The 12th Invest in ME Conference, Part 1
OverTheHills presents the first article in a series of three about the recent 12th Invest In ME international Conference (IIMEC12) in London.
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Killer Cell Immunoglobulin-like Receptor Genotype and Haplotype Investigation of Natural Killer Cell

Discussion in 'Latest ME/CFS Research' started by Kati, Jun 19, 2016.

  1. Kati

    Kati Patient in training

    Messages:
    5,463
    Likes:
    19,552
    Fresh from Griffith University:

    Killer Cell Immunoglobulin-like Receptor Genotype and Haplotype Investigation of Natural Killer Cells from an Australian Population of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Patients
    t. K. Huth1,2, e. W. Brenu1,2, d. R. Staines1,2 and S. m. marshall-Gradisnik1,2

    Received: April 04, 2016. Resubmitted: May 04, 2016. Accepted for Publication: May 05, 2016

    Open access

    http://www.la-press.com/killer-cell...r-genotype-and-haplotype-invest-article-a5702

    Abstract
    Killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptor (KIR) genes encode for activating and inhibitory surface receptors, which are correlated with the regulation of Natural Killer (NK) cell cytotoxic activity.

    Reduced NK cell cytotoxic activity has been consistently reported in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) patients, and KIR haplotypes and allelic polymorphism remain to be investigated.

    The aim of this article was to conduct a pilot study to examine KIR genotypes, haplotypes, and allelic polymorphism in CFS/ME patients and nonfatigued controls (NFCs).

    Comparison of KIR and allelic polymorphism frequencies revealed no significant differences between 20 CFS/ME patients and 20 NFCs. A lower frequency of the telomeric A/B motif (P < 0.05) was observed in CFS/ME patients compared with NFCs.

    This pilot study is the first to report the differences in the frequency of KIR on the telomeric A/B motif in CFS/ME patients.

    Further studies with a larger CFS/ME cohort are required to validate these results
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2016
    Justin30, mango, MEMum and 4 others like this.
  2. allyann

    allyann Senior Member

    Messages:
    401
    Likes:
    749
    Melbourne Australia
  3. Kati

    Kati Patient in training

    Messages:
    5,463
    Likes:
    19,552
    BurnA likes this.
  4. A.B.

    A.B. Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,751
    Likes:
    23,188
    Can anyone translate? :D
     
    BurnA and MEMum like this.
  5. allyann

    allyann Senior Member

    Messages:
    401
    Likes:
    749
    Melbourne Australia
    That is the abstract :)
     
    BurnA and Kati like this.
  6. Kati

    Kati Patient in training

    Messages:
    5,463
    Likes:
    19,552
    It seems to me that there is a genetic defect on the gene that transmits signals from NK cells. Don't quote me on that though. I am still crashed and my brain hurts from presenting to my MP on Friday. Reading this paper was too much for my brain. :bang-head:
    They were using a Fukuda cohort, and excluding patients woth other diseases including depression but it was not noted that all of them had PEM.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2016
    MEMum likes this.
  7. Jonathan Edwards

    Jonathan Edwards "Gibberish"

    Messages:
    5,227
    Likes:
    31,871
    Tha main finding appears t be that there was no difference between ME/CFS and controls. They mention a different frequency of haplotype heterozygosity (A/B) but they do not give a figure for it. I am not sure what it would mean,

    There has been a previous paper suggesting a difference in KIR expression in ME/CFS - which this paper does not seem to confirm. The sample is too small to be decisive but it would be useful to establish that there is no genetic difference in KIRs and move on from that option to another hypothesis. The pity is that people do not realise just how important negative findings are and often do not even publish them.
     
    ebethc, MEMum, Valentijn and 6 others like this.
  8. Valentijn

    Valentijn Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,281
    Likes:
    45,811
    It looks like they didn't find any significant differences between patients and controls regarding the frequency of single SNPs, nor even on the same gene. The impression I'm getting is that they came up with a convoluted category of various SNPs for a group of genes, combined them into arbitrary "motifs", and found the heterozyous form of one motif to be less common in ME patients than in the controls.

    There's no indication that there were corrections for making multiple comparisons, meaning that even the "significant" result was not significant at all. And basically they could have rearranged the motifs until something nominally significant popped up. Which is a pretty crappy way to do things.

    It's also a red flag when it's the heterozygous version of a genotype or haplotype which is supposedly the significant one. If a genotype or haplotype is causing problems, it should be a homozygous one which is the most problematic.
     
    barbc56, A.B. and ScottTriGuy like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page