NCT07645924ClinicalTrials.gov
A Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Elismetrep (K-304) in the Acute Treatment of Migraine
A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Elismetrep (K-304) in the Acute Treatment of Migraine
In brief
This is a double-blind, randomized, multicenter, outpatient evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of elismetrep, as compared with placebo, in the acute treatment of migraine.
Phase 31,800 participants sought113 sites1 country
Categories
Registered in 1 registry
- ClinicalTrials.govNCT07645924Open this record at ClinicalTrials.govSynced last month
One study can be registered in several registries. We show it once and link every record we hold.
Trial information is shown as published by the registry, in its original language.
Interested in this study?
Sign in or create an account to register your interest and follow this study.
How this study is set up
The points below are drawn from the public registry record for this study. Each one cites the field or sentence it came from. A dash (—) means the record does not state something — not that it is missing or wrong. Many well-run studies, especially small ones, leave some of these blank.
- Present: Registered before enrolment beganFirst posted 2026-06-12; recorded start 2026-07-01
- Present: Has a defined primary outcomeA primary outcome measure is listed in the record
- Present: The primary outcome states a time frameThe primary outcome measure records a time frame
- Present: Participants are randomly assignedAllocation is recorded as randomised
- Present: Has a comparison groupThe record lists a placebo or comparator arm, or more than one study arm
- Present: Uses blinding (masking)A masking level is recorded in the record
- Not stated: An ethics committee is not stated in the registry recordThis registry's ingested record has no ethics-committee field
- Not stated: Regulatory oversight (such as an IND or IDE) is not stated in the registry recordThis registry's ingested record has no regulatory-authorisation field
- Not stated: A data monitoring committee is not stated in the registry recordThis registry's ingested record has no data-monitoring-committee fieldA data monitoring committee is not required for many smaller studies, and its absence here is not unusual.
- Present: No cost to participants is mentioned in the recordChecked the summary, description and eligibility text; no cost-to-participant phrase found
- Present: Sponsor has 4 other studies in this databaseCounted from the lead sponsor named in the record (Kallyope Inc.)
- Present: Sponsor has posted results for at least one studyBased on the sponsor’s studies in this database
- The record lists 1 condition.
- Lead sponsor type recorded as: industry.
- Intervention regulatory context: investigational, within a phased regulatory pathway.
Trial stature
Three independent measures of this study, described from its registry record — not a recommendation about it. A rigorous study by investigators nobody has heard of is better evidence than a weak study led by a famous one. How these are scored.
A strong methodological design for a phase 3 study, judged from its ClinicalTrials.gov record.
How this score is built
- Randomised allocation20/20
Participants are randomly allocated between arms
- Blinding16/20
Triple-blind
- Control arm13/15
Placebo / sham control arm
- Primary-outcome specificity10/10
Named primary outcome with a defined time frame
- Endpoint type3/10
Surrogate or intermediate endpoint (conservative default)
- Multi-centre8/8
Multi-centre: 115 sites
- Data monitoring committee0/7
No data monitoring committee stated
- Prospective registration5/5
Registered before the study start date
- Protocol / SAP posted0/5
No protocol or SAP posted to the registry
A large study: 1,800 participants (target), run at 113 sites.
How this score is built
- Enrolment32/40
1,800 participants (target)
- Site count23/25
115 sites
- Country count7/15
2 countries
- Planned duration3/10
Planned over about 7 months
- Sponsor scale2/10
Kallyope Inc. has led 4 trials in our corpus
We have no verifiable track record for the investigator named on this trial. That is common for early-career investigators and for records held outside ClinicalTrials.gov — it is not a negative signal.
How this score is built
- Investigator standing0/100
No investigator recorded in the registry for this trial
These describe the registry record only, and today we hold ClinicalTrials.gov data. Absent fields lower a score, and absence often reflects registration practice rather than study quality. A high-stature trial is not necessarily safer or a better choice for you — enrolling in a large definitive trial can mean a higher chance of receiving placebo, while a small early-phase study may be the only route to a new therapy.
Summary
This is a double-blind, randomized, multicenter, outpatient evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of elismetrep, as compared with placebo, in the acute treatment of migraine.
Conditions
- Migraine
Eligibility
| Sex | All |
|---|---|
| Ages | 18 Years – 75 Years |
| Healthy volunteers | No |
Eligibility as written in the registry
Eligibility in plain statements
This record's criteria have not been broken into separate statements yet. The registry text above is complete and is the authoritative version.
Study design
| Study type | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Phase | Phase 3 |
| Allocation | Randomised |
| Intervention model | PARALLEL |
| Primary purpose | TREATMENT |
| Masking | TRIPLE (3) |
| Enrolment | 1,800 participants sought |
Sponsor and collaborators
- Kallyope Inc. Sponsor
Arms and interventions
- Elismetrep 10 mgEXPERIMENTAL
- Elismetrep 20 mgEXPERIMENTAL
- PlaceboPLACEBO_COMPARATOR
Interventions
- Drug Elismetrep
Administered orally
- Drug Placebo
Administered orally
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
Pain freedom at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that report no pain at 2 hours post-dose. Pain will be measured on a 4-point Likert scale (0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe).
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Primary outcome
Freedom from most bothersome symptoms (MBS) at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that report absence of their MBS (nausea, phonophobia, or photophobia) at 2 hours post-dose. MBS will be measured using a binary scale (0=absent, 1=present).
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Pain relief at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that report a pain level of moderate of severe (responses of 2 or 3 on the 4-point Likert scale) at baseline and then report a pain level of none or mild (responses of 0 or 1 on the 4-point Likert scale) at 2 hours post-dose.
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Sustained pain freedom from 2 to 48 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that do not use any rescue medication, do not experience any headache pain through the time period of interest, and do not have missing pain data at 2, 24, or 48hours post-dose.
Time frame From 2 to 48 hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Freedom from functional disability at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that self-report as being able to function normally on the functional disability scale in the subset of participants that reported any level of disability at baseline. The scale has a 4-point numeric rating: normal (0); mildly impaired (1); moderately impaired (2); severely impaired, requires bedrest (3).
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Pain relief at 60 minutes post-dose
Percentage of participants that report a pain level of moderate of severe (responses of 2 or 3 on the 4-point Likert scale) at baseline and then report a pain level of none or mild (responses of 0 or 1 on the 4-point Likert scale) at 60 minutes post-dose
Time frame Sixty minutes post-dose
Secondary outcome
Proportion requiring rescue medication within 24 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that take rescue medication within 24 hours post-dose.
Time frame Within 24 hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Freedom from photophobia at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that report the absence of photophobia at 2 hours post-dose in the subset of participants that reported the presence of photophobia at baseline.
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Freedom from phonophobia at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that report the absence of phonophobia at 2 hours post-dose in the subset of participants that reported the presence of phonophobia at baseline.
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Freedom from nausea at 2 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that report the absence of nausea at 2 hours post-dose in the subset of participants that reported the presence of nausea at baseline.
Time frame Two hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Sustained pain freedom from 2 to 24 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that do not use any rescue medication, do not experience any headache pain through the time period of interest, and do not have missing pain data at 2 or 24 hours post-dose.
Time frame From 2 to 24 hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Sustained pain relief from 2 to 48 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that do not use any rescue medications, do not experience any moderate or severe headache pain through the time period of interest, and do not have missing pain data at 2, 24, or 48 hours post-dose.
Time frame From 2 to 48 hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that do not use any rescue medications, do not experience any moderate or severe headache pain through the time period of interest, and do not have missing pain data at 2 or 24 hours post-dose.
Time frame From 2 to 24 hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Pain relapse from 2 to 48 hours post-dose
Percentage of participants that are pain free at 2 hours post-dose and have (a) mild, moderate, or severe pain (response of 1, 2, or 3 on the 4-point Likert scale) at any time point after 2 hours post-dose, or (b) missing pain data at 24 hours or 48 hours after 2 hours post-dose, or (c) intervening rescue medication use at or before 48 hours post-dose.
Time frame From 2 to 48 hours post-dose
Secondary outcome
Percentage of participants who experience one or more treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs)
Time frame Up to 8 days post-dose
Secondary outcome
Percentage of participants who experience one or more treatment-emergent serious adverse events (SAEs)
Time frame Up to 8 days post-dose
Dates
| Start date | July 1, 2026 (actual) |
|---|---|
| Primary completion | February 1, 2027 (estimated) |
| Completion | February 1, 2027 (estimated) |
| First posted | June 12, 2026 (actual) |
| Last updated | August 20, 2026 |
| Results posted | Not stated in the registry record |
| Status last verified | August 2026 |
Actual means the event happened. Estimated means the sponsor expects it. The two mean different things.
