Todd J Schwedt1, Bing Si2, Jing Li2, Teresa Wu2, Catherine D Chong1. 1. Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ. 2. School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current subclassification of migraine is according to headache frequency and aura status. The variability in migraine symptoms, disease course, and response to treatment suggest the presence of additional heterogeneity or subclasses within migraine. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to subclassify migraine via a data-driven approach, identifying latent factors by jointly exploiting multiple sets of brain structural features obtained via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Migraineurs (n = 66) and healthy controls (n = 54) had brain MRI measurements of cortical thickness, cortical surface area, and volumes for 68 regions. A multimodality factor mixture model was used to subclassify MRIs and to determine the brain structural factors that most contributed to the subclassification. Clinical characteristics of subjects in each subgroup were compared. RESULTS: Automated MRI classification divided the subjects into two subgroups. Migraineurs in subgroup #1 had more severe allodynia symptoms during migraines (6.1 ± 5.3 vs. 3.6 ± 3.2, P = .03), more years with migraine (19.2 ± 11.3 years vs 13 ± 8.3 years, P = .01), and higher Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scores (25 ± 22.9 vs 15.7 ± 12.2, P = .04). There were not differences in headache frequency or migraine aura status between the two subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Data-driven subclassification of brain MRIs based upon structural measurements identified two subgroups. Amongst migraineurs, the subgroups differed in allodynia symptom severity, years with migraine, and migraine-related disability. Since allodynia is associated with this imaging-based subclassification of migraine and prior publications suggest that allodynia impacts migraine treatment response and disease prognosis, future migraine diagnostic criteria could consider allodynia when defining migraine subgroups.
BACKGROUND: The current subclassification of migraine is according to headache frequency and aura status. The variability in migraine symptoms, disease course, and response to treatment suggest the presence of additional heterogeneity or subclasses within migraine. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to subclassify migraine via a data-driven approach, identifying latent factors by jointly exploiting multiple sets of brain structural features obtained via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS:Migraineurs (n = 66) and healthy controls (n = 54) had brain MRI measurements of cortical thickness, cortical surface area, and volumes for 68 regions. A multimodality factor mixture model was used to subclassify MRIs and to determine the brain structural factors that most contributed to the subclassification. Clinical characteristics of subjects in each subgroup were compared. RESULTS: Automated MRI classification divided the subjects into two subgroups. Migraineurs in subgroup #1 had more severe allodynia symptoms during migraines (6.1 ± 5.3 vs. 3.6 ± 3.2, P = .03), more years with migraine (19.2 ± 11.3 years vs 13 ± 8.3 years, P = .01), and higher Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scores (25 ± 22.9 vs 15.7 ± 12.2, P = .04). There were not differences in headache frequency or migraine aura status between the two subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Data-driven subclassification of brain MRIs based upon structural measurements identified two subgroups. Amongst migraineurs, the subgroups differed in allodynia symptom severity, years with migraine, and migraine-related disability. Since allodynia is associated with this imaging-based subclassification of migraine and prior publications suggest that allodynia impacts migraine treatment response and disease prognosis, future migraine diagnostic criteria could consider allodynia when defining migraine subgroups.
Authors: Bruce Fischl; David H Salat; Evelina Busa; Marilyn Albert; Megan Dieterich; Christian Haselgrove; Andre van der Kouwe; Ron Killiany; David Kennedy; Shuna Klaveness; Albert Montillo; Nikos Makris; Bruce Rosen; Anders M Dale Journal: Neuron Date: 2002-01-31 Impact factor: 17.173
Authors: S Khalfa; S Dubal; E Veuillet; F Perez-Diaz; R Jouvent; L Collet Journal: ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec Date: 2002 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.538
Authors: Farooq Husain Maniyar; Till Sprenger; Teshamae Monteith; Christoph Schankin; Peter James Goadsby Journal: Brain Date: 2013-11-25 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Ed H B M Gronenschild; Petra Habets; Heidi I L Jacobs; Ron Mengelers; Nico Rozendaal; Jim van Os; Machteld Marcelis Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-06-01 Impact factor: 3.240
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
Authors: Gyöngyi Kökönyei; Attila Galambos; Natália Kocsel; Edina Szabó; Andrea Edit Édes; Kinga Gecse; Dániel Baksa; Dorottya Pap; Lajos R Kozák; György Bagdy; Gabriella Juhász Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jennifer R Charlton; Yanzhe Xu; Teresa Wu; Kim A deRonde; Jillian L Hughes; Shourik Dutta; Gavin T Oxley; Aleksandra Cwiek; Helen P Cathro; Nathan P Charlton; Mark R Conaway; Edwin J Baldelomar; Neda Parvin; Kevin M Bennett Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 10.612