treatment protocols – American ME and CFS Society

Chronic inflammatory response syndrome: a review of the evidence of clinical efficacy of treatment

Abstract:

Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (CIRS) is an acquired medical condition characterized by innate immune dysregulation following respiratory exposure to water-damaged buildings (WDB). This chronic syndrome involves a range of symptoms that simultaneously affecting multiple organ systems. The purpose of this literature review was to search the published literature for successful treatments for chronic inflammatory response syndrome, an under-recognized, underdiagnosed, multisymptom multisystem illness that can affect up to 25% of the population, thus representing a silent epidemic.

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), a common misdiagnosis for CIRS, is an entity that has broader awareness within the medical community despite the absence of a defined etiology, biomarkers or a treatment protocol that reverses the underlying conditions. Therefore, the search also included treatments for ME/CFS and sick building syndrome (SBS). Thirteen articles referenced treatment for CIRS, and 22 articles referenced treatment for CFS.

The only treatment with documented clinical efficacy was the Shoemaker Protocol, which was described in 11 of the 13 articles. This treatment protocol exhibits superior outcomes compared with the treatment protocols for ME/CFS.

Source: Dooley M, Vukelic A, Jim L. Chronic inflammatory response syndrome: a review of the evidence of clinical efficacy of treatment. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2024 Nov 8;86(12):7248-7254. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000002718. PMID: 39649915; PMCID: PMC11623837. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11623837/ (Full text)

A technology-enabled multi-disciplinary team-based care model for the management of Long COVID and other fatiguing illnesses within a federally qualified health center: protocol for a two-arm, single-blind, pragmatic, quality improvement professional cluster randomized controlled trial

Abstract:

Background: The clinical burden of Long COVID, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), and other post-infectious fatiguing illnesses (PIFI) is increasing. There is a critical need to advance understanding of the effectiveness and sustainability of innovative approaches to clinical care of patients having these conditions.

Methods: We aim to assess the effectiveness of a Long COVID and Fatiguing Illness Recovery Program (LC&FIRP) in a two-arm, single-blind, pragmatic, quality improvement, professional cluster, randomized controlled trial in which 20 consenting clinicians across primary care clinics in a Federally Qualified Health Center system in San Diego, CA, will be randomized at a ratio of 1:1 to either participate in (1) weekly multi-disciplinary team-based case consultation and peer-to-peer sharing of emerging best practices (i.e., teleECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes)) with monthly interactive webinars and quarterly short courses or (2) monthly interactive webinars and quarterly short courses alone (a control group); 856 patients will be assigned to participating clinicians (42 patients per clinician). Patient outcomes will be evaluated according to the study arm of their respective clinicians. Quantitative and qualitative outcomes will be measured at 3- and 6-months post-baseline for clinicians and every 3-months post assignment to a participating clinician for patients. The primary patient outcome is change in physical function measured using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-29. Analyses of differences in outcomes at both the patient and clinician levels will include a linear mixed model to compare change in outcomes from baseline to each post-baseline assessment between the randomized study arms. A concurrent prospective cohort study will compare the LC&FIRP patient population to the population enrolled in a university health system. Longitudinal data analysis approaches will allow us to examine differences in outcomes between cohorts.

Discussion: We hypothesize that weekly teleECHO sessions with monthly interactive webinars and quarterly short courses will significantly improve clinician- and patient-level outcomes compared to the control group. This study will provide much needed evidence on the effectiveness of a technology-enabled multi-disciplinary team-based care model for the management of Long COVID, ME/CFS, and other PIFI within a federally qualified health center.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05167227 . Registered on December 22, 2021.

Source: Godino JG, Samaniego JC, Sharp SP, Taren D, Zuber A, Armistad AJ, Dezan AM, Leyba AJ, Friedly JL, Bunnell AE, Matthews E, Miller MJ, Unger ER, Bertolli J, Hinckley A, Lin JS, Scott JD, Struminger BB, Ramers C. A technology-enabled multi-disciplinary team-based care model for the management of Long COVID and other fatiguing illnesses within a federally qualified health center: protocol for a two-arm, single-blind, pragmatic, quality improvement professional cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2023 Aug 12;24(1):524. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07550-3. PMID: 37573421. https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13063-023-07550-3 (Full text)

STIMULATE-ICP: A pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster randomised trial of an integrated care pathway with a nested, Phase III, open label, adaptive platform randomised drug trial in individuals with Long COVID: A structured protocol

Abstract:

Introduction: Long COVID (LC), the persistent symptoms ≥12 weeks following acute COVID-19, presents major threats to individual and public health across countries, affecting over 1.5 million people in the UK alone. Evidence-based interventions are urgently required and an integrated care pathway approach in pragmatic trials, which include investigations, treatments and rehabilitation for LC, could provide scalable and generalisable solutions at pace.

