4.7 Article

Lasmiditan is an effective acute treatment for migraine A phase 3 randomized study

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 91, 期 24, 页码 E2222-E2232

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006641

关键词

-

资金

  1. CoLucid Pharmaceuticals, Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan in the acute treatment of migraine. Methods Adult patients with migraine were randomized (1:1:1) to a double-blind dose of oral lasmiditan 200 mg, lasmiditan 100 mg, or placebo and were asked to treat their next migraine attack within 4 hours of onset. Over 48 hours after dosing, patients used an electronic diary to record headache pain and the presence of nausea, phonophobia, and photophobia, one of which was designated their most bothersome symptom (MBS). Results Of the 1,856 patients who treated an attack, 77.9% had >= 1 cardiovascular risk factors in addition to migraine. Compared with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg were free of headache pain at 2 hours after dosing (32.2% vs 15.3%; odds ratio [OR] 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-3.6, p < 0.001), similar to those dosed with lasmiditan 100 mg (28.2%; OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.0, p < 0.001). Furthermore, compared with those dosed with placebo, more patients dosed with lasmiditan 200 mg (40.7% vs 29.5%; OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-2.1, p < 0.001) and lasmiditan 100 mg (40.9%; OR 1.7, 95% CI, 1.3-2.2, p< 0.001) were free of their MBS at 2 hours after dosing. Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in intensity. Conclusions Lasmiditan dosed at 200 and 100 mg was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of acute migraine among patients with a high level of cardiovascular risk factors. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02439320. Classification of evidence This study provides Class I evidence that for adult patients with migraine, lasmiditan increases the proportion of subjects who are headache pain free at 2 hours after treating a migraine attack.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据