A nanoelectronics-blood-based diagnostic biomarker for ME/CFS (2019) Esfandyarpour, Davis et al

Sly Saint

Sly Saint

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
By Open Medicine Foundation

Researchers at Stanford University and UC Irvine appear close to giving people with chronic fatigue syndrome something they have wanted for decades: a biological test that diagnoses their disease, according to a research paper published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Those who suffer from the illness have long faced skepticism not only from friends and family but even from the medical community because there is no diagnostic test that can flag the illness formally known as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.
Click to expand...
Typically when individuals with chronic fatigue syndrome seek help from a doctor, they undergo a series of tests that check blood counts, immune cell counts and organ function counts. The diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome comes because everything else has been ruled out.

Now, scientists at the University of California, Irvine, and Stanford University say they have found a way to diagnose it: They took blood from patients, suspended a few blood cells in each patient’s own plasma, and then put those samples under stress. As they did so, they measured the electrical response of each patient’s blood cells, suspended in plasma. And, by studying electrical wave patterns from the cells, they were able to correctly differentiate patients who had chronic fatigue syndrome from those who were healthy.
Click to expand...

full article here:
https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/state/california/article229756099.html

[have looked at the link but can't find the published paper?]
eta: link now works
this one takes you to where it's listed
https://www.pnas.org/search/chronic%2Bfatigue%2Bsyndrome content_type:journal

eta2: paper here
https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/04/24/1901274116

Sci hub, https://sci-hub.se/10.1073/pnas.1901274116
 
Last edited:
Sly Saint said:
[have looked at the link but can't find the published paper?]
Click to expand...
I would guess from this
Rahim Esfandyarpour, an assistant professor at UC Irvine and the lead author of the research paper released Monday
Click to expand...
that that link will be updated later today at some point, with this and all other papers published today - it's still early morning US time.
 
The biggest concern i have is is the small patient size.
They need to verify this on a sample of thousands or tens of thousands before it should be considered a diagnostic test.
Of course there are cost and logistical issues involved in doing this but if this test turns out to be wrong the damage done will be immense.
 
I think it's a very good article - tells a patient's story, talks about what ME is and the fact that patients are often not believed, and a diagnostic test is desperately needed. Describes the nano needle test in simple terms, then spells out that much more research is needed before it can be made available - much bigger samples to verify, production of more kit, seeing if it distinguishes between ME and other chronic conditions and between severities of ME. They also say they are trying to raise funding for it.
 
Excited to see this. PNAS is a high-impact journal and is of course multidisciplinary, which is an advantage.

I worry with all the pressure on Ron and his team that they may try and rush things through. On the other hand, they are top-class scientists and know what they are doing.
 
 
Last edited:
"The (first) issue is, can any biomarker distinguish CFS patients from those with other fatiguing illnesses? And second, is it measuring the cause, and not the consequence, of illness?" he said in an emailed comment. "This study does not provide any evidence that either has finally been achieved."
Click to expand...

From Reuters. The second part seems irrelevant to me. Even if it's measuring a consequence of the illness, rather than its cause, it can still be a biomarker?

ETA: It's SW commenting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom