PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Richard B Lipton

Publications and source records attributed to Richard B Lipton.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
PubMed2005

Comorbidity of migraine.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Comorbidity refers to the greater than coincidental association of separate conditions in the same individuals. Historically, a number of conditions have been noted to be comorbid with migraine, notably psychiatric disorders (anxiety, depression, panic disorder), epilepsy, asthma, and some congenital heart defects. Migraine sufferers have increased medical costs overall compared with others of the same sex and age, even after considering the cost of specific migraine treatment. Thus, estimates of the burden of migraine often include the costs of conditions comorbid with it. RECENT FINDINGS: Conditions may be comorbid through a variety of mechanisms. Comorbidity may be an artifact of diagnostic uncertainty when symptom profiles overlap or when diagnosis is not based on objective markers. Comorbidity may arise due to unidirectional causality, such as migraine resulting in blood pressure changes due to headache-specific treatment. Finally, conditions may be comorbid because of shared genetic or other factors that increase the risk of both conditions. In such cases, understanding these shared risk factors may lead to greater understanding of the fundamental mechanisms of migraine. SUMMARY: In this article, we will review recent developments related to migraine comorbidity. We will emphasize findings related to the comorbidity of migraine with clinical and sub-clinical vascular brain lesions, congenital heart defects, coronary heart disease, psychiatric illness, and other pain conditions.

Comorbidity↗
PubMed2005

Migraine therapy: a survey of pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns.

OBJECTIVE: Study pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns with regard to migraine therapy. BACKGROUND: Pharmacists interact with headache sufferers at least 53,000 times daily, thus are well positioned to improve the less than optimal medication management of these disorders. Methods.-Two hundred self-administered surveys, distributed at a migraine symposium, assessing pharmacists' demographic characteristics and level of agreement or disagreement with treatment approaches were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 171 useable surveys (86%) were received. Of the sample, 35% were community pharmacists, 29% were hospital pharmacists, and the remainder were from other work environments. Exclusively among community pharmacists, 80% feel that headache is an important part of their practice, 85% make between one and five over-the-counter (OTC) headache product suggestions per day, and 12% make six or more daily OTC recommendations. Among all the sample's pharmacists, more than half feel migraine patients should try OTC drugs prior to prescription medications, only half ask patients about headache-related morbidity, and one-third feel migraine-specific medications should be reserved only for patients who initially fail nonspecific drugs. Few pharmacists utilize published migraine treatment guidelines. Approximately two-thirds of pharmacists do not feel migraine is a neurobiological illness. The majority is comfortable with their ability to identify people needing a physician referral. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show pharmacists, particularly those in community pharmacies, interact with headache sufferers multiple times daily. Most pharmacists were neither familiar with nor practice migraine therapies endorsed by evidence-based guidelines. Further training of pharmacists is warranted.

Drug Prescriptions↗
PubMed2005

Aspirin is efficacious for the treatment of acute migraine.

BACKGROUND: More than 50% of migraine sufferers rely on over-the-counter medications for the treatment of migraine. Along with other over-the-counter products, aspirin is considered by the US Headache Consortium to be an option for first-line migraine treatment. This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of aspirin versus placebo for the acute treatment of a single acute attack of migraine. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy of a single, 1000-mg dose of aspirin for the treatment of acute moderate to severe migraine, with or without aura. Subjects recorded all study evaluations in a diary at baseline and at .5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 24 hours after treatment. Pain was rated on a 4-point ordinal scale from no pain to severe pain. The primary efficacy end point was headache response at 2 hours. Secondary efficacy parameters included reduction of nausea, photophobia and phonophobia, pain intensity difference, and headache recurrence at 24 hours. RESULTS: Of 485 subjects enrolled, 409 took study medication and 401 treated a confirmed migraine attack (201 with aspirin and 200 with placebo). Baseline demographic and migraine characteristics were not significantly different between groups. The 2-hour headache response rate was 52% with aspirin versus 34% with placebo (P<.001). Aspirin was significantly more effective than placebo for pain reduction beginning 1 hour after dosing (P<.001) and continuing throughout the 6-hour evaluation period. Significantly (P<.05), more subjects were pain free from the 1-hour evaluation through the 6-hour evaluation. Of the aspirin-treated subjects, 20% were pain free at 2 hours versus only 6% of placebo-treated subjects. At 24 hours, the headache recurrence rate was 21.8% for aspirin (23 of 105 subjects) and 27.7% for placebo (19 of 68 subjects). Only 34% of aspirin-treated subjects needed rescue medication at 24 hours compared with 52% of placebo-treated subjects (P<.001). Aspirin was well tolerated, and adverse events were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that aspirin is safe and effective for treatment of acute migraine in appropriately selected patients.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

