If you have mycoplasma and pneumonia I am sure they will treat that before they infuse Rituximab. Over 40 patients have now been treated at Haukeland University Hospital with Rituximab, and they have seen none, 0, major side effects. From why I can recall, two got upper respiratory infections, and two were low on IGG which was handled.
Remember that 67% had a major response from the drug in a double blind placebo-controlled study. This is big, and is on another level than ampligen. Many of the patients got up form dark rooms and could, after few months, run, travel and work again. Many said they could do exactly the same as they could do BEFORE they became ill.
They do check your IGG levels continuously to monitor them. Remmeber that Rituximab is not a pill you take, or something you receive from your GP. This is advanced treatment done at hospitals - most likely by oncologists.
Im all for it. I dont know how they selected patients for the study but i think the doctors probably have a good grasp on who will respond which is why they got good results. Larger studies can change the percentages.
If you look at the original valcyte studies by montoya, he had a positive response in 21 of 25 patients(84%). When they started doing bigger studies the percentage of success were reduced in those with cfs/me with a infectious onset. Since then they have been able to narrow down possible responders to those with either 1 or combination of ebv/cmv/hhv6.
The initial studies with ampligen showed similar positive responses.
Im just trying to keep a healthy dose of skepticism as there has been a few 'cures' come and go in the past. Im sure its going to help a sub group but skeptical about a treatment for the majority?
As for treating current chronic infections, it may seem easy for them to test for but testing for these chronic infections isnt very accurate. Most doctors would test say mycoplasma and if they didnt have igm antibodies but igg antibodies they would just say it was a past infection. igg antibodies does indicate a past infection but it cant tell them if its currently an issue or not, so many of these infections get missed. Sometimes the only way to know if they are an issue is to treat them with long courses of antibiotics. Dr nicolson's research shows that the longer one is ill with cfs/me generally the more infections they have.
Im not trying to burst your bubble but just saying there is alot of variables to be taken into account. I dont even think the CCC criteria is that accurate, until they use a few biomarkers to make a diagnosis, its still very sketchy.
Maybe a good candidate for rituximab is someone who fits the CCC but also has some labs indicating possible auto immune issues like a positive ana??
Again, i think the research is great but before it comes mainstream they will need to do much larger studies than 40 people and also be able to have some measurable marker/biomarker and an explanation of how it works. I have heard cfs/me is an autoimmune illness but i have also heard that maybe the B-cells are a reservoir for some type of virus like ebv. Both sound good to me, but they need more research before they have an answer.
Its just my theory or feeling about what i have responded to and what i have read about others responding to but at this stage i dont think there is going to be a silver bullet and we will need to be put into sub groups.
I hope the government continue to support the rituximab studies into cfs/me and find the answers we are waiting for.