1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 15th April 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

The science of craniocervical instability and other spinal issues and their possible connection with ME/CFS - discussion thread

Discussion in 'ME/CFS research news' started by ME/CFS Skeptic, May 23, 2019.

Tags:
  1. Adrian

    Adrian Administrator Staff Member

    Messages:
    6,486
    Location:
    UK
    I think one of the arguments to NICE needs to be that all treatments need safety assessments and some form of harms reporting system (not just drug treatments). This should be true for CBT/GET or whatever other treatments are being proposed.

    I don't see that having a 'natural' label on it makes a treatment safe in anyway.
     
  2. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,500
    Location:
    London, UK
    Yes, I have made this point and mentioned a manuscript that should come out soon that highlights the failings in harm surveillance.
     
  3. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341


    Stanford researchers looking for ME/CFS patients with CCI

    June 19, 2019

    ...The aim is to compare how ME/CFS patients with CCI are similar to or differ from other ME/CFS patients and healthy controls, and to measure changes (if any) in patients pre — and post — surgery...

    and

    https://twitter.com/user/status/1141448004689252352
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2019
    hinterland, JohnM and Andy like this.
  4. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    I am missing something here?

    I don't know whether it is, but if the nanoneedle test* is being used for this pre and post op ME/CFS [sic] and CCI surgery study...

    the nanoneedle study was a pilot, using n=20 ME, CFS patients, n=20 healthy control, no sick controls and not yet subject to a replication study.

    How meaningful might results be if applied to another study group when the use of this test to distinguish between ME, CFS patients and healthy controls has not yet been replicated?


    *Edited to add: Trish received the following response to her email enquiry requesting further information:

     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2019
    alktipping, Esther12, Hutan and 14 others like this.
  5. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,307
    Location:
    UK
    It seems odd to simply give an e-mail address with no link to a Stanford site with the normal sort of information about recruiting for a study and what the study will involve. Jen say's it's an ongoing study...

    I am assuming for a proper study they would need to do a full ME/CFS and CCI diagnosis by appropriate experts, and take blood samples and collect other data for a range of tests initially and at follow ups. That will be expensive, so they presumably have the full funding arranged and ethical approval for the study. And they must surely have some sort of published plan/protocol for what they are going to test.
     
    alktipping, Helen, TigerLilea and 6 others like this.
  6. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    So this is presumably an "add on" to an existing study? I agree, it seems odd not to link to the existing study's protocol page.
     
  7. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    Also strikes me as odd that a member of the public is putting out a call for prospective study participants prior to Stanford, themselves, calling for potential participants.
     
  8. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,307
    Location:
    UK
    I have just sent this e-mail to the e-mail address given in Jen B's article. I'll post here what response I get:
     
    Ellie_Finesse, Sean, Sarah94 and 15 others like this.
  9. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    Well done, Trish.
     
  10. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,307
    Location:
    UK
    Automated reply:
    Edit: Since I put CCI in the subject line of the e-mail as Jen suggested, I expect I'll get an individual reply later.
     
  11. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341


    "They are looking for patients who:
    • Have been diagnosed with ME/CFS
    • Have been diagnosed with craniocervical instability (CCI)
    • Are pre-surgery, post-surgery, or not planning to have surgery"
     
    Liessa, Barry and Trish like this.
  12. Sid

    Sid Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,057
    Has this study been approved by the research ethics committee at Stanford?
     
  13. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,602
    Are Stanford now sub-grouping all different types of ME for purposes of comparison? Or is it just the one?
     
  14. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    The only information I have found, so far, for this additional study group is the content of the call from Jen Brea.
     
    Sid, Barry and vsou like this.
  15. Mij

    Mij Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,326
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 20, 2019
    Sean, sea, TiredSam and 3 others like this.
  16. Three Chord Monty

    Three Chord Monty Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    209
    I think we've lost this. Completely. ME/CFS is what Jen Brea says it is.

