That's not a formula to calculate body surface area; it's just tells you what dose to give once you have calculated the area.
For example, if someone has a body surface area of say 1.7 square meters, then the dose to be given is 1.7 x 375 mg = 638 mg.
I am so sorry to still not understand this and hoping I can phrase my question well. I'm not even trying to understand the math formula vs. I am trying to understand if the two outcomes (re: Rituximab dose) would be the same or different?
My question is: If the BSA formula (for Patient #1 who has a BSA of 1.7 as you chose) was plugged into the 375 mg formula (1.7 x 375 mg) and then the SAME Patient #1 was plugged into the 500 mg formula that Fluge and Mella used in the Phase 2 Study (1.7 x 500 mg) wouldn't they come up with two different doses in the end?
Or is there something about this particular formula in which you end up with the same dose regardless if you use 375 mg or 500 mg? This is part of what I am trying to understand re: the study.
That's right, all doses were individually tailored according to body surface area.
This is the second thing I am trying very hard to understand. If Fluge & Mella did individual dosing for ALL Rituximab infusions in Phase 2 (tailored to body surface area) but in Phase 3 they gave all patients a dose of 500 mg for infusions #3, 4, 5 & 6... then how is this the same study and how is it not a confounding variable? I am not even talking about ME/CFS but just in general for a trial. How can you make a major change in the middle of the trial but not count it as a factor that affects the results?
Talking of misdiagnosis, if the person the original poster is asking about had been ill for less than five years with suspected ME/CFS when they were found to have a cancer too, a differential diagnosis to explain responding to rituximab could be that it was a paraneoplastic syndrome occuring with Lambert Eaton's Myasthenic Syndrome instead.
@kangaSue This is an excellent point and I can't believe that I did not think of it considering that I was in the exact same situation except that no cancer has ever been found in my case... as least so far... and my illness started in Jan 2013 so I am well past the 5 year mark although the LEMS autoantibody was not found until early 2016. I have no idea if I had it prior to that b/c I had never been tested before. I suspect that a very high percentage of people with LEMS (who have the autoimmune version without cancer) are initially given a "CFS" diagnosis. Although in the groups I belong to, many are not responders to Rituximab and many take 3,4 DAP or Firdapse vs. I was a responder to Rituximab.