Case Definition – Page 7 – American ME and CFS Society

Response to ‘A controversial consensus’; by the International Consensus Panel

Dear Sir,First and foremost, we would like to thank Drs van der Meer and Lloyd [1] for their careful and thorough review of the International Consensus Criteria (ICC) paper [2]. We support this type of open discussion and strongly agree that only in this way will the basic and clinical science of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME)/chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) evolve soundly. This being said the content of their feedback also leads us to believe that several elements have been taken out of context or that we may not have articulated these components as well as we had hoped. As a result, we fully appreciate this opportunity to rectify any such miscommunication.

You can read the rest of this comment here: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02499.x/full

Comment on: A controversial consensus–comment on article by Broderick et al. [J Intern Med. 2012]

Source: Broderick G. Response to ‘A controversial consensus’; by the International Consensus Panel. J Intern Med. 2012 Feb;271(2):213-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02499.x. Epub 2011 Dec 30. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02499.x/full (Full article)

Contrasting case definitions for chronic fatigue syndrome, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis

Abstract:

This article uses data from patients recruited using the 1994 case definition of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) to contrast those meeting criteria for the Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) Canadian case definition with those that did not meet these criteria. The study also contrasts those meeting criteria for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME) based on criteria from Ramsay and other theorists with those that did not meet the ME criteria. The ME/CFS case definition criteria identified a subset of patients with more functional impairments and physical, mental, and cognitive problems than the subset not meeting these criteria. The ME subset had more functional impairments, and more severe physical and cognitive symptoms than the subset not meeting ME criteria. When applied to a population meeting the 1994 CFS case definition, both ME/CFS and ME criteria appear to select a more severe subset of patients.

Source: Jason LA, Brown A, Clyne E, Bartgis L, Evans M, Brown M. Contrasting case definitions for chronic fatigue syndrome, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome and myalgic encephalomyelitis. Eval Health Prof. 2012 Sep;35(3):280-304. doi: 10.1177/0163278711424281. Epub 2011 Dec 7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3658447/ (Full article)

Data mining: comparing the empiric CFS to the Canadian ME/CFS case definition

Abstract:

This article contrasts two case definitions for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). We compared the empiric CFS case definition (Reeves et al., 2005) and the Canadian ME/CFS clinical case definition (Carruthers et al., 2003) with a sample of individuals with CFS versus those without. Data mining with decision trees was used to identify the best items to identify patients with CFS. Data mining is a statistical technique that was used to help determine which of the survey questions were most effective for accurately classifying cases. The empiric criteria identified about 79% of patients with CFS and the Canadian criteria identified 87% of patients. Items identified by the Canadian criteria had more construct validity. The implications of these findings are discussed.

Source: Jason LA, Skendrovic B, Furst J, Brown A, Weng A, Bronikowski C. Data mining: comparing the empiric CFS to the Canadian ME/CFS case definition. J Clin Psychol. 2012 Jan;68(1):41-9. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20827. Epub 2011 Aug 5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3228898/ (Full article)

Myalgic encephalomyelitis: International Consensus Criteria

Abstract:

The label ‘chronic fatigue syndrome’ (CFS) has persisted for many years because of the lack of knowledge of the aetiological agents and the disease process. In view of more recent research and clinical experience that strongly point to widespread inflammation and multisystemic neuropathology, it is more appropriate and correct to use the term ‘myalgic encephalomyelitis’ (ME) because it indicates an underlying pathophysiology. It is also consistent with the neurological classification of ME in the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD G93.3).

Consequently, an International Consensus Panel consisting of clinicians, researchers, teaching faculty and an independent patient advocate was formed with the purpose of developing criteria based on current knowledge. Thirteen countries and a wide range of specialties were represented. Collectively, members have approximately 400 years of both clinical and teaching experience, authored hundreds of peer-reviewed publications, diagnosed or treated approximately 50 000 patients with ME, and several members coauthored previous criteria. The expertise and experience of the panel members as well as PubMed and other medical sources were utilized in a progression of suggestions/drafts/reviews/revisions.

The authors, free of any sponsoring organization, achieved 100% consensus through a Delphi-type process. The scope of this paper is limited to criteria of ME and their application. Accordingly, the criteria reflect the complex symptomatology. Operational notes enhance clarity and specificity by providing guidance in the expression and interpretation of symptoms. Clinical and research application guidelines promote optimal recognition of ME by primary physicians and other healthcare providers, improve the consistency of diagnoses in adult and paediatric patients internationally and facilitate clearer identification of patients for research studies.

