A cluster of patients with a chronic mononucleosis-like syndrome. Is Epstein-Barr virus the cause?

Abstract:

A cluster of 134 patients who had undergone Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serological testing because of suspected chronic EBV syndrome was investigated in Nevada.

Fifteen case-patients were identified who had severe, persistent fatigue of undetermined etiology for more than two months. When compared with the remaining 119 patients who had less severe illnesses and with 30 age-, sex-, and race-matched control-persons, these 15 patients had significantly higher antibody titers against various components of EBV and against cytomegalovirus and herpes simplex and measles viruses. Epstein-Barr virus serology could not reliably differentiate individual case-patients from the others, and the reproducibility of the tests within and among laboratories was poor.

As a group, the case-patients appear to have had a syndrome that is characterized by chronic fatigue, fever, sore throat, and lymphadenopathy. The relationship of this fatigue syndrome to EBV is unclear; further studies are needed to determine its etiology.

 

Source: Holmes GP, Kaplan JE, Stewart JA, Hunt B, Pinsky PF, Schonberger LB. A cluster of patients with a chronic mononucleosis-like syndrome. Is Epstein-Barr virus the cause? JAMA. 1987 May 1;257(17):2297-302. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3033337

 

Frequency of ‘chronic active Epstein-Barr virus infection’ in a general medical practice

Abstract:

Twenty-one percent of 500 unselected patients, aged 17 to 50 years, seeking primary care for any reason were found to be suffering from a chronic fatigue syndrome consistent with “chronic active Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection,” They had been experiencing “severe” fatigue, usually cyclic, for a median of 16 months (range, six to 458 months), associated with sore throat, myalgias, or headaches; 45% of the patients were periodically bedridden; and 25% to 73% reported recurrent cervical adenopathy, paresthesias, arthralgias, and difficulty in concentrating or sleeping.

The patients had no recognized chronic “physical” illness and were not receiving psychiatric care. While antibody titers to several EBV-specific antigens were higher in patients than in age- and sex-matched controls subjects, the differences generally were not statistically significant.

A chronic fatigue syndrome consistent with the chronic active EBV infection syndrome was prevalent in our primary care practice. However, our data offer no evidence that EBV is causally related to the syndrome. Indeed, we feel that among unselected patients seen in a general medical practice currently available EBV serologic test results must be interpreted with great caution.

 

Source: Buchwald D, Sullivan JL, Komaroff AL. Frequency of ‘chronic active Epstein-Barr virus infection’ in a general medical practice. JAMA. 1987 May 1;257(17):2303-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3033338

 

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