xmrv-blog

Chronic fatigue syndrome, 'not caused by the XMRV virus'. Or is it?

Tue, 21 Dec 2010 11:02:43 +0100

XMRV is in the headlines again. This time the media have picked up on a new batch of research published in the journal Retrovirology. In the latest work, the team, from London and the University of Oxford, used DNA sequencing methods to study XMRV. They say their evidence shows the virus found in patient samples arose from laboratory contamination."Our conclusion is quite simple: XMRV is not the cause of chronic fatigue syndrome," says Professor Greg Towers, a Wellcome Trust Senior Research Fellow at University College London (UCL). "All our evidence shows that the sequences from the virus genome in cell culture have contaminated human chronic fatigue syndrome and prostate cancer samples.

The WPI, who conducted the initial XMRV research (published in Science) quickly put out a statement saying that the new research does not prove there is no link between CFS and XMRV: "The coauthors stand by the conclusions of Lombardi et al. Nothing that has been published to date refutes our data." Judy A. Mikovits.

The Lombardi et al. and Lo et al. studies were done using four different methods of detection. They were not simply PCR experiments, as were the studies by McClure et al. and others who have recently reported their difficulties with contamination. Experienced researchers such as Mikovits, Lombardi, Lo and their collaborators understand the limitations of PCR technology, especially the possibility of sample contamination. As a result, we and Lo et al. conducted rigorous studies to prevent and rule out any possibility that the results reported were from contamination.

In addition to the use of PCR methodology, the Lombardi team used two other scientific techniques to determine whether, in fact, we had found new retroviruses in human blood samples. We identified a human antibody response to a gamma retroviral infection and we demonstrated that live gamma retrovirus isolated from human blood could infect human cells in culture. These scientific findings cannot be explained by contamination with mouse cells, mouse DNA or XMRV-related virus-contaminated human tumor cells. No mouse cell lines and none of the human cell lines reported today by Hue et al. to contain XMRV were ever cultured in the WPI lab where our PCR experiments were performed. Humans cannot make antibodies to viruses related to murine leukemia viruses unless they have been exposed to virus proteins. Therefore, recent publications regarding PCR contamination do not change the conclusions of the Lombardi et al. and Lo et al. studies that concluded that patients with ME/CFS are infected with human gammaretroviruses. We have never claimed that CFS was caused by XMRV,only that CFS patients possess antibodies to XMRV related proteins and harbor infectious XMRV, which integrates into human chromosomes and thus is a human infection of as yet unknown pathogenic potential.

Science Vs Psychobabble: on the defensive over new CFS research

Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:10:16 +0100

Here's a great example of the kind of skeptical, sneering, reaction that CFS patients have come to expect from some sections of the medical profession. In his article [1] for Psychology Today, Dr. Mark Borigini, appears to adopts a "told you so" attitude, by highlighting the fact that the latest study from PNAS did not find traces of XMRV in CFS patients. However, the latest research did find a related retrovirus in a high number of CFS patients (86.5%). Borigini, who previously spoke of "chronic fatigue syndrome jihadists"[2], makes no mention of the fact that the author of the PNAS study specifically stated that this latest research supports the initial study by the WPI that discovered XMRV in CFS blood samples.

However early, or however much more research is needed, surely we should be welcoming developments in biomedical research rather than seeking to rubbish it.

[1] http://bit.ly/9BNqva
[2] http://bit.ly/6SJrji

PNAS finds virus in 86.5% of CFS patients in study

Tue, 24 Aug 2010 08:05:08 +0100

This latest study didn't find XMRV in CFS patients, but researchers said the variants of MLV-like viruses (closely related to XMRV) they found in CFS patients is evidence of a link between the virus family and the syndrome.

The paper can be viewed here: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/08/16/1006901107.full.pdf+html

The findings have already received coverage in the national press:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/24/health/research/24fatigue.html?hp

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkup/2010/08/new_evidence_virus_may_cause_c.html?hpid=topnews

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703846604575447744076968322.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_LEFTTopStories

XMRV findings replicated and confirmed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration?

Wed, 18 Aug 2010 07:54:32 +0100

Some interesting news here (http://www.rgj.com/article/20100816/NEWS/100816069) indicating that the Whittemore Peterson Institute's XMRV research has been replicated by the FDA, with a review of their findings scheduled to be published in September.

Documentary about CFS ME

Wed, 31 Mar 2010 08:15:50 +0100

I just read about plans to make a documentary about the plight of ME sufferers. Looks interesting - check out the teaser trailer on the site: http://www.whataboutme.biz/index.html

From the site: "We hope to spread the word through this website which will have videos and podcasts on ME, short virals on the ME situation delivered multi-platform, a TV documentary aimed at a prime-time audience, a worldwide theatrical release and a docu-drama dramatizing an ME sufferer’s struggle, based on the novel “The State of Me,” by Nasim Marie Jafry."

