Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T15:29:47.025Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sumatriptan Responsiveness and Clinical, Psychiatric and Psychologic Features in Migraine Patients

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2014

S.K. Meckling ,
W.J. Becker ,
M.S. Rose  and
J.T. Dalby
S.K. Meckling
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada
W.J. Becker
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Neurosciences University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada
M.S. Rose
Affiliation:
Department of Community Health Sciences,University of Calgary, Calgary, AB Canada
J.T. Dalby
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology. Peter Lougheed Centre, Calgary Regional Health Authority, Calgary, AB Canada
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

To compare sumatriptan responders and nonresponders in a migraine population with regard to a number of clinical, psychiatric and psychologic features.

Methods:

Patients were drawn from a referral headache clinic population, and classified as responders or nonresponders. Clinical features were assessed by a written questionnaire. The lifetime prevalence of several psychiatric disorders was determined by the National Institute of Mental Health diagnostic interview schedule and personality factors were measured by the 16 Personality Factors (16PF) Questionnaire.

Results:

Nonresponders indicated less influence on their migraine by menstrual factors, had a higher lifetime prevalence of generalized anxiety, and showed 16PF scores indicating greater shyness, self-sufficiency and perfectionism. Nonresponders were also more imaginative and less socially outgoing.

Conclusion:

Although they must be interpreted with caution due to small sample size and the multiple comparisons made, our results indicate that there may be differences between sumatriptan responders and nonresponders with regard to a number of clinical, psychiatric and psychologic factors. These results suggest that biological differences exist between the two patient groups which likely account for both the differences in their responses to sumatriptan and in the clinical features noted above.

Résumé:

RÉSUMÉ:

La réponse au sumatriptan et les caractéristiques cliniques, psychiatriques et psychologiques des patients migraineux. Objectif: Le but de cette étude était de comparer les répondeurs et les non-répondeurs au sumatriptan d'une population migraineuse quant à certaines caractéristiques cliniques, psychiatriques et psychologiques.

Méthodes:

Les patients ont été tirés d'une population de patients référés à une clinique de céphalée et classifiés comme répondeurs ou non-répondeurs. Les caractéristiques cliniques ont été évaluées au moyen d'un questionnaire écrit. La prévalence à vie de plusieurs maladies psychiatriques a été déterminée par la cédule d'entrevue diagnostique du National Institute of Mental Health et des facteurs de la personnalité ont été mesurés par le 16 Personality Factors (16PF) Questionnaire.

Résultats:

Les non-répondeurs ont indiqué que les facteurs menstruels avaient moins d'influence sur leur migraine, avaient une prévalence à vie plus élevée d'anxiété généralisée et avaient des scores au 16PF indiquant une plus grande timidité, un niveau plus élevé d'autonomie et de perfectionnisme. Les non-répondeurs étaient également plus imaginatifs et moins sociables.

Conclusions:

Bien que nos résultats doivent être interprétés avec prudence à cause de la petite taille de l'échantillon et des comparaisons multiples effectuées, ils indiquent qu'il pourrait exister des différences entre les répondeurs au sumatriptan et les non-répondeurs quant à certains facteurs cliniques, psychiatriques et psychologiques. Ces résultats suggèrent qu'il existe entre les deux groupes de patients des différences biologiques qui sont probablement responsables des différences dans la réponse au sumatriptan et dans les caractéristiques mentionnées.

Type
Original Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 28 , Issue 4 , November 2001 , pp. 313 - 318
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2001

References

1. Cady, RK, Wendt, JK, Kirchner, JR, et al. Treatment of acute migraine with subcutaneous sumatriptan. JAMA 1991;265:2831–2835.Google Scholar
2. The Subcutaneous Sumatriptan International Study Group. Treatment of migraine attacks with sumatriptan. N Engl J Med 1991;325:316–321.Google Scholar
3. Rapoport, AM, Ramadan, NM, Adelman, JU, et al. Optimizing the dose of zolmitriptan (Zomig, 311C90) for the acute treatment of migraine. A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose range-finding study. Neurology 1997;49:1210–1218.Google Scholar
4. Teall, J, Tuchman, M, Cutler, N, et al. Rizatriptan (MAXALT) for the acute treatment of migraine and migraine recurrence. A placebo-controlled, outpatient study. Headache 1998;38:281–287.Google Scholar
5. Solomon, GD, Cady, RK, Klapper, JA, et al. Clinical efficacy and tolerability of 2.5 mg zolmitriptan for the acute treatment of migraine. Neurology 1997;49:1219–1225.Google Scholar
6. Tfelt-Hansen, P, Teall, J, Rodrigues, F, et al. Oral rizatriptan versus oral sumatriptan: a direct comparative study in the acute treatment of migraine. Headache 1998;38:748–755.Google Scholar
7. Solomon, GD, Cady, RK, Klapper, JA, et al. Clinical efficacy and tolerability of 2.5 mg zolmitriptan for the acute treatment of migraine. Neurology 1997;49:1219–1225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Bomhof, M, Paz, J, Legg, N et al and the Rizatriptan-Naratriptan Study Group. Comparison of rizatriptan 10 mg vs naratriptan 2.5 mg in migraine. Eur Neurol 1999;42:173–179.Google Scholar
9. Diclofenac-K/Sumatriptan Migraine Study Group. Acute treatment of migraine attacks: efficacy and safety of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, diclofenac-potassium, in comparison to oral sumatriptan and placebo. Cephalalgia 1999;19:232–240.Google Scholar
10. Kramer, MS, Matzura-Wolfe, D, Plis, A, et al. A placebo-controlled crossover study of rizatriptan in the treatment of multiple migraine attacks. Neurology 1998;51:773–781.Google Scholar
11. Pfaffenrath, V, Cunin, G, Sjonell, G, Prendergast, S. Efficacy and safety of sumatriptan tablets (25 mg, 50 mg and 100 mg) in the acute treatment of migraine: defining the optimum doses of oral sumatriptan. Headache 1998;38:184–190.Google Scholar
12. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache S ociety. Classification and diagnostic criteria for headache disorders, cranial neuralgias, and facial pain. Cephalalgia 1988;8(Suppl 7):1–96.Google Scholar
13. Sheftell, FD, Weeks, RE, Rapoport, AM, et al. Subcutaneous sumatriptan in a clinical setting the first 100 consecutive patients with acute migraine in a tertiary care center. Headache 1994;34:67–72.Google Scholar
14. Tfelt-Hansen, P. Efficacy and adverse events of subcutaneous, oral and intranasal sumatriptan used for migraine treatment a systematic review based on number needed to treat. Cephalalgia 1998;18(8):532–538.Google Scholar
15. Silberstein, SD, Lipton, RB, Sliwinski, M. Classification of daily and non-daily headaches Field trial of revised IHS criteria. Neurology 1996;47:871–875.Google Scholar
16. Mahew, NT, Kailasam, F, Meadors, L, et al. Treatment of oral sumatriptan nonresponders with 5 mg zolmitriptan and 10 mg rizatriptan a comparative open trial. Headache 1999;39:368 (Abst).Google Scholar
17. The Oral Sumatriptan Dose-Defining Study Group. Sumatriptan an oral dose-defining study. Eur Neurol 1991;31(5):300–305.Google Scholar
18. Visser, WH, Terwindt, GM, Reines, SA, et al. Rizatriptan vs sumatriptan in the acute treatment of migraine. Arch Neurol 1996;53:1132–1137.Google Scholar
19. Visser, WH, de Vriend, RHM, Jaspers, NHWM, Ferrari, MD. Sumatriptan in clinical practice a two year review of 453 migraine patients. Neurology 1996;47:46–51.Google Scholar
20. Visser, WH, Burggraaf, J, Muller, LM, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of sumatriptan in migraine patients with headache recurrence or no response. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1996;60:452–460.Google Scholar
21. MaassenVan Den Brink, A, Vergouwe, MN, Ophoff, RA, et al. 5-HT1B receptor polymorphism and clinical response to sumatriptan. Headache 1998;38:288–291.Google Scholar
22. Visser, WH, de Vriend, RHM, Jaspers, MHWM, Ferrari, MD. Sumatriptan – Nonresponders A survey in 366 migraine patients. Headache 1996;36:471–475.Google Scholar
23. Somerville, BW. The role of estradiol withdrawal in the etiology of menstrual migraine. Neurology 1972;22:355–365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24. Somerville, BW. The role of progesterone in menstrual migraine. Neurology 1971;21:853–859.Google Scholar
25. Merikangas, KR, Angst, J, Isler, H. Migraine and Psychopathology Results of the Zurich Cohort Study of Young Adults. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1990;47:849–853.Google Scholar
26. Breaslau, N, Merikangas, K, Bowden, CL. Comorbidity of migraine and major affective disorders. Neurology 1994;44(Suppl 7):S17–S22.Google Scholar
27. Cleare, AJ, Murray, RM, Sherwood, RA, O’Keane, V. Abnormal 5-HT1D receptor function in major depression a neuropharmacological challenge study using sumatriptan. Psychol Med 1998;28:295–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28. Robins, LN, Helzer, JE, Croughan, J, Ratcliff, KS. National Institute of Mental Health diagnostic interview schedule. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1981;38:381–389.Google Scholar
29. Liebert, RM, Spiegler, MD. Personality Strategies and Issues, 7th Ed. Pacific Grove CA, USA, Brooks-Cole Publishing Co., 1994;10:191–217.Google Scholar
30. The Sixteen Personality Factors Questionnaire (5th Ed). Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Champaign, Illinois, 1993.Google Scholar