Media coverage of Matthees PACE recovery reanalysis: post links here

mfairma

Senior Member
Messages
204
Likes
1,049
On the NYMag piece, it's weird to see the tide turning, while the quality of coverage remains poor. It feels dirty, having opinion shifting in our favor, while real understanding remains largely so abysmally low. The understanding will no doubt come, in short or long, it's just a weird transition.
 

Cheshire

Senior Member
Messages
1,129
Likes
8,991
Moving the Goal Posts to Catch the Ball and Other Hazards of A Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Treatment Trial

When it comes to offering patients high-quality care for a poorly understood disease, solid, well-funded research, medical education, and respect go a long way. In a masterful report today in STAT, Julie Rehmeyer sets the record straight on chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). She specifically covers the many pitfalls in the landmark UK PACE trial. Rehmeyer is far from the only critic of this research.
http://www.patientpov.org/chronic-f...ards-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-treatment-trial
 

CFS_for_19_years

Hoarder of biscuits
Messages
2,396
Likes
5,882
Location
USA
PACE: Grossly Exaggerated by Jennie Spotila
http://occupyme.net/2016/09/21/pace-grossly-exaggerated
Today’s publication on Dr. Racaniello’s blog presents the analysis of the recovery outcome data obtained by Alem Matthees. Once again, the mid-stream changes to the study protocol grossly inflated the PACE results.

As the graph from the Matthees paper shows, the PACE authors claimed more than 20% of subjects recovered with CBT and GET. Using the original protocol, however, those recovery rates drop by more than three-fold. Furthermore, there is no statistically significant difference between those who received CBT or GET and those who received standard care or pacing instruction. In other words, the differences among the groups could have easily been the result of chance rather than the result of the therapy delivered.
 

CFS_for_19_years

Hoarder of biscuits
Messages
2,396
Likes
5,882
Location
USA
The PACE Study Results Exposed as Meaningless and Harmful
http://www.thefacultylounge.org/201...sults-exposed-as-meaningless-and-harmful.html

After some years of litigation, the original data have now been made public, and it turns out that the PACE investigators had overstated their results on two key determinants by factors of three and four. In other words, there is no statistically significant support for the theory that CBT or GET can lead to improvement or recovery.
The details of the re-analysis are reported on the Virology Blog here.

The PACE trial, and the attendant claims of “recovery,” have done enormous damage to ME/CFS patients, and not only by diverting funding and effort away from biomedical research.
 

Yogi

Senior Member
Messages
1,132
Likes
6,879

Dolphin

Senior Member
Messages
17,559
Likes
28,261
BIOWORLD TODAY TM
THE DAILY BIOPHARMACEUTICAL NEWS SOURCE
BIOTECH’S MOST RESPECTED NEWS SOURCE FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS
SEPTEMBER 23 , 2016
VOLUME 27, NO. 185

This week, NICE came under pressure from a different quarter, when a grassroots group of experts and patients, using patient data obtained under the U.K.’s Freedom of Information legislation, challenged claims, long unpopular with patients, that exercise and psychotherapy provided benefit to patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, or myalgic encephalomyelitis. The group, #MEAction, has been repeatedly seeking a change in the guidelines since 2012, spokesman Graham McPhee told BioWorld Today by email. The message is finally getting through.

“Inevitably, new evidence accumulates over the years,” Dillon said. “There is pressure for NICE to review that guideline against the new evidence that has accumulated, and we are going to do that.”
 

AndyPR

Senior Member
Messages
2,516
Likes
18,192
Location
Guiding the lifeboats to safer waters.
Lukewarm reception from AfME, which I don't suppose should surprise us.

Alan Cook, Chair of Board of Trustees, Action for M.E., says, “As a point of principle, Action for M.E. supports the sharing of research data to enable replication and validation. We have supported the release of PACE trial data, and I wrote to QMUL in February to ask it to do so. It is evident that this new preliminary analysis of the data raises a number of questions, and we would welcome publication in a peer-reviewed journal to facilitate the robust scientific debate that is clearly needed.

“Any new evidence that can be replicated and validated concerning the efficacy of symptom-management approaches must be considered in the formulation of treatment guidelines. This includes the guideline published by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, which is due to be considered for review next year.”
https://www.actionforme.org.uk/news/preliminary-analysis-of-newly-released-pace-data
 

JohnCB

Immoderate
Messages
351
Likes
2,558
Location
England

sarah darwins

I told you I was ill
Messages
2,508
Likes
10,447
Location
Cornwall, UK
What's all this "new evidence" stuff from NICE (and, of course, AfME)?

It's not really new evidence, is it. More like suppressed data which demonstrates that the existing 'evidence' base was a sham, as many people have been saying for years. That's rather an important distinction, especially in terms of consequences for those involved (which maybe answers my original question).