Regarding the European Studies

Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:53:31 +0100

If XMRV does not, in fact, play a role in ME then the sooner we can establish this the better; to blindly cling to XMRV as a cause would divert attention and resources away from other avenues of enquiry.

But my concern is that the latest studies suggesting that there's not a link (and subsequent discussion/media coverage) don't address a number of points raised by the WPI:

I've taken some of the key points listed on the WPI website http://www.wpinstitute.org/news/news_current.html

The authors of the two UK studies did not attempt to “replicate” the WPI study. Replication requires that the same technologies be employed. The WPI sent reagents and information to several groups of researchers in an effort to support their replication studies. Neither UK study requested positive control blood, plasma or nucleic acids from the WPI.

The collection, preparation and storage of DNA were completely different between the Science and UK papers.

The low level of XMRV in the blood. XMRV is present in such a small percentage of white blood cells that it is highly unlikely that either UK study’s PCR method could detect it using the methods described.

I've not read any explanation so far why the recent studies didn't follow the Science methodology or why the points raised by the WPI would not cast doubt on the findings.

XMRV Studies

Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:06:10 +0100

The recent UK studies that have recently cast doubt on the link between XMRV and ME are disappointing to say the least. I read a short piece in the BMJ that discussed these studies. The article did seem to me to take delight (maybe that's too strong a word) in the fact that the US results are looking questionable. Today I found an interesting post http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Wesselys_Way.htm which lists some quotes over the years from psychiatrist Professor Simon Wessely who co-authored the BMJ article. You can see why Wessely might not be too disappointed that the link is now looking less likely than when the US study was announced.

UK XMRV Study Doesn't Support Association Between XMRV & ME/CFS

Thu, 07 Jan 2010 20:13:21 +0100

Yesterday a number of newspapers reported results of a UK study which does not support an association between the XMRV virus and CFS in UK patients.

The study was carried out by Imperial College London and King’s College London and published in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS ONE.

Blood samples were taken from 186 ME patients and tested for the presence of DNA from XMRV. A number of control tests were also carried out to show that the DNA in these samples was intact, that any positive findings were not a result of contamination of their experiment and that their test would identify XMRV if it was present. The researcher who carried out the DNA tests did not know which of the samples came from people with CFS.

The researchers did not identify XMRV in the blood from any of the 186 CFS patients tested. Their control tests showed that the DNA being tested was intact, that there was no contamination in their experiments and that when XMRV was present (in a positive control sample containing XMRV DNA) their test detected it.

The WPI who conducted the original research that found a link between XMRV and ME/CFS quickly hit out at the UK study. They claim that the UK research did not duplicate the rigorous scientific techniques used by WPI. In addition they point to the fact that the WPI study was published after six months of rigorous review and three independent lab confirmations. In contrast, this latest study was published online after only three days of review. The final point of difference relates to the patient samples used in the UK study; the WPI suggest that those
samples may have been confused with fatigued psychiatric patients, since the UK has "relegated 'CFS' patients to psychiatric care and not traditional medical practices".

This is the beauty of the scientific method: a theory is advanced, evidence presented and then other scientists try and replicate the results. Contrast this with so many products/solutions on the market offering quick fixes or miracle cures where there is no firm evidence for their effectiveness. For sure the results are disappointing. Many felt that the WPI research was a breakthrough that would at last lead to treatment for ME. Hopefully it still could. Either way, after more trials we'll arrive at the point where XMRV is confirmed as either causing or being present in most cases of ME/CFS or it will shown to be a redherring.

XMRV Testing now available in London...

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:14:22 +0100

OK, it's good news again that XMRV is being taken seriously. But what exactly is this test designed to do? Will peoples' samples be used in the replication studies of the WPI's research? Or is it simply a private test so people know if they have XMRV? If it's the latter, of what use will the results be at this stage? There's still no confirmation that XMRV actually causes CFS/ME. Of course we're all hoping that the research will come through that proves causation, but right now the science only shows a probable link between the two. If you have the opportunity to take part in a study into XMRV then great, but I can't see the value in taking a XMRV test until (a) the link between CFS/ME and XMRV is clearer and (b) there's treatement available.

Raising money for XMRV research

Mon, 07 Dec 2009 10:48:58 +0100

If everyone who has visited the XMRV Map had donated $10 to a CFS or Fibro charity we'd have raised almost half a million dollars in less than one week! Makes you think...