MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Zolmitriptan 5 mg Nasal Spray: Efficacy and Onset of Action in the Acute Treatment of Migraine—Results From Phase 1 of the REALIZE Study

2004· article· en· W2071760228 on OpenAlexaff
Marek Gawel, Jürgen Aschoff, Arne May, Bruce Charlesworth

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZolmitriptanMigraineNasal sprayMedicineOnset of actionAction (physics)Phase (matter)PharmacologyAnesthesiaNasal administrationInternal medicineSumatriptanChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of phase 1 (reported here) of this two-phase study was to assess the efficacy of zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray, in terms of ability to provide relief from all migraine symptoms, in a controlled setting, designed to replicate clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Zolmitriptan nasal spray has been shown to be fast acting and highly effective in the treatment of migraine, as assessed using standard endpoints, such as headache response and pain-free rates. METHODS: In the double-blind first phase of the study, patients with migraine were randomized to receive zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray or placebo to treat a single migraine attack. Attacks were treated according to patients' normal patterns of use, in order to closely reflect clinical practice; that is, no specific regimen was dictated in terms of time to treatment or at what level of pain intensity the headache should be treated. Patients could take a second dose of study medication or an agreed escape medication if adequate pain relief had not been achieved 2 hours after the first dose. The primary efficacy endpoint was total symptom relief (freedom from pain, nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia) 1 hour after the first dose. Secondary efficacy endpoints included headache response, pain-free status and sustained pain-free status, and ability to perform normal activities. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population comprised 461 zolmitriptan nasal spray recipients and 451 placebo recipients. The total symptom relief rate 1 hour post-dose was significantly higher in the zolmitriptan 5 mg nasal spray group than in the placebo group (14.5% vs. 5.1%; P < .0001); the difference between the groups was significant from 30 minutes post-dose. Treatment with zolmitriptan nasal spray, compared with placebo, also produced a higher headache response rate from 10 minutes post-dose (15.1% vs. 9.1%; P = .0079) and a higher pain-free rate from 30 minutes post-dose (7.7% vs. 3.2%; P = .0039). Zolmitriptan nasal spray was also significantly superior to placebo in terms of sustained pain-free status and patients' ability to perform normal activities. Zolmitriptan nasal spray was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the efficacy demonstrated by zolmitriptan nasal spray in previous clinical trials.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face PainSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207