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 11th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

In-Depth Analysis of the Plasma Proteome in ME/CFS Exposes Disrupted Ephrin-Eph and Immune System Signaling, 2021, Hanson et al

Discussion in 'ME/CFS research' started by John Mac, Jan 29, 2021.

  1. John Mac

    John Mac Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    903
    https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7382/9/1/6
     
  2. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,208
    Location:
    London, UK
    Ephrin sounds an interesting new signal.
     
  3. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    13,208
    Location:
    London, UK
  4. Hoopoe

    Hoopoe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,218
    CGA and FSHB constitute follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). I had FSH tested and it was very low, near zero if I recall correctly.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2021
  5. ME/CFS Skeptic

    ME/CFS Skeptic Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,484
    Location:
    Belgium
    So if I understand correctly, this preliminary study tested 4790 unique human proteins in a small sample of 20 ME/CFS patients and 20 controls. After controlling for multiple testing, 9 proteins showed statistically significant differences between the two groups.

    These are summarized as follows:
    The authors did some additional analyses and mention that their data points to disrupted Ephrin-Eph signalling.
    It's difficult to say what the disrupted Ephrin-Eph signalling means exactly because it is involved in so many different bodily processes. Will be interesting to see if the results pointing towards Ephrin can be confirmed in larger studies.
     
    Dolphin, Robert 1973, sebaaa and 17 others like this.
  6. wigglethemouse

    wigglethemouse Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    947
    This group has been very good at sharing data in supplementary files. For anyone interested there are two Excel files and one doc file in a zip archive here
    https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7382/9/1/6/s1

    I sorted "Supplementary File 1.xlsx" by fold change, filtered p<=0.01, and magnitude of log2(fold change)>0.5 (FC>1.42) and this is what I get. Some of these findings are discussed in the paper but I could not see GUCA2B discussed. This protein may be related to intestinal salts and water (and/or kidneys) according to gene cards, and there is a 5 fold change reduction between healthy control and ME/CFS with p=0.01. This paper although using the sample methods of sample collection as the previous paper does not list gut issues as symptom so it is not possible to tell if there is a relationship in the current data.

    upload_2021-1-29_14-2-27.png

    Here is what Gene Cards says which seems to impy possible digestion, salt, and water balance in the intestines. Not sure if I'm reading this right.
    https://www.genecards.org/cgi-bin/carddisp.pl?gene=GUCA2B
    I used the string-db tool described in the paper to look at the protein relationships for GUCA2B but there is no data in the Excel spreadsheet to quantify those other proteins related to GUCA2B
    upload_2021-1-29_14-3-44.png
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2021
    Robert 1973, sebaaa, tmrw and 10 others like this.
  7. DMissa

    DMissa Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    89
    Location:
    Australia
    Q value is 0.42 which excludes it when correcting for multiple comparisons by BH method, would explain its absence from a global-level analysis using tighter Q thresholds.
     
    Robert 1973, Amw66, sebaaa and 9 others like this.
  8. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    26,395
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    I haven't read the paper yet but it looks like this group are well aware that the small sample in this study means that this is just a start. I hope they get more funding for this.

    With the potential for possibly two or more illnesses being included under the ME/CFS label, it would be interesting to look at the scatter plots of some of the proteins.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2021
    Cheshire, Robert 1973, Amw66 and 12 others like this.
  9. wigglethemouse

    wigglethemouse Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    947
    They are aware.
    https://twitter.com/user/status/1355221958611390464


    According to the paper this was funded by Cornell and NIH. The NIH grant was a 5 year funded grant 2013-2017 totalling $2,956,287
    Immune Cell Gene Expression And Predictive Models In CFS
    https://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_description.cfm?aid=9042926&icde=0

    As an aside, at Stanford collection of ~1000 patient samples of ME and comparison illness is complete but lacks funding to process. This has been collected for the Stanford multi-omics project led by Fereshteh Jahanbani. Proteomics is one of the omics waiting to be performed. I hope results from pilot studies like this Hanson one will open up funding paths.
     
    Michelle, Robert 1973, Amw66 and 15 others like this.
  10. Hutan

    Hutan Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    26,395
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    One issue is that some protein biomarkers might only be different when the body is stressed. For example, one team reported finding that, in healthy people, plasma Cys34 changed to its oxidised form when muscles were worked, but it didn't in people with ME/CFS. Surely there will be proteins that are permanently different, but it's something to keep in mind I guess, if one group finds a difference and another doesn't.
     
  11. Milo

    Milo Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,104
    Did anyone notice that dr Levine picked patients meeting the Fukuda criteria? This is unusual unless they used a cohort of patients whose blood was sitting in the freezer for a while
     
    sebaaa, Kitty, andypants and 6 others like this.
  12. Ravn

    Ravn Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,040
    Location:
    Aotearoa New Zealand
    Fukuda would be fine if they made sure it was Fukuda with PEM. Which I'm hoping Dr Levine would have done. But unfortunately not made clear in the paper.

    Can anyone explain what the significance of protein ratios is and how they relate to "biological relevance"?
     
    sebaaa, Kitty, andypants and 2 others like this.
  13. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    Australia
    This is my confirmation bias talking, but I am very excited about this study. I have been trying to explain links as to why certain neurological syndromes (GBS for example) often lead to long term CFS-like symptoms, despite apparent neurological recovery. This is why I've been interested in axonal guidance pathways and cellular adhesion pathways (along with the fact that viruses like to bind to certain receptors in these pathways...)

