Literature DB >> 24527745

Improving the classification of migraine subtypes: an empirical approach based on factor mixture models in the American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study.

Richard B Lipton1, Daniel Serrano, Jelena M Pavlovic, Aubrey N Manack, Michael L Reed, Catherine C Turkel, Dawn C Buse.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Refine the classification of migraine subtypes by applying factor mixture models (FMM) to a large population sample of people with headache.
BACKGROUND: Current classification of primary headache disorders is symptom-based and uses somewhat arbitrary boundaries developed by expert consensus. Symptom profiles and headache frequency are used to distinguish among probable migraine (PM), episodic migraine (EM), high-frequency episodic migraine (HFEM), and chronic migraine (CM). Herein, we used statistical approaches to parse the heterogeneity in the broad group of persons with migraine and test the hypothesis that the groups that emerge differ in prognosis.
METHODS: The American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention study mailed surveys to a sample of 120,000 US households selected to represent the US population in 2004. Follow-up surveys were sent to a random sample of 24,000 respondents with "severe headache" on an annual basis from 2005 to 2009. People meeting International Classification of Headache Disorders, Second Edition, criteria for migraine were classified as EM (<15 headache days/month) and CM (≥15 headache days/month) based on modified Silberstein-Lipton criteria. The EM group was subdivided into HFEM (10 to 14 headache days/month) and low-frequency episodic migraine (LFEM; <10 headache days/month). Factor mixture models (FMM) identified 5 subgroups of migraine (taxa) using data from the 2005 survey on the severity of migraine symptoms, average migraine pain intensity, headache-related disability, cutaneous allodynia and depression, as well as monthly headache and migraine frequency as determinants of class membership. We assessed the validity of these taxa by examining the distribution of clinical diagnoses at cross-section and the rate of CM onset within these groups.
RESULTS: Data from the 2005 American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention survey were used for the FMM and data from the 2006-2009 surveys were used to assess prognosis of groups defined based on FMM. In total, 12,860 participants were eligible for classification analysis, including 10,162 with LFEM and 601 with HFEM, 1302 with probable migraine, and 795 with CM. Of these, 3152 (24.5%), 1076 (8.4%), 3896 (30.3%), 2251 (17.5%), and 2485 (19.3%) were assigned to Taxons 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Overall, there was a strong association between taxon assignment and clinical diagnosis. As the most prevalent disorder in the sample, EM was the largest contributor to each of the 5 taxa, constituting more than 80% of each group other than Taxon 2. Taxon 2 was enriched with the most severe spectrum of migraine including the highest concentrations of CM (28.4%) and HFEM (22.6%), whereas Taxon 5 represented the least severe end of the migraine spectrum including the lowest concentrations of CM (0%) and HFEM (0.08%). Validity of taxon assignment was tested by the ability of taxon membership to predict clinical course. For Taxon 2, 22% of those free of CM at baseline developed it. For Taxon 5, less than 2% of CM-free Taxon 5 members developed it.
CONCLUSION: Statistically based classification using FMM extends traditional clinical syndrome-based diagnosis. FMM can serve as an important tool to parse phenotypic heterogeneity and identify natural migraine subgroups. This approach may improve our ability to diagnosis migraine, to select initial therapy, to predict prognosis, and to discover biomarkers and genes.
© 2014 American Headache Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biophenotypes; chronic migraine; diagnosis; episodic migraine; factor mixture models; latent class analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24527745     DOI: 10.1111/head.12332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Headache        ISSN: 0017-8748            Impact factor:   5.887


  11 in total

1.  Predictors of Short-Term Prognosis While in Pediatric Headache Care: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Serena L Orr; Abigail Turner; Marielle A Kabbouche; Paul S Horn; Hope L O'Brien; Joanne Kacperski; Susan LeCates; Shannon White; Jessica Weberding; Mimi N Miller; Scott W Powers; Andrew D Hershey
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 5.887

Review 2.  Are Episodic and Chronic Migraine One Disease or Two?

Authors:  Reuben Burshtein; Aaron Burshtein; Joshua Burshtein; Noah Rosen
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2015-12

Review 3.  Do trigeminal autonomic cephalalgias represent primary diagnoses or points on a continuum?

Authors:  Larry Charleston
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2015-06

4.  Accurate Classification of Chronic Migraine via Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Todd J Schwedt; Catherine D Chong; Teresa Wu; Nathan Gaw; Yinlin Fu; Jing Li
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 5.887

Review 5.  Neurobiology of migraine progression.

Authors:  Wanakorn Rattanawong; Alan Rapoport; Anan Srikiatkhachorn
Journal:  Neurobiol Pain       Date:  2022-06-09

6.  Are migraine and tension-type headache diagnostic types or points on a severity continuum? An exploration of the latent taxometric structure of headache.

Authors:  Dana P Turner; Todd A Smitherman; Anna Katherine Black; Donald B Penzien; John A H Porter; Kenneth R Lofland; Timothy T Houle
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 7.926

7.  Migraine progression in subgroups of migraine based on comorbidities: Results of the CaMEO Study.

Authors:  Richard B Lipton; Kristina M Fanning; Dawn C Buse; Vincent T Martin; Lee B Hohaia; Aubrey Manack Adams; Michael L Reed; Peter J Goadsby
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 9.910

8.  Association of Genetic Variants With Migraine Subclassified by Clinical Symptoms in Adult Females.

Authors:  Joe Kossowsky; Megan S Schuler; Franco Giulianini; Charles B Berde; Ben Reis; Paul M Ridker; Julie E Buring; Tobias Kurth; Daniel I Chasman
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 4.086

9.  Reliability and Validity of Turkish Version of Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) in Patients with Migraine.

Authors:  Pınar Yalinay Dikmen; Mumine Bozdağ; Mumin Güneş; Seda Koşak; Bahar Taşdelen; Derya Uluduz; Aynur Ozge
Journal:  Noro Psikiyatr Ars       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 1.339

10.  A Comparison of the Chronic Migraine Epidemiology and Outcomes (CaMEO) Study and American Migraine Prevalence and Prevention (AMPP) Study: Demographics and Headache-Related Disability.

Authors:  Richard B Lipton; Aubrey Manack Adams; Dawn C Buse; Kristina M Fanning; Michael L Reed
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 5.887

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.