• 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.

NIH: ME/CFS "PEM" Focus Group Study Results Published

PatJ

Forum Support Assistant
Messages
5,288
Location
Canada
From the study:
Background:
Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome is characterized by persistent and disabling fatigue, exercise intolerance, cognitive difficulty, and musculoskeletal/joint pain. Post–exertional malaise is a worsening of these symptoms after a physical or mental exertion and is considered a central feature of the illness. Scant observations in the available literature provide qualitative assessments of post–exertional malaise in patients with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. To enhance our understanding, a series of outpatient focus groups were convened.

Methods:
Nine focus groups totaling 43 patients who reported being diagnosed with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome were held between November 2016 and August 2019. Focus groups queried post–exertional malaise in daily life and participants' retrospective memory of post–exertional malaise that followed an exercise provocation with a cardiopulmonary exercise test. Data analysis followed the grounded theory method to systematically code and categorize the data to find meaningful patterns. A qualitative software package was used to move text into categories during data coding.

Results:
A wide range of symptoms were attributed to exertion both in daily lives and following cardiopulmonary exercise testing. While three core symptoms emerged (exhaustion, cognitive difficulties, and neuromuscular complaints), participants' descriptions were notable for their unique individual variations. Of 18 participants who responded to questions centered around symptoms following a cardiopulmonary exercise test, 17 reported that symptoms started within 24 h and peaked in severity within 72 h following the cardiopulmonary exercise test. Patients described post–exertional malaise as interfering with their ability to lead a “normal” life.

Conclusion:
The experience of post–exertional malaise in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome varies greatly between individuals and leads to a diminished quality of life. myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome patients describe post–exertional malaise as all-encompassing with symptoms affecting every part of the body, difficult to predict or manage, and requiring complete bedrest to fully or partially recover. Given the extensive variability in patients, further research identifying subtypes of post–exertional malaise could lead to better targeted therapeutic options.
 

BrightCandle

Senior Member
Messages
1,152
It's astonishing after 70 years that this is considered research still. There is not a single thing to learn in this, they just tortured some ME patients with CPET again and got the same qualitative results they always get. What was the point exactly? Are they suggesting that the prior studies all showing the same thing were invalid in some way or was this really meant to be a repetition of results study?
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
5,741
Location
Alberta
Maybe they were hoping to find something new about PEM, but nothing in their tests revealed anything of note. If there is a metabolic marker for PEM, it might not be in the blood or urine; if it's in just a small clump of braincells, finding it will be a major, expensive, undertaking.

The study probably has some value, even if it's just adding confirmation that ME is a genuine disease. Publishing negative results is important for science too. If studies such as this, which don't provide new exciting findings, aren't published, then the poorly done (maybe data-tortured) study with exciting findings would get all the attention and have no counterevidence to at least raise questions. Then you might end up with CBT/GET. :(
 

Rufous McKinney

Senior Member
Messages
13,378
It's astonishing after 70 years that this is considered research still.

Yes.... I'm glad they published this. Why they can't come up with ways to quantify and measure features of PEM still shocks me. And given the cognitive challenges for some of us, how can you rely upon our recollections...?

So it possible that PEM events lead to declines in our overall condition, and repeated PEM events may be harmful. Leading to more severe symptoms. Would they ask Cancer people to experience : more cancer activity, in order to study the cancer?

I'm struck by a study like this- does this help any of the ME folks who are too ill to work in any traditional way, and are unable to obtain disability? When will these studies actually result in help to protect pwME?

The paper itself is full of quotes from patients- very interesting read....if one has the energy to read..and lots of fine print in Italics.
 

BrightCandle

Senior Member
Messages
1,152
I have read multiple studies that do quantify it using CPET. The VO2 max drops in ME/CFS patients notably on subsequent CPET tests done hours or a day later markedly compared to control and their first result is usually below prediction too and doing the test causes severe PEM symptoms. We have numerous quantitative studies out there explaining what PEM is too. If the year was 1982 this might have delivered something of interest and note but we live in the post-Stanford nanoneedle and MRI inflammation research age, this feels so last century just like a study on germ theory would in the post-DNA age.
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
5,741
Location
Alberta
The VO2 max drops in ME/CFS patients

Yes, that is a rather useless measure. It doesn't reveal anything on why it happens. It could be physiological, neurological, psychological, or even microbiome related. Still, it's probably better that it was done and published, rather than not done at all. Whether yet another study of this type should get funding is a whole different question. The recent study using qEEG has much more exciting and potentially useful results ... and received no funding.
 

BrightCandle

Senior Member
Messages
1,152
Yes, that is a rather useless measure. It doesn't reveal anything on why it happens. It could be physiological, neurological, psychological, or even microbiome related. Still, it's probably better that it was done and published, rather than not done at all. Whether yet another study of this type should get funding is a whole different question. The recent study using qEEG has much more exciting and potentially useful results ... and received no funding.

Depressed people don't show the drop, like the control they usually gain a little on the second go. It is a unique response to ME not seen in anything else. It doesn't prove the type of dysfunction only that exercise genuinely hurts the bodies ability to produce energy and you can't fake the results. But its also a useless thing to do to confirm ME because it tortures the patient and leaves them in a worse state.

I am hopeful mostly that the Stanford nanoneedle will quantify the condition, a simple blood test is nice and easy to administer and it really feels like the heart of measuring the fatigue with energy dysfunctions at a cellular level. Failing that a (neuro)inflammation detecting MRI scanner could be extremely useful too although that is probably going to catch a whole bunch of diseases on top of ME/CFS.
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
5,741
Location
Alberta
It doesn't prove the type of dysfunction only that exercise genuinely hurts the bodies ability to produce energy and you can't fake the results.

I'm not an expert in VO2 max, but I question whether it reduces the body's physical ability to produce energy. Is it possible that ME alters the brain in a way that limits the person's ability to signal the body to produce that energy? The muscles and mitochondria and all that might be working properly, but something in the signalling might be malfunctioning.

As for quantifying ME, have a look at the recent paper from this thread: https://forums.phoenixrising.me/thr...ts-released-from-laurentian-university.81385/

I assume that qEEG ( Quantitative Electroencephalography ) is cheaper to administer than MRI scans, and may have lower positive false results from other diseases. The paper also talks about a correlation between the presence of an enterovirus in the gut. I'm less sure about the correlation with the enterovirus; a larger survey might find PWME with some other immune activation cause.

I think the vascular hypoperfusion fnding is quite exciting. If verified, it may direct more ME research effort into the brain, which I think hasn't had enough attention.
 

Seven7

Seven
Messages
3,444
Location
USA
I'm not an expert in VO2 max, but I question whether it reduces the body's physical ability to produce energy.
The point is you cannot fake your wall. VO2 max is a recognize wall (top) and used in sport medicine so doctors understand it. Is when your body switches from aerobic to anaerobic metabolism. This occurs when your lungs cannot put enough oxygen into the bloodstream to keep up with the demands of your muscles for energy.
Anaerobic metabolism, which is used for vigorous muscle contraction, produces many fewer ATP molecules per glucose molecule, so it is much less efficient.

So is a good test for a measurable tangible test to have a definition of the wall. So if a patient says hey I can only stand for 2 min then I feel like I am dying, is a way to demonstrate when that wall is. So it can be used by insurance and also if doctor doubt that you have an issue. You cannot manipulate nor fake nor push your way, this can be me-assured and demonstrated.