    I'm going to be poring over this one for a while...

    Oh and by the way,
    Ephrin receptor A2 is an epithelial cell receptor for Epstein-Barr virus entry
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29292383/

    side note, here is a table of EPH - Ephrin receptor interactions:
    https://www.frontiersin.org/files/A...10-01473-HTML/image_m/fimmu-10-01473-t001.jpg

    Guess how Ephrins regulate cellular adhesions? ;);)
    (A certain class of receptors like to co-locate with RTKs...)

    Also interesting is that Ephrins are involved in "bidirectional" signalling and the fact that they play key roles in the development and function of proprioceptive and other sensory afferents.

    edit - there is some good stuff and some bad stuff in the paper. The AUC for the protein pairs look a bit spurious. The small sample size is still a problem, with both false positives and false negatives. From the supplementary data, there are a few other proteins that have low P values, but borderline high Q values that are either previously of interest (HSP70), or other ephrins, and semaphorins and netrins which are also associated in the same processes as ephrins.

    I also note that activation of EphB receptors leads to muscle hyperalgesia in a rat model:
    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1744806920984079
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2021
  14. Hoopoe

    Hoopoe Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    5,218
    I am wondering: how do you go from disruption of these proteins to an illness like ME/CFS?

    Ephrins play a role in the neuronal dendrites and synapses and that seems like it might be a way.

    Ephrin regulation of synapse formation, function and plasticity

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3631567/
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2021
  15. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    Australia
    That's the mystery isn't it? The hypothesis needs to be quite specific and tick a lot of boxes (including many things that have been ruled out).
     
    sebaaa, andypants, Ron and 4 others like this.
  16. ME/CFS Skeptic

    ME/CFS Skeptic Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,484
    Location:
    Belgium
    IMHO, the most important thing a hypothesis needs to explain is how a mechanism could cause the severe and chronic disability seen in ME/CFS while not showing any major disturbances in normal medical tests and various markers that have been tested repeatedly in ME/CFS patients. That's one of the reasons I'm not very enthusiastic about hypotheses like the one discussed here

    There must be some mechanism or bodily function that we can't see or measure that is disturbed. But the interesting thing is that it doesn't leave many clues behind in the many biomarkers that modern medicine can already measure.

    When we'll finally find a disruption of proteins in ME/CFS I suspect it will be more like the tip of the iceberg rather than the pathology that is causing ME/CFS. So I wouldn't think too much about how the disrupted proteins (if we find something that is robust) might cause ME/CFS and think more about what it might signal.
     
  17. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    Australia
    This may seem surprising, but highly sensitive and specific blood based biomarkers are rare. Many diseases do not have them.

    Most blood tests are quite superficial and test very little of what goes on in the body. The first is that there are tens of thousands of things to test, the second is that for a biomarker to be found in blood, it either has to be due to cells in circulation, or somehow spill over into blood (or be entirely missing from blood in the case of deficiencies). This leaves plenty of signalling problems that won't show up in blood tests.

    I agree we should think about what it might signal - specifically, consider what it means on each of the biological scales - from biochemistry, to cellular chemistry, to localised tissue and so on. And most importantly, place it in context of all the other findings so far - both positive findings and everything that has been ruled out.

    Nonetheless, I am reminded of the hypotheses that we were discussing a few weeks ago - which I suggested could involve dysregulated cellular adhesions (sadly I didn't mention Ephrins!). But the key mystery was still: how this led to other symptoms.
    https://www.s4me.info/threads/the-possibility-of-autoimmunity-or-auto-reactivity-in-me-cfs.18640/
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2021
  18. ME/CFS Skeptic

    ME/CFS Skeptic Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,484
    Location:
    Belgium
    Yes but in ME/CFS there aren't even non-specific biomarkers.

    A person can be incredibly sick yet his main test come back pretty much normal. I'm not sure but I suspect in most other illnesses it will be easier to find abnormalities, even with low specificity, if a person has gotten so ill.
     
    Mij, Michelle, sebaaa and 2 others like this.
  19. Snow Leopard

    Snow Leopard Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    Australia
    I presume you are referring to sensitive blood based biomarker tests.

    We do have a good candidate for a reliable biomarker (in over 10 studies): workrate at ventilatory threshold on the 2 Day CPET. The only problem is that it isn't practical for many patients to undergo.

    All of this still begs the question though, is it just that we haven't found the right test(s) yet?
     
    Mithriel, Michelle, FMMM1 and 6 others like this.
  20. Kitty

    Kitty Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    4,977
    Location:
    UK
    There are lots of other clues, though. I guess when doctors were figuring out what causes Type 1 diabetes, they had to rely on these to diagnose it until someone realised that blood sugar might be important and worked out how to test it. The lack of a test didn't mean that it was impossible to diagnose it, and it's possible that other indications of health vs disease used at the time looked pretty normal.

    It's still possible that, when we do unpick the mechanism, it will come to look quite quickly as if it should have been much more obvious from the clues.
     
    Michelle, Wyva, Hoopoe and 6 others like this.

Share This Page