical trials. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2006;62(3):161‐72. - PubMed
McCrory 2003
    1. McCrory DC, Gray RN. Oral sumatriptan for acute migraine. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002915] - DOI - PubMed
Moore 1998
    1. Moore RA, Gavaghan D, Tramèr MR, Collins SL, McQuay HJ. Size is everything ‐ large amounts of information are needed to overcome random effects in estimating direction and magnitude of treatment effects. Pain 1998;78(3):209‐16. - PubMed
Moore 2008
    1. Moore RA, Barden J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Managing potential publication bias. In: McQuay HJ, Kalso E, Moore RA editor(s). Systematic Reviews in Pain Research: Methodology Refined. Seattle: IASP Press, 2008:15‐24. [ISBN: 978‐0‐931092‐69‐5]
Moore 2011
    1. Moore RA, Straube S, Paine J, Derry S, McQuay HJ. Minimum efficacy criteria for comparisons between treatments using individual patient meta‐analysis of acute pain trials: Examples of etoricoxib, paracetamol, ibuprofen, and ibuprofen/paracetamol combinations after third molar extraction. Pain 2011;152(5):982‐9. - PubMed
Moore 2012
    1. Moore RA, Derry CJ, Derry S, Straube S, McQuay HJ. A conservative method of testing whether combination analgesics produce additive or synergistic effects using evidence from acute pain and migraine. European Journal of Pain 2012;16(4):585‐91. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2011.08.009] - DOI - PubMed
Moore 2013
    1. Moore RA, Straube S, Aldington D. Pain measures and cut‐offs ‐ 'no worse than mild pain' as a simple, universal outcome. Anaesthesia 2013;68(4):400‐12. [DOI: 10.1111/anae.12148] - DOI - PubMed
Munakata 2009
    1. Munakata J, Hazard E, Serrano D, Klingman D, Rupnow MF, Tierce J, et al. Economic burden of transformed migraine: results from the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study. Headache 2009;49(4):498‐508. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2009.01369.x] - DOI - PubMed
Nuesch 2010
    1. Nüesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Tschannen B, Altman DG, et al. Small study effects in meta‐analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ 2010;341:c3515. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c3515] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Oldman 2002
    1. Oldman AD, Smith LA, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Pharmacological treatments for acute migraine: quantitative systematic review. Pain 2002;97(3):247‐57. - PubMed
Pascual 2002
    1. Pascual J. Clinical benefits of early triptan therapy for migraine. Headache 2002;42 Suppl 1:10‐7. [DOI: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2002.0420s1010.x] - DOI - PubMed
PCA 2013
    1. Prescribing and Primary Care team, Health and Social Care Information Centre. Prescription cost analysis, England 2012. http://data.gov.uk/dataset/prescription_cost_analysis_england [Accessed 17 Apr 2013]. Government Statistical Service: Health and Social Care Information Centre, 2013. [ISBN: 978‐1‐84‐636859‐2]
Pierce 2009
    1. Pierce M, Marbury T, O'Neill C, Siegel S, Du W, Sebree T. Zelrix: a novel transdermal formulation of sumatriptan. Headache 2009;49(6):817‐25. - PubMed
Radtke 2009
    1. Radtke A, Neuhauser H. Prevalence and burden of headache and migraine in Germany. Headache 2009;49(1):79‐89. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2008.01263.x] - DOI - PubMed
Shea 2007
    1. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2007;7:10. [DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-10] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Steiner 2013
    1. Steiner TS, Stovner LJ, Birbeck GL. Migraine: the seventh disabler. Journal of Headache and Pain 2013;14:1. [DOI: 10.1186/1129-2377-14-1] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Stovner 2010
    1. Stovner LJ, Andree C. Prevalence of headache in Europe: a review for the Eurolight project. Journal of Headache and Pain 2010;11(4):289‐99. [DOI: 10.1007/s10194-010-0217-0] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Tfelt‐Hansen 2012
    1. Tfelt‐Hansen P, Pascual J, Ramadan N, Dahlöf C, D'Amico D, Diener HC, et al. Guidelines for controlled trials of drugs in migraine: third edition. A guide for investigators. Cephalalgia 2012;32(1):6‐38. [DOI: 10.1177/0333102411417901] - DOI - PubMed
Thornton 2000
    1. Thornton A, Lee P. Publication bias in meta‐analysis: its causes and consequences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000;53(2):207‐16. [DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00161-4] - DOI - PubMed
Victor 2010
    1. Victor TW, Hu X, Campbell JC, Buse DC, Lipton RB. Migraine prevalence by age and sex in the United States: a life‐span study. Cephalalgia 2010;30(9):1065‐72. [DOI: 10.1177/0333102409355601] - DOI - PubMed
Vos 2012
    1. Vos T, Flaxman AD, Naghavi M, Lozano R, Michaud C, Ezzati M, et al. Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990‐2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012;380(9859):2163‐96. [DOI: ] - PMC - PubMed
Yu 2012
    1. Yu S, Liu R, Zhao G, Yang X, Qiao X, Feng J, et al. The prevalence and burden of primary headaches in China: a population‐based door‐to‐door survey. Headache 2012;52(4):582‐91. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.02061.x] - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances