2 more positive XMRV studies (prostate cancer) plus a new Silverman/Klein XMRV study

[ixchelkali]

Here's something that puzzles me: Silverman's study concludes "The chemokine IL-8 is one of the most highly induced genes in response to XMRV infection of prostate cancer cell line DU145." And yet, in Nancy Klimas' study of the cytokine profile of ME/CFS patients found that IL-8 levels were reduced. Does that make sense?

http://www.experts.scival.com/miami/pubDetail.asp?t=&id=19909538&o_id=&n=Fletcher%2C+Mary+Ann&u_id=1275

There was a 2001 study that found elevated IL-8 levels in fibromyalgia patients (which BTW mentioned that IL-8 promotes sympathetic pain).

 

[garcia]

Here's something that puzzles me: Silverman's study concludes "The chemokine IL-8 is one of the most highly induced genes in response to XMRV infection of prostate cancer cell line DU145." And yet, in Nancy Klimas' study of the cytokine profile of ME/CFS patients found that IL-8 levels were reduced. Does that make sense?

http://www.experts.scival.com/miami/pubDetail.asp?t=&id=19909538&o_id=&n=Fletcher%2C+Mary+Ann&u_id=1275

There was a 2001 study that found elevated IL-8 levels in fibromyalgia patients (which BTW mentioned that IL-8 promotes sympathetic pain).

That's an interesting discrepancy. I'd like to know what diagnostic criteria Nancy Klimas used to define her patient cohort. For me it makes more sense that IL-8 would be elevated, not reduced.

 

[Bob]

Here's something that puzzles me: Silverman's study concludes "The chemokine IL-8 is one of the most highly induced genes in response to XMRV infection of prostate cancer cell line DU145." And yet, in Nancy Klimas' study of the cytokine profile of ME/CFS patients found that IL-8 levels were reduced. Does that make sense?

Silverman was testing a prostate cancer cell line, so does that mean that he was testing only cancer cells for changes in gene expression?
If so, then cancer cells might have different gene regulation and expression to non-cancerous cells, in response to XMRV.
Maybe that could explain the difference?
If that difference is confirmed, it sounds like it might be quite significant, and warrants further investigation.

That was well spotted ixchelkali!

ETA: Another thought... Is the prostate cancer cell line human tissue or is it engineered tissue?
If it's engineered tissue, then that might explain the differences.

 

[alex3619]

Here's something that puzzles me: Silverman's study concludes "The chemokine IL-8 is one of the most highly induced genes in response to XMRV infection of prostate cancer cell line DU145." And yet, in Nancy Klimas' study of the cytokine profile of ME/CFS patients found that IL-8 levels were reduced. Does that make sense?

HI ixchelkali, I have been thinking about this and there are two things to consider.

The first is that this was from a cell line - its not just that it is a cancer line, it is that it is entirely without immunological and neurological modification and control - XMRV might tend to produce IL-8 but that is isolated from the body.

The second point follows from the first. If IL-8 is induced, then the body may act to compensate by suppressing IL-8 production. The underlying tendency of the disease is being countered by active immune and neurological response.

These are ust two things to consider. If ME/CFS were not a complex molecular disorder, possibly more complex than type 2 diabetes, we would have a cure already.

Bye
Alex

 

[Cloud]

Dr P told me that IL8 is the most elevated Cytokine in the xmrv+ patient (but that was way back when the research was new). I believe that Dr Judy said the same thing about IL8 and xmrv. They were both obviously referring to pwc's, not PC patients. MY IL8 was consistently very high for a prolonged period of time and never dropped to normal. I am yet to hear of anyone with high IL8 dropping to below normal levels (Mine came down a lot with AV tx but still remains out of range high). Some of Dr Nancy's patients have posted on this forum about having very low IL8. I would like to know the difference.

 

[ixchelkali]

That's an interesting discrepancy. I'd like to know what diagnostic criteria Nancy Klimas used to define her patient cohort. For me it makes more sense that IL-8 would be elevated, not reduced.

Sounds like she used Fukuda, but excluded those with depression or other psychiatric illness. But really, I think Dr Klimas knows how to recognize ME/CFS and how to differentiate it from idiopathic fatigue.

From the study:

Female CFS patients (n = 40; mean age 50) were from the CFS and Related Disorders Clinic at the University of Miami. A diagnosis of CFS was made using the International Case Definition [19,20]. Female healthy controls (n = 59; mean age 53) were from a NIH funded study. All subjects signed an informed consent approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Miami. All CFS study subjects had a SF-36 summary physical score (PCS) below the 50th percentile, based on population norms. Exclusion criteria for CFS included all of those listed in the current Centers for Disease Control (CDC) CFS case definition, including the listed psychiatric exclusions, as clarified in the International CFS Working Group [20]. All CFS subjects were assessed for psychiatric diagnosis at the time of recruitment with the Composite International Diagnostic Instrument [21]. Based on this assessment, we excluded subjects with DSM IV diagnoses for psychotic or melancholic depression, panic attacks, substance dependency, or psychoses as well as any subjects currently suicidal. We also excluded subjects with Borderline or Antisocial Personality Disorder. Subjects had no history of heart disease, COPD, malignancy, or other systemic disorders that would be exclusionary, as clarified by Reeves et al. [20]. Subjects were also excluded for the following reasons: less than 18 yrs of age, active smoking or alcohol history, history of significant inability to keep scheduled clinic appointments in past.

http://www.translational-medicine.com/content/7/1/96#B19

 

[Stephen12]

Why Dr. Silverman publishes but not Dr. Mikovits

Can someone tell me why it is that Dr. Silverman, a co-author of the Science study, can still get his work published while Dr. Mikovits cannot? I have read in oher postings that she is stigmatized by the XMRV contamination issue until it is resolved. No one will publish her until then. But she has done several potentially important studies which are ready for publication but Mikovits' work is being impounded. Silverman's work is not, however.

Why is this done to Mikovits and not Silverman?

Cort, do you know anything?