• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of, and finding treatments for, complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia, long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Haukeland Rituximab follow-up study, 21 July 2013: "even higher rates of effect"

Firestormm

Firestormm

Senior Member
Messages
5,055
Location
Cornwall England
liquid sky said:
They really need to study immune responses to the rituximab. They need good baseline tests of immune function and then what exactly changes in those who respond and those who do not. Hopefully, they can tease out some cohorts and also what type immune dysfunction responds to rituximab.

If they can decipher what immune signatures respond, then they can spare those patients who will not respond from exposure to the drug. This is not a harmless drug and they are talking about using it repeatedly for possibly years.
Click to expand...

I agree. I am not happy at the thought that a drug like this might be 'thrown' at anyone and everyone with this diagnosis - especially this diagnosis - on a 'sink or swim' basis. I am sure it won't be but very little has yet to be forthcoming from the original authors about why they think those that responded did so. It is a critical nut to crack. If ME is to be established firmly as an autoimmune condition then it must be better explained. Hopefully, this is what will come out of the next publication. Hopefully it won't simply be a repeat of the first. Although a repeat would be nice but you see what I mean :)
 
MeSci

MeSci

ME/CFS since 1995; activity level 6?
Messages
8,231
Location
Cornwall, UK
urbantravels said:
You will never be able to pick out the effects of treatment from the baseline condition in one individual, because you have no way of knowing what the baseline condition would have been without the treatment. That's why you need larger groups, as similar as possible, undergoing the same treatment under the same conditions at the same time. This is how you correct for variations in the baseline condition.
Click to expand...

I've seen studies where they use the same people as both control and treatment groups, by first following their progress without treatment, and then with, and sometimes again without. Obviously with an illness with so much natural variability as ours, this would be relatively difficult, at least without using objective measurements to determine and match the stage of the illness with and without treatment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.