    It's been heading in this direction for a long time. We're almost completely there.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,827
    Location:
    Australia
    :rolleyes:

    It's pointless reading too much meaning from tweets like that.
     
    sb4, Esther12, Perrier and 4 others like this.
  18. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,307
    Location:
    UK
    The first of the copied tweets says:
    'Maybe someday others will suffer from it and it will be called Brea syndrome...' I took that to be a suggestion that Jen had a rare condition that maybe someone else might suffer some day, not that what Jen had is necessarily what the rest of us have.

    I wish Jen well, and hope the rest of us might find what's wrong with us sometime soon too. Since I don't have the symptom pattern described by the people who have had this surgery, I don't see it as relevant for me, but I'm pleased for them that their treatment has worked.
     
    Liessa, alktipping, Amw66 and 14 others like this.
  19. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,584
    Location:
    UK
    https://twitter.com/user/status/1143102894276616192



     
  20. Dx Revision Watch

    Dx Revision Watch Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,341
    Page 33

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd/Topic-packet-Sept-2018.pdf

    ICD-10-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting September 11-12, 2018

    Topic Packet One:



    Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes (EDS)

    A proposal to create thirteen new codes for Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) was presented at the March 2018 Coordination and Maintenance Meeting.

    The new codes that were proposed were in recognition of the thirteen specific types of EDS that were published by the International Consortium on EDS. The classification and manuscripts about EDS were published in the March 2017 Part C Seminars in Medical Genetics issue of the American Journal of Medical Genetics and are all available through the Ehlers-Danlos Society (http://bit.ly/EDS2017papers).

    However, based on public comment and the low prevalence of some types of EDS, a revised proposal to expand the more common and more severe types of EDS is being resubmitted for consideration.

    Ehlers-Danlos syndromes are a clinically and genetically heterogeneous group of heritable connective tissue disorders characterized by articular hypermobility, skin hyperextensibility or laxity, and tissue fragility affecting virtually every organ system: skin, ligaments, joints, bone, muscle, blood vessels and various organs.

    The prevalence and most common types of EDS cited in the GeneReview articles are:

    hypermobile (hEDS) - 1:5000 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1279;
    classical (cEDS) - 1:20,000 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1244
    and vascular (vEDS) - 1:200,000 based on identification of 1500 affected individuals https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1494/.

    The most severe in presentation and the only one associated with early mortality is vascular (vEDS). “The long-term outlook (prognosis) for people with vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome is generally poor. It is typically considered the most severe form of EDS and is often associated with a shortened lifespan. Among affected people diagnosed as the result of a complication, 25% have experienced a significant medical complication by age 20 and more than 80% by age 40. The median life expectancy for people affected by vascular EDS is 48 years.[4][2]”
    https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/2082/ehlers-danlos-syndrome-vascular-type.

    A specific ICD-10-CM code for the most common and severe types will be of value to the patient and the clinician. Regardless of the type experienced, EDS is a life- long progressive condition that has a major impact on the lives and daily function of most living with EDS.

    This proposal is resubmitted jointly by Brad Tinkle, MD PHD, Division Chief of Clinical Genetics at Advocate Children’s Hospital and member of the Steering Committee of the International Consortium on EDS and Kay Jewell, MD Consultant, Acer Therapeutics Pharmaceutical Company.

    (Proposed) TABULAR MODIFICATIONS

    New/Revise subcategory

    Q79.6 Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes

    Add:

    Q79.60 Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, unspecified
    Q79.61 Classical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
    Classical EDS (cEDS)​
    Q79.62 Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
    Hypermobile EDS (hEDS)​
    Q79.63 Vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
    Vascular EDS (vEDS)​
    Q79.69 Other Ehlers-Danlos syndromes

    -------------------------------

    The following new codes were approved by NCHS and added to the FY 2020 ICD-10-CM Tabular List that was posted a few days ago:

    FY 2020 ICD-10-CM Tabular List:

    https://dxrevisionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2019/06/icd10cm_tabular_2020.pdf

    [28MB]

    Page 1148:

    Q79.60 Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, unspecified
    Q79.61 Classical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
    Classical EDS (cEDS)​
    Q79.62 Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
    Hypermobile EDS (hEDS)​
    Q79.63 Vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
    Vascular EDS (vEDS)​
    Q79.69 Other Ehlers-Danlos syndromes


    [Edited to add link.]
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2019

Share This Page