Talk:Triptan

message: Sumatriptan is generic now, so cost should probably be edited.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.81.61 (talk) 19:05, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: No title

message: Reading this article, it would appear that this page is about a family of drugs, referred repeatedly throughout the article as Triptans ... therefore it would appear that this article should be named Triptans rather than the singular Triptan.  As now, Triptans redirects to Triptan ... probably it should be the other way around. Enquire (talk) 19:02, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Triptan vs. Triptans 

message: "Many patients have a recurrent attack later in the day, and only one such recurrence in a day can be treated with a second dose of a triptan."
uh...what?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.86.54 (talk) 04:25, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: All statements on Wikipedia should be backed by citations, especially in health articles. This one was not. I did not understand it either. I deleted it.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 10:59, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this MEAN 

message: Probably not worth discussing, but I don't have the time to do the merger right now. Maybe later. Part of 5-HT1D receptor agonist should probably merged into Discovery and development of triptans and/or 5-HT1D receptor. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 11:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, boldly merged most of the material that seems to belong here (as opposed to Discovery and development of triptans). Lots of copyediting still needed. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 15:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[5-HT1D receptor agonist]] 

message: It is unclear where the data for this table is coming from, especially that of the L-703,664 and GR 46611 molecules as they are referenced nowhere else in the article and have no article attached to them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.10.230 (talk) 14:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch! I referenced GR-46611 and deleted the other, which only seems to block 5-HT1D receptors so probably doesn't count as a triptan. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 15:35, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation of Examples of Triptans Table 

message: This is how a pair of sentences in the introduction currently read: "They are not effective for the treatment of tension–type headache,[1] except in persons who also experience migraines.[2] They may be effective in disabling tension–type headaches, which exist on a spectrum of migraine.[2] "  
  
If I understand correctly, they may (with a low degree of certainty) be useful as treatment for tension headaches in migraineurs. This is not what is currently stated, rather it goes all-in on saying they are not effective for tension headaches, it then makes the exception, but in a separate sentence restates the exception. This is unclear and I would be grateful if someone more knowledgeable than myself could tidy and condense this into one sentence, either stating that this exception exists or disregarding it altogether as appropriate.  
  
Anditres (talk) 00:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the second, separate sentence as it is unsupported by the source, which actually states that true "disabling tension–type headaches" do not respond to sumatriptan; those that do, in people with a history of migraine, are actually migraine-spectrum headaches which the patients believe to be (or report as) tension-type headaches because they lack the more distinguishing features of migraine. Thank you for noting this confusion. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:38, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion in introduction with respect to efficacy in tension-type headaches 

message: Uzz 82.118.14.71 (talk) 20:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Z