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

Deep phenotyping of post-infectious myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome, 2024, Walitt et al

Discussion in 'ME/CFS research' started by pooriepoor91, Feb 21, 2024.

  1. Midnattsol

    Midnattsol Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,611
    The study has been picked up by Norwegian media, and focus is of course on ME being a "disease" where patients believe they can't do what they are actually capable of.. I must admit I've skipped the part where Vegard Wyller (strong proponent of the "chronic stress activation" hypothesis) was interviewed. Glad the article ended with a Karl Tronstad (biomedical scientist) who talked about the limitations of the study.

    ME can be caused by an imbalance in the brain
     
    sebaaa, Lou B Lou, Wyva and 10 others like this.
  2. Midnattsol

    Midnattsol Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    3,611
    We need more basic science on the metabolome to know what is normal. It's so frustrating it's not being done!

    A dataset I worked with had multiple blood samples drawn 2-4-10 weeks apart for 20 weeks (+ some additional bloodwork in a 20 week follow-up period), but most studies only have a snapshot like you said. The number of datapoints in "my" dataset enabled us to make a timeline and find metabolites that reacted similarly over time and our hypothesis were/is that those metabolites were the most likely to be changed by the intervention in the study. But over such a a long time period, stretching through multiple seasons, there would be variations in the environment and behavioral patterns (more sun exposure and activity in hot, warm weather for example, and maybe more sleep in winter) that could also be behind at least some of the changes we saw. This was a diet intervention, and it took ~10 weeks for the metabolome to stabilize after a change in diet, if a metabolomic study today "control for" diet they at most ask participants to eat a standardised diet for three days, if that.
     
    alktipping, Hoopoe, Michelle and 9 others like this.
  3. Karen Kirke

    Karen Kirke Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    57
    I mentioned these van Campen severity ranges in an email to Dr Walitt - I wonder if this influenced this part of the Q&A the NIH subsequently posted https://www.nih.gov/mecfs/nih-intramural-mecfs-study-qa
    I see the availability of data and willingness of the authors to email with patients as a positive feature of this study.
     
  4. Kalliope

    Kalliope Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    6,282
    Location:
    Norway
    B_V, mango, Hutan and 8 others like this.
  5. Hoopoe

    Hoopoe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,255
    Interesting because it took me 2-3 months to recover from previous Christmas and I suspect it was all the unhealthy food.
     
  6. SNT Gatchaman

    SNT Gatchaman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,456
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    Commentary in JAMA: NIH Study Provides Long-Awaited Insight Into Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

    Generally OK, but points off at the start for the artistic form of "woman-reclining-with-hand-on-forehead". Good that they interviewed Nath not Walitt.

    Less good sections include —

    As in this thread, that's not supportable on the data. Also neurocognitive tests are deficient if they can't correlate the symptoms that are so commonly reported (and easily observable to anyone interacting with a patient).

    Not clear why people would need to see a psychiatrist if you've just said it's not a psychiatric problem.

    This also was an important point, but clumsy use of the word "severe" which might be read to suggest ME/CFS itself is not also a severe disease. "Other serious" would have worked well there.

     
    sebaaa, Arvo, pooriepoor91 and 15 others like this.
  7. SNT Gatchaman

    SNT Gatchaman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,456
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    (We can add "legitimacy deficit" to "effort preference" in terminology we would prefer not to be associated with this condition.)
     
    Arvo, alktipping, Hutan and 10 others like this.
  8. cfsandmore

    cfsandmore Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    206
    Location:
    USA
    Dr. Nath has faulty logic. He also seems to enjoy talking out of both sides of his mouth.
     
    Binkie4, Arvo, Keela Too and 8 others like this.
  9. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    26,941
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    A helpful, sympathetic interview, it's not long, the transcript doesn't take long to read. Here's a key bit of the transcript:

     
    RedFox, B_V, pooriepoor91 and 20 others like this.
  10. Medfeb

    Medfeb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    567
    I think this is an important point. Reviewer #4, (appears to be Tony Komaroff, see p 6), questioned how they could have found no cognitive issues when it's been so widely reported. And Gudrun Lange is a neuropsychiatrist with extensive experience evaluating pwME. She's recommended specific test methods (as discussed in this article) to identify the subtle differences and that these are often not use

    Edited to clarify - I don't know if NIH used the methods Dr. Lange recommends
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2024
  11. Andy

    Andy Committee Member

    Messages:
    21,967
    Location:
    Hampshire, UK
    alktipping, Kalliope, RedFox and 20 others like this.
  12. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    26,941
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    Chris Ponting's response to the NIH study, as set out there in the discussion with David, is spot on.
    The study is too small to produce useful results; and there are unwarranted interpretations of the meagre data that is there. It's a disappointment.
    Chris hints that the mediocre nature of the study may in fact prompt the pendulum to swing in our favour.
     