Comment in: A controversial consensus–comment on article by Broderick et al. [J Intern Med. 2012]

Source: Carruthers BM, van de Sande MI, De Meirleir KL, Klimas NG, Broderick G, Mitchell T, Staines D, Powles AC, Speight N, Vallings R, Bateman L, Baumgarten-Austrheim B, Bell DS, Carlo-Stella N, Chia J, Darragh A, Jo D, Lewis D, Light AR, Marshall-Gradisbik S, Mena I, Mikovits JA, Miwa K, Murovska M, Pall ML, Stevens S. Myalgic encephalomyelitis: International Consensus Criteria. J Intern Med. 2011 Oct;270(4):327-38. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02428.x. Epub 2011 Aug 22. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3427890/ (Full article)

Chronic fatigue syndrome in an ethnically diverse population: the influence of psychosocial adversity and physical inactivity

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a complex multifactorial disorder. This paper reports the prevalence of chronic fatigue (CF) and CFS in an ethnically diverse population sample and tests whether prevalence varies by social adversity, social support, physical inactivity, anxiety and depression.

METHODS: Analysis of survey data linking the Health Survey for England (1998 and 1999) and the Ethnic Minority Psychiatric Illness Rates in the Community (EMPIRIC) study undertaken in 2000. The study population comprised a national population sample of 4,281 people ages 16 to 74 years. CF and CFS were operationally defined on the basis of an interview in the EMPIRIC study, alongside questions about psychosocial risk factors. Previous illnesses were reported in the Health Survey for England during 1998 and 1999, as was physical inactivity.

RESULTS: All ethnic minority groups had a higher prevalence of CFS than the White group. The lowest prevalence was 0.8% in the White group, and it was highest at 3.5% in the Pakistani group (odds ratio (OR), 4.1; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.6 to 10.4). Anxiety (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4 to 2.2), depression (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.8), physical inactivity (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1 to 3.8), social strain (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.48) and negative aspects of social support (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.3) were independent risk factors for CFS in the overall sample. Together these risk factors explained ethnic differences in the prevalence of CFS, but no single risk factor could explain a higher prevalence in all ethnic groups.

CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of CFS, but not CF, varies by ethnic group. Anxiety, depression, physical inactivity, social strain and negative aspects of social support together accounted for prevalence differences of CFS in the overall sample.

Source: Bhui KS, Dinos S, Ashby D, Nazroo J, Wessely S, White PD. Chronic fatigue syndrome in an ethnically diverse population: the influence of psychosocial adversity and physical inactivity. BMC Med. 2011 Mar 21;9:26. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-9-26. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072345/ (Full article)

A review of the definitional criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The research community has for more than three decades tried to unravel the diagnostic mystery that is Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). This has resulted in considerable amounts of time and money being invested in attempts aimed at establishing the aetiology and pathogenesis of CFS. All of this investment has produced evidence of an interesting variety of endocrine, immune, infectious, muscular and neurological abnormalities in CFS; however, the cause remains elusive. The absence of a known causative agent or diagnostic test for CFS has resulted in the development of a number of CFS case definitions. As such, the main objectives of this paper are to provide a critical review of the similarities and differences between the varying approaches to CFS case definition. The conflicts and controversies that have emerged as a result of the differing definitional criterion for CFS are highlighted and the potential impact on future research is identified.

METHODS, RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents a critical review of the most frequently used case definitions in CFS. There are currently five case definitions of CFS; however, the most prominent and widely used of these definitions is the 1994 Centre for Disease Control and Prevention Case Definitions. However, the pre-eminence of this definition over the others has never been substantiated and it has been widely criticized for its lack of specificity. Furthermore, none of the above case definitions have produced evidence to demonstrate their accuracy or precision at defining cases of CFS. A summary description of the symptom profile included in each of the case definitions is provided. The inconsistencies that have emerged in CFS research as a consequence of differing approaches to case definition are also highlighted and discussed.

Source: Christley Y, Duffy T, Martin CR. A review of the definitional criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012 Feb;18(1):25-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01512.x. Epub 2010 Oct 4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21029269

Severe versus Moderate criteria for the new pediatric case definition for ME/CFS

Abstract:

The new diagnostic criteria for pediatric ME/CFS are structurally based on the Canadian Clinical Adult case definition, and have more required specific symptoms than the (Fukuda et al. Ann Intern Med 121:953-959, 1994) adult case definition.

Physicians specializing in pediatric ME/CFS referred thirty-three pediatric patients with ME/CFS and 21 youth without the illness. Those who met ME/CFS criteria were separated into Severe and Moderate categories. Significant differences were found for symptoms within each of the six major categories: fatigue, post-exertional malaise, sleep, pain, neurocognitive difficulties, and autonomic/neuroendocrine/immune manifestations.

