1. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 23rd January 2023 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

USA: The RECOVER Initiative - programme of Long Covid research funding and series of research videos

Discussion in 'Long Covid news' started by rvallee, Feb 13, 2022.

  1. Laurie P

    Laurie P Established Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    71
    Location:
    New England, USA
    I appreciate the blog but we need action as this is the reality for ME/CFS:

    https://twitter.com/user/status/1576960454676557824
     
    alktipping, Lilas, Ariel and 8 others like this.
  2. RedFox

    RedFox Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    648
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Oh, for sure. I stand by my original comment--I'm very proud the NIH and CDC speak of ME/CFS as a serious problem. But there's not enough action. They're consulting experts in post-viral syndromes in the RECOVER trial, publishing good material about ME, and funding some research. That's good, but we need far more.
     
  3. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,299
    Location:
    UK
    Keynote Presentation: Advancing Toward Recovery from Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC): The NIH RECOVER Initiative with Live Q&A


    OCT 19, 2022 12:00 PM PDT

    Walter Koroshetz, MD
    Director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), National Institutes of Health
    register at link
    https://www.labroots.com/webinar/ke...elae-sars-cov-2-infection-pasc-nih-recover-in
     
    ahimsa, Lilas, Dakota15 and 1 other person like this.
  4. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    8,299
    Location:
    UK
    ARUP’s Clinical Trials Group Assists in Multisite Study Aimed at Unravelling the Mysteries of Long COVID-19

    full article
    https://www.aruplab.com/magnify22/arups-clinical-trials-group-assists-multisite-study-long-covid-19
     
    Sean and Dakota15 like this.
  5. Jaybee00

    Jaybee00 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,325
    The Good, the Bad, and the Strange: the RECOVER Initiative Long COVID Grants, Cort Johnson

    Some bogus stuff here— @dave30th—possible for you to inquire as how to how an HIV study got funded here—thanks.

    https://twitter.com/user/status/1593610811972276225
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2022
  6. Jaybee00

    Jaybee00 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,325
    Summary


    • The RECOVER Initiative has spent hundreds of millions of dollars building out the infrastructure to support its big study – following and analyzing 18,000 people.
    • Grants from outside researchers, though, are important as well. The vast majority of potential long COVID researchers, after all, reside outside the RECOVER Initiative and they can provide creative insights that Initiative investigators might miss.
    • In August RECOVER released the titles of the 40 grants it funded to the tune of $37 million dollars. This blog assessed them for their potential impact on the ME/CFS subset of long COVID and ME/CFS itself.
    • Because, strangely enough, almost all the grants do not show up in the NIH’s Reporter database of NIH-funded studies, much detail was missed.
    • It was hard understanding how 15% of the grants met the definition of a long COVID grant. A further 24% of the grants focused on the non-ME/CFS subset of long COVID (such as diabetes, kidney disease, etc.). About 60% of the grants clearly focused on the ME/CFS subset of long COVID.
    • As expected immune system grants lead the pack and the strong focus on autoantibodies was welcome. EBV reactivation has shown up in several major studies but unfortunately was assessed in only one. The blood vessels and cardiovascular system, and the metabolism – two areas the NIH might have passed on – received good interest – as did the nervous system and brain.
    • Surprisingly, the autonomic nervous system – obviously a key player in long COVID – received only one study. Unfortunately, no exercise physiology studies – so important to the field of ME/CFS – were funded. Neither were any microbiome or mitochondrial studies.
    • Overall, the slate of studies seemed strong but the number of studies being funded and the amount of funding devoted to them, though, was surprisingly low. RECOVER is a $1.15 billion Initiative yet it provided all of $40 million to individual research projects – just 2 1/2 times the funding ME/CFS gets in a year.
    • Why that was so and other questions have been forwarded to the RECOVER Initiative.
     
    Ariel, alktipping, Hutan and 5 others like this.
  7. BrightCandle

    BrightCandle Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    338
    I have been really concerned about what the RECOVER programme has been funding for a while. Initially they were funding absolutely nothing but data collection, the entire thing was just the biggest symptom and fluids collection study in the entire world of all time, a true master use of 500 million USD. But now it seems the little over half of the rest of it is being aimed at research and I am not surprised to find a lot of it is barely applicable to the disease itself. I sure hope they come up with something but they have I think avoided the most promising areas of research so far so I don't anticipate much of value coming out of it.
     
    bobbler, Ariel, alktipping and 5 others like this.
  8. CRG

    CRG Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,336
    Location:
    UK
    I find the Health Rising piece confusing - it seems to require that: the long term effects of COVID 19 substantially = Long Covid and that in turn Long COVID substantially = ME/CFS, when no part of that line of equivalences has so far been shown to have significance.

