Thank you Brian!
A quick summary:
HC = healthy controls
ME = ME/CFS
Figures in brackets are probably SD unless otherwise specified
I've bolded the ones that look statistically interesting (hard to tell in some cases)
Some interesting lack of differences e.g. in CRP, a marker of inflammation, which has sometimes been claimed to be elevated, with little evidence. And no difference in total body energy use, although this may not capture differences during exertion.
It's probably important to bear in mind the small sample sizes.
Don't rely on my report - check the source for any important purpose
1. CPET - volume of oxygen at anaerobic threshold adjusted for participant weight
HC 16.0 (4.3) ::: ME 10.6 (3.8)
2. CPET - RER at AT
Respiratory Exchange Ratio (VCO2/VO2) at the time of anaerobic threshold
HC 1.30 (0.08) ::: ME 1.24 (0.12)
3. Total Body Energy Use - whole room indirect calorimetry - 12 hours
HC 1859 (353) ::: ME 1862 (391)
4. White blood cell count in blood
HC 5907 (1536) ::: ME 6143 (1243)
5. ESR Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate
HC 7.43 (6.13) ::: ME 10.1 (11.9)
Maybe statistically different, but lots of variability in both groups
6. CRP mg/L
HC 3.29 (6.85) ::: ME 1.4 (2.22)
7. White blood cell count in cerebrospinal fluid
(there are typos with CSF and CFS, if anyone able to edit the entry is reading this)
HC 1.0 (1.12) ::: ME 1.3 (1.66)
8. Mitochondrial respiration
Oxygen consumption rate of peripheral mononuclear cells in unactivated state (median and interquartile range)
HC 46.7 (26.2 to 58.0) ::: ME 52.1 (41.0 to 84.9)
9. Effect of maximal exertion on autonomic function
variability of the time between heart beats over 24 hours (median and interquartile range)
HC 67.8 (58.9 to 77.1) ::: ME 56.3 (46.1 to 64.4)
10. Tilt testing
% of participants with sufficiently severe symptoms to require the tilt test is stopped
HC 36.8%. ::: ME 58.8%
11. Microbiome in stool
Number of specific types of bacteria using Least Known Taxon units
HC 477 (33) ::: ME 427 (44)
Might be statistically different but hard to get excited about this particular measure - there are probably lots of different ways to look at microbiome differences. I think we'd need more detailed information e.g. what is missing
12. Test of variables of attention (cognitive function)
Presumably 0 is the population average
HC 1.1 (3.6) ::: ME 0.9 (4.7)
so, presumably the participants are slightly above average compared to reference populations, but, without a pre-illness measure, I don't think this tells us much about ME/CFS, other than the ME/CFS participants were not grossly cognitively disabled on this parameter when tested
13. Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (cognitive function)
Auditory information processing speed and calculation ability
HC 52.4 (12.1) ::: ME 52.0 (11)
comments for the previous measure apply
Adverse events
No serious adverse events.
Some differences in not-serious adverse events, although no more than would be expected, and actually less than expected for some e.g. 22.2% of people with ME/CFS reported fatigue as a 'not-serious' adverse event. (A serious event is something like death, so pretty serious, meaning that the fatigue, headaches, back aches in the 'not-serious' category might still have been awful.)
A quick summary:
HC = healthy controls
ME = ME/CFS
Figures in brackets are probably SD unless otherwise specified
I've bolded the ones that look statistically interesting (hard to tell in some cases)
Some interesting lack of differences e.g. in CRP, a marker of inflammation, which has sometimes been claimed to be elevated, with little evidence. And no difference in total body energy use, although this may not capture differences during exertion.
It's probably important to bear in mind the small sample sizes.
Don't rely on my report - check the source for any important purpose
1. CPET - volume of oxygen at anaerobic threshold adjusted for participant weight
HC 16.0 (4.3) ::: ME 10.6 (3.8)
2. CPET - RER at AT
Respiratory Exchange Ratio (VCO2/VO2) at the time of anaerobic threshold
HC 1.30 (0.08) ::: ME 1.24 (0.12)
3. Total Body Energy Use - whole room indirect calorimetry - 12 hours
HC 1859 (353) ::: ME 1862 (391)
4. White blood cell count in blood
HC 5907 (1536) ::: ME 6143 (1243)
5. ESR Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate
HC 7.43 (6.13) ::: ME 10.1 (11.9)
Maybe statistically different, but lots of variability in both groups
6. CRP mg/L
HC 3.29 (6.85) ::: ME 1.4 (2.22)
7. White blood cell count in cerebrospinal fluid
(there are typos with CSF and CFS, if anyone able to edit the entry is reading this)
HC 1.0 (1.12) ::: ME 1.3 (1.66)
8. Mitochondrial respiration
Oxygen consumption rate of peripheral mononuclear cells in unactivated state (median and interquartile range)
HC 46.7 (26.2 to 58.0) ::: ME 52.1 (41.0 to 84.9)
9. Effect of maximal exertion on autonomic function
variability of the time between heart beats over 24 hours (median and interquartile range)
HC 67.8 (58.9 to 77.1) ::: ME 56.3 (46.1 to 64.4)
10. Tilt testing
% of participants with sufficiently severe symptoms to require the tilt test is stopped
HC 36.8%. ::: ME 58.8%
11. Microbiome in stool
Number of specific types of bacteria using Least Known Taxon units
HC 477 (33) ::: ME 427 (44)
Might be statistically different but hard to get excited about this particular measure - there are probably lots of different ways to look at microbiome differences. I think we'd need more detailed information e.g. what is missing
12. Test of variables of attention (cognitive function)
Presumably 0 is the population average
HC 1.1 (3.6) ::: ME 0.9 (4.7)
so, presumably the participants are slightly above average compared to reference populations, but, without a pre-illness measure, I don't think this tells us much about ME/CFS, other than the ME/CFS participants were not grossly cognitively disabled on this parameter when tested
13. Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (cognitive function)
Auditory information processing speed and calculation ability
HC 52.4 (12.1) ::: ME 52.0 (11)
comments for the previous measure apply
Adverse events
No serious adverse events.
Some differences in not-serious adverse events, although no more than would be expected, and actually less than expected for some e.g. 22.2% of people with ME/CFS reported fatigue as a 'not-serious' adverse event. (A serious event is something like death, so pretty serious, meaning that the fatigue, headaches, back aches in the 'not-serious' category might still have been awful.)
Last edited: