Immune Markers in Cerebrospinal Fluid Provide Insights Into the Basis for Symptoms Like “Brain Fog”

Press Release: Mailman School of Public Health, March 30, 2015. Scientists at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health have identified a unique pattern of immune molecules in the cerebrospinal fluid of people with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) that provides insights into the basis for cognitive dysfunction—frequently described by patients as “brain fog”—as well as new hope for improvements in diagnosis and treatment.

In the study published in Molecular Psychiatry, Mady Hornig, MD, and colleagues used immunoassay testing methods to measure levels of 51 immune biomarkers called cytokines in the cerebrospinal fluid of 32 people with ME/CFS for an average of seven years, 40 with multiple sclerosis, and 19 non-diseased controls. The researchers found that levels of most cytokines, including the inflammatory immune molecule interleukin 1, were depressed in individuals with ME/CFS compared with the other two groups, matching what was seen in a blood study in patients who had the disease for more than three years. One cytokine—eotaxin—was elevated in the ME/CFS and MS groups, but not in the control group.

“We now know that the same changes to the immune system that we recently reported in the blood of people with ME/CFS with long-standing disease are also present in the central nervous system,” says Dr. Hornig, professor of Epidemiology and director of translational research at the Center for Infection and Immunity at the Mailman School. “These immune differences may contribute to symptoms in both the peripheral parts of the body and the brain, from muscle weakness to brain fog.”

Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment

“Diagnosis of ME/CFS is now based on clinical criteria. Our findings offer the hope of objective diagnostic tests for disease as well as the potential for therapies that correct the imbalance in cytokine levels seen in people with ME/CFS at different stages of their disease,” adds W. Ian Lipkin, MD, John Snow Professor of Epidemiology and director of the Center for Infection and Immunity.

There is precedent for use of human monoclonal antibodies that regulate the immune response in a wide range of disorders from rheumatoid arthritis to multiple sclerosis. However, the researchers note, additional work will be needed to assess the safety and efficacy of this approach.

The study was supported by a grant from the Chronic Fatigue Initiative of the Hutchins Family Foundation and the Edward P. Evans Foundation.

Additional authors include Andrew F. Schultz, Meredith L. Eddy and Xiaoyu Che at the Mailman School; C. Gunnar Gottschalk and Daniel L. Peterson at Sierra Internal Medicine in Incline Village, NV; and Konstance K. Knox at Coppe Health Care Solutions in Waukesha, WI, and Simmaron Research in Incline Village, NV.

Journal Reference: M Hornig, G Gottschalk, D L Peterson, K K Knox, A F Schultz, M L Eddy, X Che, W I Lipkin. Cytokine network analysis of cerebrospinal fluid in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome. Molecular Psychiatry, 2015; DOI: 10.1038/mp.2015.29

 

Epidemic myalgic encephalomyelitis

The letter below, “Epidemic myalgic encephalomyelitis,” was published in the British Medical Journal in 1978. In it, the authors maintain that ME is an organic illness that exists as a distinct clinical entity with recognizable signs and symptoms. The authors propose that the cause may be “a persistent viral infection.

 

Epidemic myalgic encephalomyelitis

Outbreaks of the paralytic disease known as epidemic myalgic encephalomyelitis have puzzled doctors all over the world in the past 30 years. One of the best known of these epidemics was that at the Royal Free Hospital in London in 1955, which affected more than 300 people. (1) Most outbreaks tend to occur in the summer, young adults are predominantly affected, and the incidence is higher in women. The evidence suggests that infection is spread by personal contact, and young hospital personnel seem particularly at risk. The features common to every epidemic include headache, unusual muscular pains (which may be severe), lymphadenopathy-often of the posterior cervical lymph nodes-and low-grade fever.(2, 3) In a minority of cases frank neurological signs can be detected by careful clinical examination: there may be nystagmus, diplopia, myoclonus, bulbar weakness, motor weakness, increased or decreased tendon reflexes, disturbances of the sphincters, and extensor plantar responses.(2-7) Fasciculations, cranial nerve lesions, and extrapyramidal signs have also been reported. Most patients complain of paraesthesiae, and sensory loss is common.”(4) One characteristic feature of the disease is exhaustion, any effort producing generalised fatigue. Often there are psychiatric abnormalities, especially emotional lability and lack of concentration.(1- 3, 4) The clinical outcome may take any of three courses: some patients recover completely, some follow a relapsing course, and some are permanently incapacitated.(3)