    From a public health perspective, which is what surely the US Congress had in its collective mind when it required the NIH to commit $1.15 billion to studying the long-term effects of COVID, all health consequences of COVID infection would require attention, and which includes a vast range of sequelae only a fraction of which are common to an ME/CFS diagnosis. The COVID19 pandemic may as a simple fact of itself, require greater investigation of ME/CFS but so far none of the epidemiology strongly indicates that there is a major increase in ME/CFS incidence following COVID19 infection.

    I know that's not what many people expect and there may be all sorts of failings that mean post COVID ME/CFS incidence is not being recognised or recorded, but for whatever reason it isn't there strongly in the data while all sorts of other health problems are and it's not surprising if those are attracting research funding rather than ME/CFS.
     
    alktipping and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  9. Jaybee00

    Jaybee00 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,325
    But there are funded projects that are not related to the long-term effects of Covid, apart from the MECFS subset.


    The Strange – Long COVID Grants (???) – 14%
    I would be shocked if Congress had these studies in mind when it funded the RECOVER project. It’s possible that some of these studies added long COVID cohorts to ongoing studies. Still, they seem like a reach.

    • Elucidating Genetic and Environmental Second Hits in Racial and Ethnic Minorities with APOL1 High-Risk Genotypes – this is a kidney disease study that was ongoing before COVID-19 and does not mention long COVID
    • Imaging Neuroglial Mechanisms of Neuropathic Pain-Opioid Interaction in HIV – started in 2018, does not mention long COVID
    • Prenatal Immune Activation and Maternal Mental Health as Predictors of Infant Sleep and Cognitive Development
    • Role of NLRP3 Signals in Ischemia/Reperfusion-Induced Organ Injury
    • GenoMISC: Genetic Determinants of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome after SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Children (MIS-C) – multisystem inflammatory syndrome is a highly dangerous, nasty syndrome that often lands children in intensive care but it occurs in the first couple of weeks after an infection; i.e. it’s not a long COVID issue.
     
  10. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    10,202
    Location:
    Canada
    I feel like it should be pointed out that the RECOVER initiative has hired at some point a communications director, which may or may not be the case. There is someone in charge of communicating what this giant secretive project is doing. Seriously.

    I guess it's only for communications within the bubble. Because basically nothing is openly communicated. Seriously looks like if there's ever an investigation of this, it will find a lot of money misused as blatantly as when someone at the CDC did that.

    From move fast and break things to move slow and leave the already broken things broken. Institutional mentality with startup-level oversight and accountability.
     
  11. CRG

    CRG Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,336
    Location:
    UK
    The last of those is illustrative of the point I was making - the instruction from Congress to the NIH is to commit funds to investigate: "the long-term effects of COVID", a terminology which clearly isn't limited to whatever Long Covid may include and can logically include the study of any impact of COVID on any group of affected patients.

    It is true that the APOL1 study doesn't mention COVID although it's start date is given as 14/12/20, so after COVID hit, but science doesn't work on every relevant point being mentioned in every study title or description and in this case there's clear relevance to other ongoing work: COVID-19 and APOL-1 High-Risk Genotype-Associated Collapsing Glomerulonephritis

    The HIV study does seem an outlier although there are comparisons to be made between HIV and COVID and a subset of PASC patients will be taking opioids for comorbidities which makes this relevant:

    "The precise mechanisms by which opioids interact with the viral infection to exacerbate neuropathic pain have yet to be fully elucidated, but likely involve the synergetic dysregulation of neuro-glial interactions, including glial activation and alterations in the excitation-inhibition balance of the brain."

    There's also the possibility that this HIV study is a legacy orphan of NIH carving out a whole new budgetary area at the behest Congress.

    I couldn't find any documentation on the Prenatal Immune Activation study but the named researcher is working on COVID and maternal health - it would be highly significant if COVID in pregnancy has long term impacts on the child !

    The objection to the Ischemia/Reperfusion-Induced Organ Injury study seems bizarre - it's an established impact of COVID infection: Liver injury in COVID-19: Detection, pathogenesis, and treatment and if the patient survives there's likely to be lifetime (i.e long term) impacts.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2022
    RedFox likes this.
  12. Jaybee00

    Jaybee00 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,325
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 1, 2023
  13. Jaybee00

    Jaybee00 Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,325
    alktipping, RedFox and Hutan like this.
  14. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    44,534
    Location:
    UK
    Thanks Jaybee, I've added to the thread title, and will include an item about them in the weekly news.
     
    alktipping, ahimsa and Hutan like this.

Share This Page