    TiredSam, alktipping, RedFox and 16 others like this.
  13. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,539
    Location:
    London, UK
    Patients are desperate and patients need treatment. And we can't just wait to figure out the entire pathophysiology, like we need to start.

    I understand where Brian Vastag is coming from but it isn't so much that we haven't figured out the entire pathophysiology. It is that we still have no data at all that you can base a reasonable justification of using powerful drugs on. Fluge and Bella were right to follow what seemed like a serendipitous lead. But using checkpoint inhibitors on the basis of a few slight shifts in cell patterns in a tiny group of people isn't enough.

    The physician has to ask the question. Would I give this drug to my sister? Or my neighbour over the road? I actually did that (the second) and although it was worth it, the story was long and complex. Immunotherapeutic drugs that have the power to make big differences tend also have the power to do great harm. And if nobody really has a cogent theory they might do harm not just from side effects but by turning out to be the opposite of what is needed and making the ME five times worse.
     
    Amw66, alktipping, Colette and 16 others like this.
  14. dave30th

    dave30th Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,248
    Yes, he was looking for a way not to view it as a complete loss, I think.
     
  15. SNT Gatchaman

    SNT Gatchaman Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,456
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    The WASF3 paper that resulted circuitously seems to be the best part of this research work, albeit orthogonal, and needing larger replication. Along with that paper, Brian's description in the WaPo of how it all transpired was one of the brighter aspects of last year - a joy to read.

    But was this Walitt himself interested in the mitochondria at that early stage or was this a group prompting? If it was then he can reclaim a bit of ground in my view. But in 2017 he seems to have had fixed and quite opposite views on "somatic and interoceptive disorders".

    I still struggle to see how this paper could end up being framed the way it was, given the lead-in findings in Paul Hwang's paper. It's just weird to have had the above in August 2023 and then this paper six months later with little to connect the two and a reversion to lightly encoded FND/psychosomaticism. There's no reference to either WASF3 or Wang, Hwang et al. in this paper. See also @EndME's post up-thread.
     
    alktipping, horton6, shak8 and 12 others like this.
  16. Kitty

    Kitty Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,413
    Location:
    UK
    That struck me too—I was expecting to see it being put in context with the other findings. When it wasn't, I assumed it must be due to publishing conventions, or the work being done by separate labs/in separate studies, or some other technical reason.

    Or perhaps Walitt thought it might undermine his argument, or Hwang didn't want his work associated with it?
     
  17. EndME

    EndME Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    873
    I think the most reasonable explanation might be your first explanation, i.e. that the intramural study predates the Hwang study by multiple months/years, even though it was published later. (The Hwang study was submitted in Feb. 2023, I have no idea when they had their first results, but it's possible that by that time the intramural study was basically already written apart from some authors possibly being in disagreement about certain spins they wanted to still put on the data).

    The intramural study isn't too coherent. My guess is the whole thing was written before the WASF3 findings came to light and technically they could and maybe should have made a small amendment once they knew about the WASF3 results, but I guess that would have made the whole thing even less coherent and then all the different authors might have even come up with even stranger stories that aren't really supported by the data.

    Now we're left with 2 papers where the one is story telling without any "abnormal measurement results" and the other has supposedly "abnormal measurement results" but without any connection or detailed information on anything at all.
     
    Hutan, alktipping, Lilas and 7 others like this.
  18. Braganca

    Braganca Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    315
  19. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,373
    Location:
    UK
  20. Laurie P

    Laurie P Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    178
    Location:
    New England, USA
    Here are two articles in the the Washington Post by Leana Wen about the NIH ME/CFS study. I'm posting them because the first one is about a patient in the study and the second one has some quotes from Nath. I didn't encounter a paywall for either article.

    Opinion
    Chronic fatigue patients are bravely offering their illnesses to science

    By Leana S. Wen
    March 19, 2024 at 7:30 a.m. EDT

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/03/19/chronic-fatigue-long-covid-nih-study/

    Opinion
    New landmark study offers hope to people with long covid

    By Leana S. Wen
    March 11, 2024 at 7:30 a.m. EDT

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/03/11/long-covid-treatment-research-hope/

     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2024

Share This Page