Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre-including this research content-immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

No abstract

Background Vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are used to reduce the risk of developing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite the significant benefits in terms of reduced risk of hospitalization and death, different adverse events may present after vaccination: among them, headache is one of the most common, but nowadays there is no summary presentation of its incidence and no description of its main features. Methods We searched PubMed and EMBASE covering the period between January 1st 2020 and August 6th, 2021, looking for record in English and with an abstract and using three main search terms (with specific variations): COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination; headache/adverse events. We selected manuscript including information on subjects developing headache after injection, and such information had to be derived from a structured form (i.e. no free reporting). Pooled estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Analyses were carried out by vaccine vs. placebo, by first vs. second dose, and by mRNA-based vs. “traditional” vaccines; finally, we addressed the impact of age and gender on post-vaccine headache onset. Results Out of 9338 records, 84 papers were included in the review, accounting for 1.57 million participants, 94% of whom received BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1. Headache was generally the third most common AE: it was detected in 22% (95% CI 18–27%) of subjects after the first dose of vaccine and in 29% (95% CI 23–35%) after the second, with an extreme heterogeneity. Those receiving placebo reported headache in 10–12% of cases. No differences were detected across different vaccines or by mRNA-based vs. “traditional” ones. None of the studies reported information on headache features. A lower prevalence of headache after the first injection of BNT162b2 among older participants was shown. Conclusions Our results show that vaccines are associated to a two-fold risk of developing headache within 7 days from injection, and the lack of difference between vaccine types enable to hypothesize that headache is secondary to systemic immunological reaction than to a vaccine-type specific reaction. Some descriptions report onset within the first 24 h and that in around one-third of the cases, headache has migraine-like features with pulsating quality, phono and photophobia; in 40–60% of the cases aggravation with activity is observed. The majority of patients used some medication to treat headache, the one perceived as the most effective being acetylsalicylic acid.

Objectives To investigate the safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in people with epilepsy (PwE). Methods In this multicentric observational cohort study, we recruited adult patients (age > 18 years old) with epilepsy who attended the Outpatient Epilepsy Clinic from 1st July to 30th October 2021. We administered to the patients a structured questionnaire and interview on demographic and epilepsy characteristics, current treatment, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine characteristics, post-vaccine seizure relapse, other side effect, variation of sleep habits, caffeine, or alcohol intake. Seizure frequency worsening was defined as a ratio between mean monthly frequency post-vaccination and mean monthly frequency pre-vaccination superior to 1. Patients were categorized in two groups: patients with seizure frequency worsening (WORSE) and patients with seizure stability (STABLE). Results A total of 358 people participated with a mean age of 47.46 ± 19.04. Focal seizure (79.1%), generalized epilepsy (20.4%), and unknown types of epilepsy (0.5%) were detected among participants. In total, 31 (8.7%) people expressed that they were not willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine; 302 patients (92.35%) did not experience an increase in the seizure frequency (STABLE-group) whereas 25 patients (7.65%) had a seizure worsening (WORSE-group). Post-vaccine seizures occurred mainly in the 7 days following the administration of the vaccine. Patients in the WORSE-group were treated with a mean higher number of anti-seizure medication (ASMs) (p = 0.003) and had a higher pre-vaccine seizure frequency (p = 0.009) compared with patients in the STABLE-group. Drug-resistant epilepsy was also associated with seizure worsening (p = 0.01). One-year pre-vaccination seizure frequency pattern demonstrated that patients in the WORSE-group had a higher frequency pattern (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis of the vaccinated group showed that only the seizure frequency pattern (confidence interval [CI] = 1.257–2.028; p < 0.001) was significantly associated with seizure worsening. Conclusion In our cohort of vaccinated PwE, only a little percentage had a transient short-term increase of seizure frequency. The present study demonstrates that COVID-19 vaccines have a good safety and tolerability profile in the short term in PwE.