In general, the results showed participants who met the Severe ME/CFS criteria reported the highest scores, the Moderate ME/CFS group show scores that were a little lower, and the control group evidenced the lowest scores. Findings indicate that the Pediatric Case Definition for ME/CFS can distinguish between those with this illness and controls, and between those with Severe versus Moderate manifestations of the illness.

Source: Jason L, Porter N, Shelleby E, Till L, Bell DS, Lapp CW, Rowe K, De Meirleir K. Severe versus Moderate criteria for the new pediatric case definition for ME/CFS. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2009 Dec;40(4):609-20. doi: 10.1007/s10578-009-0147-8. Epub 2009 Jun 10.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19513826

Childhood chronic fatigue syndrome

Abstract:

Chronic fatigue syndrome in childhood and adolescents(CCFS) is a complex and debilitation with severe morbidity and confusion. It is common condition with up to 3-5% of children and adolescents showing strange fatigue and confusion for more than 30 days. In this condition, four major symptoms are important: sleep disorders, easy fatigability, disturbed learning and memorization and immunological problems. Routine laboratory studies are similar to adult CFS, although abnormalities can be seen on serum pyruvic acid level, OGTT pattern, deep body temperature rhythm, hormonal secretion rhythm, and cerebral blood flow. For a diagnosis of CCFS, a research group supported by Japanese ministry of health, labor and welfare developed CCFS case definition on 2004. Treatment focused to correct disrupted circadian rhythms and supply of energy.

Source: Miike T. Childhood chronic fatigue syndrome. Nihon Rinsho. 2007 Jun;65(6):1099-104. [Article in Japanese] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17561704

Overview of chronic fatigue syndrome focusing on prevalence and diagnostic criteria

Abstract:

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is an operational concept proposed by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to clarify the unknown etiology of the syndrome characterized by the sensation of abnormally prolonged fatigue. Lots of investigators reported various abnormalities such as virus infection, immune abnormalities, HPA axis abnormalities, metabolic abnormalities, etc., but there are a few abnormalities common to vast majority cases of CFS. Therefore, lots of people as well as medical doctors are still skeptical about the presence of CFS.

However, recent studies reveal that CFS can be understood to be a special condition based on the abnormality of neuroendocrine-immunologic system caused by the psycho-social stress and some genetic components. Under these conditions, a reactivation of various kinds of herpes virus infections and/or chronic infections might occur as a result of immune dysfunction, causing the abnormal production of several cytokines. A distinctive feature of CFS is thought to be the secondary brain dysfunction caused by the abnormal production of several cytokines. In this paper, I show the overview of CFS focusing around prevalence, economic impact and diagnostic criteria in Japan.

Source: Kuratsune H. Overview of chronic fatigue syndrome focusing on prevalence and diagnostic criteria. Nihon Rinsho. 2007 Jun;65(6):983-90. [Article in Japanese] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17561686

Translation and validation of the Dutch language version of the CDC Symptom Inventory for assessment of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: In a study by Wagner et al., the CDC Symptom Inventory was validated in a population selected from the inhabitants of a city in the USA, and proofed reliable for the assessment of the accompanying symptoms of CFS. The Dutch translation of the CDC Symptom Inventory is compared to the original and the psychometric properties are presented for patients in a tertiary care setting.

METHODS: One hundred thirty-nine consecutive patients who visited the CFS Center Amsterdam for the first time were asked to complete the CDC Symptom Inventory in the Dutch Language Version (DLV) together with the usual set of questionnaires. Sixty-one patients had Chronic Fatigue (CF) and 78 patients fulfilled the criteria for CFS. Forty-three healthy accompanying persons completed the CDC Symptom Inventory DLV, the Physical Functioning scale of the Medical Outcome Survey Short Form-36 DLV, and the Fatigue and Concentration scales of the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS-20).

RESULTS: The healthy controls group contained fewer women and was overall older than the patient groups. The influence of gender on the CDC Symptom Inventory DLV was significant but the effect of age was not. The Dutch version had a good internal consistency and convergent validity. The results were comparable to the original English version, but the sex-related difference needs further study.

CONCLUSION: The Dutch version of the CDC Symptom Inventory is a reliable tool for the assessment of the secondary criteria for CFS. The results show that it is comparable to the outcome of studies in English speaking countries.

Source: Vermeulen RC. Translation and validation of the Dutch language version of the CDC Symptom Inventory for assessment of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). Popul Health Metr. 2006 Oct 18;4:12. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1621077/ (Full article)