At a symposium held recently at the Royal Society of Medicine to discuss the disease and plan research there was clear agreement that myalgic encephalomyelitis is a distinct nosological entity. Other terms that have been used to describe the disease were rejected as unsatisfactory for various reasons: the cardinal clinical features show that the disorder is an encephalomyelitis; “Iceland disease” is not specific enough; and “neuromyasthenia” suggests a relation to myasthenia gravis whereas the muscle fatigability is different, as are the electrophysiological findings.(8) Indeed, the exhaustion and tiredness are similar to that described by patients with multiple sclerosis.(9) From the patient’s point of view the designation benign is also misleading, since the illness may be devastating. Originally the term was used because no deaths had been recorded from myalgic encephalomyelitis. Two patients who had had the disease have now been examined post mortem: one was found to have multiple sclerosis. The adjective epidemic is correct, since most cases occur in an epidemic, but the disease may be endemic, and sporadic cases may occur. (10-12)

Some authors have attempted to dismiss this disease as hysterical, (13) but the evidence now makes such a tenet unacceptable. Some purely psychiatric symptoms may well occur, particularly in patients entering the chronic phase. No doubt, too, in an epidemic some hysterical persons will simulate the symptoms of the disease. Nevertheless, the organic basis is clear-from the finding that the putative agent can be transferred to monkeys(14); the detection of an increased urinary output of creatine2 (15); the persistent finding of abnormal lymphocytes in the peripheral blood of some patients (16); the presence of lymphocytes and an increased protein concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid of occasional patients (3); and the neurological findings. At this symposium more evidence was produced to support the organic nature of the disease. Increased serum concentrations of lactic dehydrogenases and transaminases have been found in several patients examined during the acute attack. In a recent outbreak in London immunological studies showed a high incidence of serum anticomplementary activity and the presence of ill-defined aggregates on electron microscopy of acute-phase sera.(17) A perplexing finding, suggesting the possibility of a persistent virus infection, was the ability of lymphocytes from patients to proliferate and survive in vitro for up to 19 weeks. The results of electroencephalographic studies were also stated to be abnormal, confirming other reports. (10)

We still know nothing about the nature and cause of epidemic myalgic encephalomyelitis, but outbreaks are still occurring. Future epidemics should be studied by a collaborative team of neurologists, epidemiologists, virologists, and immunologists. Its findings would be important not only for the study of epidemic myalgic encephalomyelitis but also for other neurological disorders, including multiple sclerosis.

1 British Medical Journal, 1957, 2, 895.

2 White, D N, and Burtch, R B, Neurology, 1954, 4, 506.

3 Acheson, E D, American Journal of Medicine, 1959, 26, 569.

4 Gilliam, A G, Epidemiological Study of an Epidemic, Public Health Bulletin, No 240. US Public Health Service, Washington, 1938.

5 Acheson, E D, Lancet, 1955, 2, 394.

6 Pellew, R A A, Medical Journal of Australia, 1951, 1, 944.

7 Hill, R C J, South African Medical Journal, 1955, 29, 344.

8 Richardson, A T, Annals of Physical Medicine, 1956, 3, 81.

9 McAlpine, D, Compston, N D, and Lumsden, C E, Multiple Sclerosis, chap 5. Edinburgh and London, Livingstone, 1955. ”

10 Ramsay, A M, and O’Sullivan, E, Lancet, 1956, 1, 761.

11 Jelinek, J E, Lancet, 1956, 2, 494.

12 Ramsay, A M, Lancet, 1957, 2, 1196.

13 McEvedey, C P, and Beard, A W, British Medical Journal, 1970, 1, 7.

14 Pellew, R A A, and Miles, J A R, Medical Journal of Australia, 1955, 2, 480.

15 Albrecht, R M, Oliver, V L, and Poskanzer, D C, Journal of the American Medical Association, 1964, 187, 904.

16 Wallis, A L, MD Thesis, Edinburgh University, 1957.

17 Dillon, M J, et al, British Medical Journal, 1974, 1, 301.

 

Source: BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL 3 JUNE 1978 1436-1437

You can read and download a PDF file of the letter at:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1604957/?page=1