Neurological sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection have already been reported, but there is insufficient data about the impact of the pandemic on the management of the patients with chronic neurological diseases. We aim to analyze the effect of COVID-19 pandemic and social restriction rules on these fragile patients. Methods: Patients with chronic neurologic diseases routinely followed at the outpatient clinic of Gemelli University Hospital, Rome, were assessed for symptoms suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the pandemic period, consequences of social restrictions, and neurological disease features, concomitant medical conditions, current medical and disease-specific treatments. Data source: a dedicated telephone survey designed to encompass questions on COVID-19 symptoms and on pandemic effects in chronic neurologic conditions. Results: Overall, 2,167 individuals were analyzed: 63 patients reported contact with COVID-19 positive cases, 41 performed the swab, and 2 symptomatic patients tested positive for COVID-19 (0.09%). One hundred fifty-eight individuals (7%) needed urgent neurological care, deferred due to the pandemic; 641 patients (30%) suspended hospital treatments, physiotherapy or other support interventions; 405 individuals (19%) reported a subjective worsening of neurological symptoms. Conclusions: In our population, the presence of neurological chronic diseases did not increase the prevalence of COVID-19 infection. Nevertheless, the burden of neurological disorders has been worsened by the lockdown.

Pathological evidence of amyloid on nerve biopsy has been the gold standard for diagnosis in hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis polyneuropathy (hATTR-PN) for a long time. In this article, we reviewed the pathological findings of a large series of sural nerve biopsies from a cohort of hATTR-PN patients, collected by different Italian referral centers. Patients and Methods: We reviewed clinical and pathological data from hATTR-PN patients, diagnosed and followed in five Italian referral centers for peripheral neuropathies. Diagnosis was formulated after a positive genetic test for transthyretin (TTR) mutations. Sural nerve biopsy was performed according to standard protocols. Results: Sixty-nine sural nerve biopsies from hATTR-PN patients were examined. Congo red positive deposits were found in 73% of cases. Only the Phe64Leu mutation failed to show amyloid deposits in a high percentage of biopsies (54%), as already described. Unusual pathological findings, such as myelin abnormalities or inflammatory infiltrates, were detected in occasional cases. Conclusions: Even if no longer indicated to confirm hATTR-PN clinical suspicion, nerve biopsy remains, in expert hands, a rapid and inexpensive tool to detect amyloid deposition. In Italy, clinicians should be aware that a negative biopsy does not exclude hATTR-PN, particularly for Phe64Leu, one of the most frequent mutations in this country.

No abstract

Background and purpose Hereditary transthyretin (TTR) amyloidosis (ATTRv) is a dominantly inherited, adult‐onset, progressive, and fatal disease caused by mutations in the transthyretin gene. Therapeutic agents approved for this disease include the TTR stabilizer tafamidis and the gene‐silencing drugs patisiran and inotersen. Inotersen is an antisense oligonucleotide that suppresses the hepatic production of transthyretin. After European Medical Agency approval in 2018, an early‐access program was opened in Italy, and in this article, we present the long‐term outcome of a cohort of Italian ATTRv patients who received inotersen within this program. Methods This is a multicenter, observational, retrospective study of patients affected by ATTRv that started inotersen during the early‐access program. The primary end point was safety. Secondary end points included change from baseline in familial amyloid polyneuropathy (FAP) stage, Polyneuropathy Disability, Neuropathy Impairment Scale, Compound Autonomic Dysfunction Test, Norfolk Quality of Life–Diabetic Neuropathy, troponin, N‐terminal pro–brain natriuretic peptide, interventricular septum thickness, and body mass index. Results In total, 23 patients were enrolled. No patient permanently discontinued the treatment because of thrombocytopenia, and no cases of severe thrombocytopenia were observed. Five patients discontinued the treatment permanently because of voluntary withdrawal (two patients), renal failure after infective pyelonephritis, not related to inotersen, drug‐related hypotension, and amyloid‐negative crescentic glomerulonephritis. In seven patients, dosing frequency was reduced to every 2 weeks due to recurrent thrombocytopenia. Considering the FAP stage, only two patients worsened, whereas the other 21 patients remained stable until the last follow‐up available. Conclusions The long‐term safety profile of inotersen is favorable. Neurologic disease severity at baseline is the main factor associated with progression.