I must have missed this study. I rather like it. Which is not surprising since I am in the process of writing a hypothesis that predicts excessive gamma interferon production probably from CD8 cells that should be demonstrable using ELISPOT. Now of course ELISPOT is just the old-fashioned form of FluoroSpot. ELISPOT picks up cell products using enzyme linked systems which are messy and difficult to overlay. My colleague Linda Wilkinson developed an overlay version which we called PhenELISPOT but ELISPOT never caught on that much because of the difficulty in measuring lots of things at once.
Around that time multichannel fluorescence was coming on line. My brother was soon to use FISH multichannel fluorescence to light up chromosomes with fluorescent tags with 21 colours if I remember rightly. I guess that the FluoroSpot people have dug up ELISPOT and done the obvious thing - to overlay signals using multichannel fluorescence. It may be an untested new-fangled device but having played with this sort of system my thought is that it is an obvious and very likely reliable approach.
The fact that soluble g-IFN levels have not shown up would be an expected part of the story. The signal is likely to be operating close up at much lower secretion levels than would give systemic rises.
The only caveat is that I was thinking of ME/CFS and this might be a signal system for ordinary post viral fatigue type LC. But the signal may be the same for both, just the regulation different.
Wait, excessive IFN-γ means inflammation, right? (Isn't that quite a new direction for you?)
Is the idea then that excessive IFN-γ activates macrophages as part of the innate immune response?
If so, the difference between PVFS and ME/CFS might then be:
- The level and duration of this inflammation, and
- How well each patient is genetically equipped to deal with it—and where the macrophages unleash havoc?