The classification of chronic daily headache in adolescents--a comparison between the second edition of the international classification of headache disorders and alternative diagnostic criteria.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the second edition of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-2) and the Silberstein-Lipton (S-L) criteria in the classification of adolescents with chronic daily headache (CDH). METHODS: We reviewed the clinical records and the headache diaries of 170 adolescents (13 to 17 years) seen between 1998 and 2003 at a headache center. Relevant information was transferred to a standardized form that included operational criteria for the ICHD-2. CDH subtypes were classified according the criteria proposed by S-L into transformed migraine (TM) with (TM+) and without medication overuse (TM-), chronic tension-type headache (CTTH), new daily persistent headache (NDPH), and hemicrania continua (HC). RESULTS: From the 69 patients with TM- according the S-L criteria, most (71%) could be classified as chronic migraine (CM), while a minority of patients required a combination of diagnosis, mainly migraine and CTTH (14.4%). Of the patients with TM+, just 39.6% met the criteria for probable CM (PCM) with probable medication overuse (PMO). If instead of 15 migraine days per month, we considered 15 or more days of migraine or probable migraine, 84% of the subjects with TM- and 68.7% of those with TM+ could be classified. Of the 27 subjects classified as NDPH without medication overuse according to the S-L system, the majority (51.2%) were also classified as NDPH according the ICHD-2. Interestingly, three (11.1% of the subjects with NDPH without medication overuse) were classified as CM in the ICHD-2 because these patients had an abrupt onset of 15 or more days of migraine per month. All patients with NDPH with medication overuse according to the S-L criteria required a combination of diagnoses in the ICHD-2. All subjects with CTTH received a single diagnosis in both classification systems. CONCLUSIONS: (i) Among adolescents with TM, the majority (58.1%) could be classified as CM, according to the ICHD-2. These results were driven by TM without medication overuse. (ii) If the ICHD-2 criteria for CM are revised to require 15 days of migraine or probable migraine, the proportion of patients with TM- who meet the criteria for CM increases from 71% to 84%; for TM+, the proportion with probable chronic migraine and PMO increases from 30% to 68%. (iii) About half of the patients with NDPH according to the S-L criteria have too many migraine features to meet ICHD-2 criteria for NDPH.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Migraine: epidemiology, impact, and risk factors for progression.

Migraine is a chronic and sometimes progressive disorder characterized by recurrent episodes of headache and associated symptoms. This article reviews the epidemiology of and the risk factors for migraine described in population studies, and discusses the burden of disease and the socioeconomic costs of migraine. In the years prior to puberty, migraine is more common among boys than girls. By the onset of puberty, migraine is more prevalent in girls, and by the late teens, females are about twice as likely to suffer from migraine as males. The prevalence of migraine peaks in both sexes during the most productive years of adulthood (age 25 to 55 years) and, in the United States, the prevalence is higher in individuals of lower socioeconomic status. Direct costs of migraine include the cost of migraine medications and health care expenses. Indirect costs associated with migraine include reduced productivity due to absenteeism and reduced performance while at work. Recent evidence suggests that a subgroup of migraine patients may have a clinically progressive disorder. Future epidemiologic studies should focus on identifying patients who are at higher risk for progression and on assessing the impact of intervention strategies on disease progression.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Guidelines for trials of behavioral treatments for recurrent headache, first edition: American Headache Society Behavioral Clinical Trials Workgroup.

Guidelines for design of clinical trials evaluating behavioral headache treatments were developed to facilitate production of quality research evaluating behavioral therapies for management of primary headache disorders. These guidelines were produced by a Workgroup of headache researchers under auspices of the American Headache Society. The guidelines are complementary to and modeled after guidelines for pharmacological trials published by the International Headache Society, but they address methodologic considerations unique to behavioral and other nonpharmacological treatments. Explicit guidelines for evaluating behavioral headache therapies are needed as the optimal methodology for behavioral (and other nonpharmacologic) trials necessarily differs from the preferred methodology for drug trials. In addition, trials comparing and integrating drug and behavioral therapies present methodological challenges not addressed by guidelines for pharmacologic research. These guidelines address patient selection, trial design for behavioral treatments and for comparisons across multiple treatment modalities (eg, behavioral vs pharmacologic), evaluation of results, and research ethics. Although developed specifically for behavioral therapies, the guidelines may apply to the design of clinical trials evaluating many forms of nonpharmacologic therapies for headache.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2004

Caffeine as a risk factor for chronic daily headache: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the possible association of dietary caffeine consumption and medicinal caffeine use with chronic daily headache (CDH). METHODS: Population-based cases and controls were recruited from the Baltimore, MD, Philadelphia, PA, and Atlanta, GA, metropolitan areas. Controls (n = 507) reported 2 to 104 headache days/year, and cases (n = 206) reported > or =180 headache days/year. Current and past dietary caffeine consumption and medication use for headache were based on detailed self-report. High caffeine exposure was defined as being in the upper quartile of dietary consumption or using a caffeine-containing over-the-counter analgesic as the preferred headache treatment. RESULTS: In comparison with episodic headache controls, CDH cases were more likely overall to have been high caffeine consumers before onset of CDH (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50, p = 0.05). No association was found for current caffeine consumption (i.e., post CDH) (OR = 1.36, p = 0.12). In secondary analyses, associations were confined to younger (age <40) women (OR = 2.0, p = 0.02) and those with chronic episodic (as opposed to chronic continuous) headaches (OR = 1.69, p = 0.01), without physician consultation (OR = 1.67, p = 0.04) and of recent (<2 years) onset (OR = 1.67, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Dietary and medicinal caffeine consumption appears to be a modest risk factor for chronic daily headache onset, regardless of headache type.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

The epidemiology and impact of migraine.

Migraine is a highly prevalent headache disorder that has a substantial impact on the individual and society. In this article, we review the burden of migraine, emphasizing the population-based studies that used standardized diagnostic criteria. We highlight descriptive epidemiology, burden of disease, patterns of diagnosis, and treatment. We focus on the epidemiology and burden of probable migraine, a subtype of migraine where just one clinical feature is missing. We finish by describing approaches to improving healthcare delivery for migraine and probable migraine. Although migraine is a remarkably common cause of temporary disability, many migraineurs, even those with disabling headache, have never consulted a physician for the problem. Prevalence is highest in women, in persons between the ages of 25 and 55 years, and, at least in the United States, in individuals from low-income households. Nonetheless, prevalence is high in groups other than these high-risk groups. Probable migraine is a prevalent form of migraine, and like migraine with and without aura it produces decrements in health-related quality of life and increments in disability relative to control subjects.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2004

Prioritizing treatment attributes and their impact on selecting an oral triptan: results from the TRIPSTAR Project.

Seven oral triptans, which differ on a range of attributes important for treatment selection, are now available for treating migraine. US neurologists were surveyed to assess the relative importance of treatment attributes, prespecified by clinical relevance and availability of controlled study data, for selecting among oral triptans. Using a multiattribute decision model, we combined these data on the importance of treatment attributes with information on the relative performance of the oral triptans derived from a recent meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials.

Animals↗
PubMed2004

Priorities for triptan treatment attributes and the implications for selecting an oral triptan for acute migraine: a study of US primary care physicians (the TRIPSTAR Project).

BACKGROUND: Physicians treating patients with migraine can now choose from among 7 triptans, which differ on a range of attributes that may be important for treatment selection. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to determine the relative importance of treatment attributes of the available triptans and assess their impact on deciding the most appropriate treatment for a particular patient with migraine. METHODS: As part of the TRIPSTAR project, US primary care physicians were surveyed to elicit their views on the relative importance of a prespecified set of treatment attributes for making treatment choices in clinical practice. The treatment attributes assessed were those for which data from controlled clinical trials were available for subsequent comparison. The resulting attribute-importance weights were then combined with data on the performance of individual triptans across these attributes in a multiattribute decision model to assist selection of an oral triptan. RESULTS: Efficacy attributes were considered more important than tolerability or consistency of effect in selecting an oral triptan. For triptan-naive but not triptan-experienced patients, tolerability was considered significantly more important than consistency (30% [95% CI, 27%-34%] vs 21% [19%-24%]). Sustained pain-free status and freedom from cardiovascular (chest) adverse events were the most important efficacy and tolerability attributes for both patient categories. When the relative importance of the treatment attributes was combined in a multiattribute decision model with meta-analysis data from controlled trials, almotriptan, eletriptan, and rizatriptan were significantly closer to the hypothetical ideal triptan than the reference product, sumatriptan 100 mg. CONCLUSION: Multiattribute decision-making models (such as that used in the TRIPSTAR project) that determine and apply the relative importance of treatment attributes to drug selection have considerable potential value as a decision support tool in the treatment of acute migraine.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2004

Einstein's Institute for Aging Research: collaborative and programmatic approaches in the search for successful aging.

While aging research has been progressing rapidly recently, the involvement of multiple organs and systems in the aging process has hampered a comprehensive assessment of some of aging's basic features. In response to this problem, the Institute for Aging Research at Einstein did not emerge out of the traditional geriatric programs, but through enhanced collaborations between basic and clinical scientists who had successful careers in the research of a specific organ or system. The strength of the Center derives from three specific programs focused on a specific area of aging research. The programs focus on the Biology of Aging, Genetics of Aging and the Aging Brain. Each programmatic area is characterized by collaboration between basic and clinical scientists. In addition to addressing the traditional questions about the mechanisms of involution, the programs also examine the mechanisms for exceptional and healthy longevity. The mechanisms favoring longevity are being examined in models of caloric restriction (biological nutrient sensing pathways), in human centenarians (longevity genes), and in longitudinal studies identifying humans who maintain excellent cognitive function (protection from Alzheimer's). Each programmatic area is enhanced by common research core laboratory and by the creation of a scientific training program for new investigators. In addition to the investigators involved in the program project, the Institute for Aging Research includes other investigators with funded aging research who participate in journal clubs, seminars, and in specific collaborations. We suggest that this Institute serve as a model that gerontologists at other institutions should consider as they evaluate opportunities for collaborative, multi-disciplinary approaches to enhance aging research.

Academies and Institutes↗