cassava7
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
I believe this section is where a link between HHV6 and a subset of ME patients comes from - presence of sncRNA-U14
We have recently identified HHV-6–encoded sncRNA-U14 as a potent marker for viral reactivation (15).
Expecting that viral RNA numbers under reactivation/infection conditions can be higher than viral DNA numbers and that they should be easier to detect, we carried out FISH studies using concentrated PBMCs or blood clot sections from a fraction of these ME/CFS cases (n = 20) (Fig. 3). FISH analysis increased HHV-6–positive cases to 40% (n = 8 out of 20)
(Supplemental Table I). FISH image analysis confirmed our hypothesis that only a small fraction of the blood cells carried HHV-6 sncRNA-U14. None of the control cases, including the two iciHHV-6cases, showed positive staining for sncRNA-U14.
From methods section
Sure would be nice if someone could replicate the FISH analysis, say from the UK ME biobank samples. No idea what FISH entails, or if it requires fresh blood.
Thanks for pointing that out. I dismissed it as "it's only 8 out of 20 patients", but could that finding isolate at least a subset of patients? In his presentations at NIH'19, Prusty also mentioned similar small non-coding RNAs from other viruses. I wonder if checking for all of these sncRNA would yield a higher number of positive cases.

That diagram is a bit confusing. It is so easy to miss the "or" which shows they are separate experiments.
I found the title after a while

Last edited: