Friday, 25 May 2012

Results of the Blood XMRV Scientific Research Working Group Study Published in 'Science' Sept 2011

Video posted on YouTube by SolveCFS channel.

Presenters: Steven Kleinmann, BSc, MD, expert on blood transfusion; Michael Busch, MD, PhD, also focused on blood transfusion; Graham Simmons, PhD, specializes in blood transfusion and emerging viruses including chikungunya, SARS-CoV, HIV, HCV, Ebola Virus.

They comment on the paper in Science - Detection of MLV-related virus gene sequences in blood of patients with CFS and healthy blood donors, 2009, by Shyh-Ching Lo, Pripuzova, Li, Komaroff, Hung, Wang, Alter. This is the paper that sparked debate about a possible link between XMRV and M.E.

They did a follow-up study and presented their results also in Science, under the title of: Failure to Confirm XMRV/MLVs in the Blood of Patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: A Multi-Laboratory Study. (Sep 2011)

'They' refers to the Scientific Research Working Group (SRWG). This group was established in 2009(?) and comprises of a number of professionals, chaired by Simone Glynn, and includes members from CDC, FDA, NIH [ie. very governmentally linked].

The follow-up study went in phases.
Phase 1 of study - Analytical Panels.
Started early 2010. Prepared 22 Rvl Cells - human prostate cell line chronically infected with XMRV. Phase 2 - Pilot Study Facilitated labs with divergent results to test clinically validated samples. Plasma vs. whole blood vs. peripheral blood mononuclear cells
Phase 3 - Clinical Sensitivity and Specificity (May 2011) The ability of participant assays to effectively detect clinical XMRV positives and negatives will be examined.
Positives - 25 clinical samples from XMRV and CFS patients reported in original study that found correlation. Note the reality was that they couldn't access all 25 of these samples/patients.
Negatives - those that came up negative in study Labs - used multiple laboratories (From here, the procedures followed go into a very technical presentation)

Results on 1554 separately coded samples from all of the labs. The Whittemore Peterson Institute used nucleic acid gag test. WPI was also the ONLY lab that found any clinical samples to be nucleic acid test (NAT) positive. However, in the sensitivities test for all labs, WPI was one of the least sensitive in picking up results.

Two labs performed virus culture assays - the WPI lab reported mycoplasma contamination, so their results became invalidated.

Conclusion: "As our study has demonstrated, there is no such thing as an independently validated clinically positive sample against which to test. Currently there is no such thing as human gammaretroviruses (HGRV). No published virus has been isolated, cloned, or sequenced from a human." They also add at the end that they still don't rule out other viruses being involved, hence supporting the advice against blood donations from CFS patients.

No comments:

Post a Comment