A Pharmacovigilance Study from 2004 to 2024 Utilizing the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Examines Ischemic Adverse Events Linked to Triptan Use in Migraine Therapy.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2025-10-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S551333
Nuo Xu, Xiaowen Lu
{"title":"A Pharmacovigilance Study from 2004 to 2024 Utilizing the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Examines Ischemic Adverse Events Linked to Triptan Use in Migraine Therapy.","authors":"Nuo Xu, Xiaowen Lu","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S551333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Triptans are commonly employed for acute migraine relief, yet concerns remain regarding their potential association with ischemic adverse events (IAEs). This study aimed to evaluate the association between triptan use and IAEs using real-world data from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective pharmacovigilance analysis utilizing FAERS data spanning from Q1 2004 to Q3 2024. Reports of IAEs (stroke, including myocardial infarction, and other ischemic events) in patients using triptans were analyzed. The signal strength of triptan-associated IAEs was evaluated using disproportionality analysis with the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis of the FAERS database (2004-2024) identified 1305 ischemic adverse events (AEs) linked to triptans, accounting for 6.60% of all triptan-related AEs. The report proportion varied among triptans, with naratriptan (12.23%) and almotriptan (12.15%) showing the highest rates, while sumatriptan (4.74%) had the lowest. Females comprised 69.4% of cases, and 20.4% of reports involved life-threatening outcomes or death. Disproportionality analysis revealed significant signals for almotriptan (ROR=3.34), naratriptan (ROR=2.96), and rizatriptan (ROR=2.41), with almotriptan exhibiting the strongest association. The most frequent ischemic AEs included arteriospasm coronary (ROR=33.59), reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (ROR=63.92), and coronary artery dissection (ROR=93.17). Mortality rates exceeded 6% for ischemic stroke and acute myocardial infarction. Time-to-onset analysis showed frovatriptan had the earliest median onset (3.5 days), while almotriptan had the longest (284 days). Serious AEs were more frequently reported for cerebral vasoconstriction, cerebral ischemia, and coronary artery disease (p<0.05). These findings suggest notable ischemic safety signals associated with triptans, particularly specific drug subtypes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This pharmacovigilance study suggests a potential association between triptan use and ischemic adverse events, particularly in high-risk patients. Clinicians should carefully evaluate cardiovascular risk factors before prescribing triptans and consider alternative treatments for susceptible individuals. Additional prospective studies are required to validate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"18 ","pages":"5331-5345"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12523564/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S551333","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Triptans are commonly employed for acute migraine relief, yet concerns remain regarding their potential association with ischemic adverse events (IAEs). This study aimed to evaluate the association between triptan use and IAEs using real-world data from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

Methods: We performed a retrospective pharmacovigilance analysis utilizing FAERS data spanning from Q1 2004 to Q3 2024. Reports of IAEs (stroke, including myocardial infarction, and other ischemic events) in patients using triptans were analyzed. The signal strength of triptan-associated IAEs was evaluated using disproportionality analysis with the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and Bayesian confidence propagation neural network (BCPNN).

Results: Analysis of the FAERS database (2004-2024) identified 1305 ischemic adverse events (AEs) linked to triptans, accounting for 6.60% of all triptan-related AEs. The report proportion varied among triptans, with naratriptan (12.23%) and almotriptan (12.15%) showing the highest rates, while sumatriptan (4.74%) had the lowest. Females comprised 69.4% of cases, and 20.4% of reports involved life-threatening outcomes or death. Disproportionality analysis revealed significant signals for almotriptan (ROR=3.34), naratriptan (ROR=2.96), and rizatriptan (ROR=2.41), with almotriptan exhibiting the strongest association. The most frequent ischemic AEs included arteriospasm coronary (ROR=33.59), reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (ROR=63.92), and coronary artery dissection (ROR=93.17). Mortality rates exceeded 6% for ischemic stroke and acute myocardial infarction. Time-to-onset analysis showed frovatriptan had the earliest median onset (3.5 days), while almotriptan had the longest (284 days). Serious AEs were more frequently reported for cerebral vasoconstriction, cerebral ischemia, and coronary artery disease (p<0.05). These findings suggest notable ischemic safety signals associated with triptans, particularly specific drug subtypes.

Conclusion: This pharmacovigilance study suggests a potential association between triptan use and ischemic adverse events, particularly in high-risk patients. Clinicians should carefully evaluate cardiovascular risk factors before prescribing triptans and consider alternative treatments for susceptible individuals. Additional prospective studies are required to validate these findings.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

2004年至2024年利用FDA不良事件报告系统(FAERS)的药物警戒研究检查了与曲坦类药物用于偏头痛治疗相关的缺血性不良事件。
背景:曲坦类药物通常用于缓解急性偏头痛,但人们仍然担心其与缺血性不良事件(iae)的潜在关联。本研究旨在利用来自FDA不良事件报告系统(FAERS)的真实数据评估曲坦类药物使用与iae之间的关系。方法:我们利用2004年第一季度至2024年第三季度的FAERS数据进行了回顾性药物警戒分析。对使用曲坦类药物患者的iae(卒中,包括心肌梗死和其他缺血性事件)报告进行分析。使用报告优势比(ROR)和贝叶斯置信传播神经网络(BCPNN)的歧化分析来评估曲坦类药物相关iae的信号强度。结果:FAERS数据库分析(2004-2024)确定了1305例与曲坦类药物相关的缺血性不良事件(ae),占所有曲坦类药物相关ae的6.60%。曲坦类药物的报告率各不相同,以纳曲坦(12.23%)和阿莫曲坦(12.15%)的报告率最高,舒马曲坦(4.74%)的报告率最低。女性占69.4%,20.4%的报告涉及危及生命的结果或死亡。歧化分析显示阿莫曲坦(ROR=3.34)、纳曲坦(ROR=2.96)和利扎曲坦(ROR=2.41)具有显著性信号,其中阿莫曲坦的相关性最强。最常见的缺血性ae包括冠状动脉痉挛(ROR=33.59)、可逆性脑血管收缩综合征(ROR=63.92)和冠状动脉剥离(ROR=93.17)。缺血性中风和急性心肌梗死的死亡率超过6%。发病时间分析显示,罗伐曲坦的中位发病时间最早(3.5天),而阿莫曲坦的中位发病时间最长(284天)。严重不良事件在脑血管收缩、脑缺血和冠状动脉疾病中更为常见(结论:这项药物警戒研究表明曲坦类药物的使用与缺血性不良事件之间存在潜在关联,特别是在高危患者中。临床医生在开曲坦类药物处方前应仔细评估心血管危险因素,并考虑易感个体的替代治疗。需要进一步的前瞻性研究来验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信