Professor & patients' paper on the solvable biological challenge of ME/CFS: reader-friendly version
Simon McGrath provides a patient-friendly version of a peer-reviewed paper which highlights some of the most promising biomedical research on ME/CFS ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

Tests to definitively diagnose cfs

Discussion in 'General ME/CFS Discussion' started by knackers323, Sep 16, 2014.

  1. knackers323

    knackers323 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes:
    346
    I read an article saying that Dr Alan Light has come up with a gene test to definitively diagnose cfs.

    Another article said that Griffith uni is on the cusp of developing a breakthrough diagnostic test.

    Anyone heard of these?
     
    merylg likes this.
  2. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,249
    Likes:
    33,552
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    There are threads on these all over PR. Use Google and run a search on keywords. To this add Workwell Foundation, Julia Newton, Stanford and Japanese brain scans, and so on. No such diagnostic test is recognized yet, but the pathophysiology is being worked out. We are where RA or MS were decades ago - no cause but the pathophysiology is finally being revealed.
     
  3. fibrodude84

    fibrodude84 Senior Member

    Messages:
    190
    Likes:
    114
    I don't know if this is possible since a syndrome is a collection of symptoms we all share but we may have varying reasons for it. Maybe you have a viral reactivation and I have an autoimmune dysfunction and the next guy has a mitochondrial problem. There may be many sub-types.
     
    wastwater and merylg like this.
  4. WillowJ

    WillowJ คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl

    Messages:
    3,763
    Likes:
    4,842
    WA, USA
    True. But tests are being proposed which may work for various subtypes, though none are yet validated as diagnostic. But I think this is coming.

    We also have test(s) which might possibly indicate pathology common to us all, though shared by other conditions as well, such as NK cell dysfunction--this would be analogous to ANA in Lupus; it is used as part of the diagnostic, but is not unique to Lupus, while SLE itself is now thought to be more than one disease.
     
    fibrodude84 and PennyIA like this.
  5. knackers323

    knackers323 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes:
    346
    Well if the test hasn't been developed it makes you wonder why the doc would come out and say that he has. It just makes him look bad
     
  6. WillowJ

    WillowJ คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl

    Messages:
    3,763
    Likes:
    4,842
    WA, USA
    Dr. Light and the others did not claim this. Their claims were discovery or near-discovery of possible diagnostic tests, which is fair.

    http://www.cfstreatmentguide.com/blog/new-diagnostic-tools-for-mecfs
    http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...ia-have-hope-in-new-diagnostic-tool.html?pg=1

    following the links:

    Marshall-Gradisnik et al.:
    Nakatomi et al.
    Keller et al.
     
    Cheshire and alex3619 like this.
  7. knackers323

    knackers323 Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes:
    346
    Anyone heard any update on either of these diagnostic tests?
     
  8. taniaaust1

    taniaaust1

    Messages:
    11,870
    Likes:
    12,561
    Sth Australia
    Their is another ME/CFS research team in Australia (one in Sth Australaia) following up on a different biomarker too then what the Griffith Uni team is doing.

    Ive been in their original research and in more recent times (last year) their followup study which was done as a confirmation one 7 years after the original.

    Hopefully they got enough of us back from the original group to have made this study good enough to be able to get published when completed (I heard some of us had even moved overseas so they trying to track us down from everywhere). I think it was they needed at least 10 or maybe it was 20 of us from the original study years ago to confirm their findings.

    Their biomarker (thou maybe not specific?? so maybe would have to be used with another or other ME/CFS biomarkers) is to do with the brain and shrinkage of a certain part of our brain. In the first study, they found that they could actually tell how long ME/CFS (CCC defined) people had been sick for by the amount of shrinkage. The longer we are ill with ME.. the more of our brain shrinkage there is. Hence why the follow up 7 years later to see if that still holds true for the orignals and confirms first study.

    My brain now should be just like someone who had ME/CFS 7 years longer then me in the original study and should of worsened along their graph. (they also did some first time study of some completely not looked at before in ME things.. eg the very backs of our eyes which is the best indication on what is going on with nerves into our brains).

    Even if they didnt manage to get enough of us back for the follow up confirmtion part of the latest study, their latest study will still be very interesting due to the extra things studied this time with us and a new group of ME/CFS people.

    Anyway.. if you have ME watch out for the Australia studies as most coming out of here use the CCC definition or maybe even the international ME one in their participants selection or ME immune markers (on top of having the participants meet the Fukuda or other CFS defintions too). Hopefully with them being so selective.. we may see usable biomarkers coming out of Australia.
     
    Last edited: Feb 26, 2015

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page