THREE NEW BIOMARKERS FOR ME/CFS!

[Remy]

From National ME/FM Action Network:

A N N O U N C E M E N T
THREE NEW BIOMARKERS FOR ME/CFS
March 20, 2016
Three separate research teams from CANADA, the UK, and AUSTRALIA have recently published their findings of significant new bio-markers (substances that can be collected from patients and measured in a laboratory to indicate the presence of disease).
1. UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA (Edmonton, Canada)
Full report: http://bmcimmunol.biomedcentral.com/…/10.…/s12865-016-0142-3
2. ST. GEORGE’S UNIVERSITY OF LONDONecondly,
Full report: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article…
NATIONAL CENTRE FOR NEUROIMMUNOLOGY & EMERGING DISEASES (NCNED)
At
GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY, QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA
.
The NCNED press release: https://app.secure.griffith.edu.au/…/screening-test-for-chr…
WE APPLAUD CANADA, THE UK AND AUSTRALIA
PLEASE VISIT ALSO: MECFSNSW.ORG.AU
Our hardworking peers in support of all of us.
WE SALUTE YOU

 

[h3ro]

It's a bit disappointing that the one from University Of Alberta only studied female patients and only with a sample size of 12.

 

[Cort]

The

It's a bit disappointing that the one from University Of Alberta only studied female patients and only with a sample size of 12.

I counted 68 or am I looking at the wrong study?

 

[Cort]

Most important thing - the study found similar patterns to the big Hornig/Lipkin study with regards to down regulation of cytokines over time.... Finally some good replication in the cytokine arena-- and with regard to a big, important study...That's very good news.

Despite these differences in granularity and subgroup definition the subjects we studied in this work appear to display cytokine profiles similar to those found in the larger ME/CFS population studied by Hornig et al., [15].

 

[h3ro]

The

I counted 68 or am I looking at the wrong study?

Ah yes. You're right. Still disappointing that they only studied females. Yet another study that the guys a left entirely out of.

 

[Strike me lucky]

Now for a cure.

 

[Cort]

Ah yes. You're right. Still disappointing that they only studied females. Yet another study that the guys a left entirely out of.

We'll be that last ones

 

[Gijs]

I have seen so many 'biomarkers' none of them will ever be used in the daily care for medical diagnoses.

 

[Cort]

I have seen so many 'biomarkers' none of them will ever be used in the daily care for medical diagnoses.

I know what you mean but we'll see - what we need are studies to validate them. That might be happening....

 

[IrisRV]

I have seen so many 'biomarkers' none of them will ever be used in the daily care for medical diagnoses.

It takes time to get from a new biomarker to a routine test. If our difficulties could be detected by established tests, we wouldn't be in our current predicament. They are going to have to find something new, verify it's validity over the whole patient population, develop a commercial test, and make that test available in every lab around the world.

We are still at step 1: find some measurable abnormality the distinguishes this illness from others. It's going to be years and years before we get to the end. I do think we'll get there eventually. I don't find it surprising that none of the proposed biomarkers has yet come to the point of being used routinely in diagnosis at the PCP's office.

 

[Strike me lucky]

It takes time to get from a new biomarker to a routine test. If our difficulties could be detected by established tests, we wouldn't be in our current predicament. They are going to have to find something new, verify it's validity over the whole patient population, develop a commercial test, and make that test available in every lab around the world.

We are still at step 1: find some measurable abnormality the distinguishes this illness from others. It's going to be years and years before we get to the end. I do think we'll get there eventually. I don't find it surprising that none of the proposed biomarkers has yet come to the point of being used routinely in diagnosis at the PCP's office.

Cfsme isnt seen as a serious disorder, until then we will be blowing in the wind. There are many other conditions that dont have a specific 100% test or have biomarkers that arent specific or reliable.

They could easily use some of the biomarkers they have now along with a good criteria, but they refuse to go down that line and keep cfsme very vague.

 

[Tony L]

Thanks for reporting this, Remy. I just love getting up to positive news like this. It may only be small steps but guys like these are doing the ground works, building the foundations for others to build on. The bigger, stronger those foundations are the more likely others are going want to join the build.
It all helps to build momentum of the scientific process.