Objective This article estimates the incidence and fatality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and identifies potential risk factors for fatality in patients with active epilepsy. Methods This is a cross-sectional observational study of patients with active epilepsy and COVID-19. A control group was used to compare the cumulative incidence and case-fatality rate (CFR). The main outcomes of the study were cumulative incidence, defined as number of patients with active epilepsy and COVID-19 admitted to an emergency department divided by the total number of patients with epilepsy at risk, and CFR based on the number of deaths during the enrollment period. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate risk factors for fatality in patients with active epilepsy. Results Of the 1,537 patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 21 (1.3%) had active epilepsy. The cumulative incidence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of COVID-19 in patients with epilepsy was higher (1.2% [0.6–2.4]) compared to the population without epilepsy (0.5% [0.5–0.5]). In reverse transcription PCR–positive patients, there were no significant differences in CFR in patients with active epilepsy compared to patients without epilepsy (33.3% vs 8.3%; p = 0.266). Of the 21 patients with active epilepsy, 5 (23%) died. In multivariate analysis, the factor associated with fatality in patients with active epilepsy was hypertension (odds ratio [OR] 2.8 [95% CI 1.3–21.6]). In another model, age (OR 1.0 [95% CI 1.0–1.1]) and epilepsy (OR 5.1 [95% CI 1.3–24.0]) were associated with fatality during hospitalization. Conclusion COVID-19 cumulative incidence was higher in patients with active epilepsy. Epilepsy was associated with fatality during hospitalization. Hypertension was associated with fatality in patients with epilepsy.

Migraine-related stigma is a pervasive issue impacting nearly half of chronic migraine patients, with significant consequences for their quality of life, disability and mental health. Despite its profound effects, migraine stigma remains under-recognised in both clinical practice and research. This narrative review explores the three primary types of stigmas affecting migraine patients: public, structural and internalised. Public stigma involves negative societal attitudes and stereotypes that trivialise the condition. Structural stigma is reflected in policies that restrict access to necessary care and resources. Internalised stigma occurs when patients absorb these negative views, leading to self-blame and diminished self-worth. Addressing these different types of stigmas is crucial for improving the understanding, diagnosis and treatment of migraine. Educational efforts, advocacy and policy reform are essential strategies in this context. A deep understanding of stigma is vital for developing effective interventions that enhance clinical management and patient quality of life. Ultimately, reducing stigma can lead to better health outcomes and a more comprehensive approach to migraine care.

Migraine patients over 65 years have been excluded from pivotal anti-CGRP monoclonal antibody trials leaving limited real-life data on effectiveness and safety in this population. This review aims to summarize available evidence on treatment response and safety for older patients. A PubMed and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) search identified studies on anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients with migraine over 65 up to October 2024. The review focuses on headache outcomes like reduction in monthly migraine days or monthly headache days, response rates (30%, 50%, 75%) and adverse effects of this specific population and/or against placebo, standard care, or younger patients. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool. All eligible studies were included, along with additional articles presented narratively. Data from clinical trials and post-hoc analyses show comparable efficacy and safety between older and younger patients. Similarly, early real-life studies support the use of anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies in patients over 65 years, showing similar response rates, reductions in monthly migraine days and adverse effects. Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies should likely be offered to patients over 65 although available evidence remains limited. Further studies analyzing specific data from this subgroup are necessary.

Several factors contribute to stigma associated with migraine, such as the lack of objective diagnostic tests and biomarkers or traditional gender stereotypes. Patients with migraine can perceive the stigma from different sources: other people (public stigma), organisations (structural stigma) or themselves (internalised stigma), and even neurologists may harbour stigma towards patients with headache. At a social level, repeated migraine attacks lead to restricted participation in work and family life, inducing anxiety, depression and reduced self-esteem. Regarding the workplace, the impact of migraine on their proffesional lives is significant. Individuals who were acquainted with people with migraine at job tended to behave more negatively towards them, and over half of the managers did not consider headache as a valid reason for being absent from work. Effectiveness at work is reduced during a migraine attack, but also because of the interictal symptoms these patients go through. Regarding presenteeism, migraine was the second most expensive disease in the USA, with an annual cost of approximately $240 billion. For all these facts, destigmatisation should take place at the level of healthcare providers, patients and the general population. Implementing educational programmes, training more neurologists in a specialised headache approach, listening to the patients and taking their concerns seriously, or recognizing the disability that the disease causes are strategies that may help minimizing the stigma of migraine.