Locations
113 sites are recruiting
United States
| Facility | City | State or region | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Albuquerque Clinical Trials | Albuquerque | New Mexico | Recruiting |
| Lehigh Center for Clinical Research | Allentown | Pennsylvania | Recruiting |
| Dent Neuro Institute, Buffalo | Amherst | New York | Recruiting |
| Michigan Headache Pain & Neurological Institute | Ann Arbor | Michigan | Recruiting |
| DelRicht Research | Atlanta | Georgia | Recruiting |
| Tekton Research | Austin | Texas | Recruiting |
| FutureSearch Trials of Neurology | Austin | Texas | Recruiting |
| Physicians to Children & Adolescents, PSC (Kentucky Pediatric / Adult Research) | Bardstown | Kentucky | Recruiting |
| Central Research Associates, LLC (CRA) dba Flourish Research | Birmingham | Alabama | Recruiting |
| Boston Clinical Trials - Alcanza | Boston | Massachusetts | Recruiting |
| Pantheon Clinical Research | Bountiful | Utah | Recruiting |
| SPRI Clinical Trials, LLC | Brooklyn | New York | Recruiting |
| IMMUNOe Research Centers | Centennial | Colorado | Recruiting |
| Crescent City Headache & Neurology Center | Chalmette | Louisiana | Recruiting |
| TrialSphere | Chandler | Arizona | Recruiting |
| OnSite Clinical Solutions | Charlotte | North Carolina | Recruiting |
| WR-ClinSearch, LLC | Chattanooga | Tennessee | Recruiting |
| Chicago Headache Center & Research Institute | Chicago | Illinois | Recruiting |
| Cedar Crosse Research Center | Chicago | Illinois | Recruiting |
| StudyMetrix Research | City of Saint Peters | Missouri | Recruiting |
| MCB Clinical Research Centers | Colorado Springs | Colorado | Recruiting |
| Axiom Research, LLC | Colton | California | Recruiting |
| Hometown Research | Columbus | Ohio | Recruiting |
| True North Neurology | Commack | New York | Recruiting |
| ProScience Research Group | Culver City | California | Recruiting |
| Horizon Clinical Research and Gill Neuroscience | Cypress | Texas | Recruiting |
| APD Clinical Research | Cypress | Texas | Recruiting |
| FutureSearch Trials of Dallas, LP | Dallas | Texas | Recruiting |
| J. Lewis Research, Inc. / Foothill Family Clinic Draper | Draper | Utah | Recruiting |
| OK Clinical Research, LLC | Edmond | Oklahoma | Recruiting |
| Leading Edge Research LA, LLC | Encino | California | Recruiting |
| Healthcare Research Network II, LLC | Flossmoor | Illinois | Recruiting |
| Advanced Neurosciences Research | Fort Collins | Colorado | Recruiting |
| Guildford Neurologic Research Partners, LLC | Greensboro | North Carolina | Recruiting |
| Headache Wellness Center | Greensboro | North Carolina | Recruiting |
| DelRicht Research | Gulfport | Mississippi | Recruiting |
| Healthcare Research Network | Hazelwood | Missouri | Recruiting |
| DM Clinical Research | Houston | Texas | Recruiting |
| Victorium Clinical Research | Houston | Texas | Recruiting |
| Axiom Research, Orange County | Irvine | California | Recruiting |
| AMR Clinical - Kansas City | Kansas City | Missouri | Recruiting |
| Clinical Investigation Specialists, Inc. | Kenosha | Wisconsin | Recruiting |
| GMG Clinical Research, LLC dba Radiance Clinical Research | Lampasas | Texas | Recruiting |
| Wake Research Las Vegas Rainbow | Las Vegas | Nevada | Recruiting |
| IMA Clinical Research - Las Vegas | Las Vegas | Nevada | Recruiting |
| Excel Clinical Research | Las Vegas | Nevada | Recruiting |
| AMR Clinical - Las Vegas | Las Vegas | Nevada | Recruiting |
| Redbird Research | Las Vegas | Nevada | Recruiting |
| CTI Clinical Research Center | Lexington | Kentucky | Recruiting |
| AMR Clinical - Lexington | Lexington | Kentucky | Recruiting |
63 further sites are listed in the registry record.
Study documents
No documents are linked in this registry record.
Changes over time
- August 20, 2026
Site removed
1 site removed (113 total)
114113
- August 5, 2026
Site removed
1 site removed (114 total)
115114