Methods and analysis: This is a pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster-randomised clinical trial of two components of an integrated care pathway (Coverscan™, a multi-organ MRI, and Living with COVID Recovery™, a digitally enabled rehabilitation platform) with a nested, Phase III, open label, platform randomised drug trial in individuals with LC. Cluster randomisation is at level of primary care networks so that integrated care pathway interventions are delivered as “standard of care” in that area. The drug trial randomisation is at individual level and initial arms are rivaroxaban, colchicine, famotidine/loratadine, compared with no drugs, with potential to add in further drug arms. The trial is being carried out in 6-10 LC clinics in the UK and is evaluating the effectiveness of a pathway of care for adults with LC in reducing fatigue and other physical, psychological and functional outcomes at 3 months. The trial also includes an economic evaluation which will be described separately.

Ethics and dissemination: The protocol was reviewed by South Central-Berkshire Research Ethics Committee (reference: 21/SC/0416). All participating sites obtained local approvals prior to recruitment. Coverscan™ has UK certification (UKCA 752965). All participants will provide written consent to take part in the trial. The first participant was recruited in July 2022 and interim/final results will be disseminated in 2023, in a plan co-developed with public and patient representatives. The results will be presented at national and international conferences, published in peer reviewed medical journals, and shared via media (mainstream and social) and patient support organisations.

Trial registration number: ISRCTN10665760.

Source: Forshaw D, Wall EC, Prescott G, Dehbi HM, Green A, Attree E, Hismeh L, Strain WD, Crooks MG, Watkins C, Robson C, Banerjee R, Lorgelly P, Heightman M, Banerjee A; STIMULATE-ICP trial team. STIMULATE-ICP: A pragmatic, multi-centre, cluster randomised trial of an integrated care pathway with a nested, Phase III, open label, adaptive platform randomised drug trial in individuals with Long COVID: A structured protocol. PLoS One. 2023 Feb 15;18(2):e0272472. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272472. PMID: 36791116; PMCID: PMC9931100. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9931100/ (Full text)

Treatments of chronic fatigue syndrome and its debilitating comorbidities: a 12-year population-based study

Abstract:

Background: This study aims to provide 12-year nationwide epidemiology data to investigate the epidemiology and comorbidities of and therapeutic options for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) by analyzing the National Health Insurance Research Database.

Methods: 6306 patients identified as having CFS during the 2000-2012 period and 6306 controls (with similar distributions of age and sex) were analyzed.

Result: The patients with CFS were predominantly female and aged 35-64 years in Taiwan and presented a higher proportion of depression, anxiety disorder, insomnia, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, renal disease, type 2 diabetes, gout, dyslipidemia, rheumatoid arthritis, Sjogren syndrome, and herpes zoster. The use of selective serotonin receptor inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), Serotonin antagonist and reuptake inhibitors (SARIs), Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), benzodiazepine (BZD), Norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitors (NDRIs), muscle relaxants, analgesic drugs, psychotherapies, and exercise therapies was prescribed significantly more frequently in the CFS cohort than in the control group.

Conclusion: This large national study shared the mainstream therapies of CFS in Taiwan, we noticed these treatments reported effective to relieve symptoms in previous studies. Furthermore, our findings indicate that clinicians should have a heightened awareness of the comorbidities of CFS, especially in psychiatric problems.

Source: Leong KH, Yip HT, Kuo CF, Tsai SY. Treatments of chronic fatigue syndrome and its debilitating comorbidities: a 12-year population-based study. J Transl Med. 2022 Jun 11;20(1):268. doi: 10.1186/s12967-022-03461-0. PMID: 35690765. https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-022-03461-0 (Full study)

Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: Differences in treatment outcome between a tertiary treatment centre in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands

Abstract:

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) reduces fatigue and disability in chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). However, outcomes vary between studies, possibly because of differences in patient characteristics, treatment protocols, diagnostic criteria and outcome measures. The objective was to compare outcomes after CBT in tertiary treatment centres in the Netherlands (NL) and the United Kingdom (UK), using different treatment protocols but identical outcome measures, while controlling for differences in patient characteristics and diagnostic criteria.

METHODS: Consecutively referred CFS patients who received CBT were included (NL: n=293, UK: n=163). Uncontrolled effect sizes for improvement in fatigue (Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire), physical functioning (SF-36 physical functioning subscale) and social functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale) were compared. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine whether patient differences explained outcome differences between centres.

RESULTS: Effect sizes differed between centres for fatigue (Cohen’s D NL=1.74, 95% CI=1.52-1.95; UK=0.99, CI=0.73-1.25), physical functioning (NL=0.99, CI=0.81-1.18; UK=0.33, CI=0.08-0.58) and social functioning (NL=1.47, CI=1.26-1.69; UK=0.61, CI=0.35-0.86). Patients in the UK had worse physical functioning at baseline and there were minor demographic differences. These could not explain differences in centre outcome.

CONCLUSION: Effectiveness of CBT differed between treatment centres. Differences in treatment protocols may explain this and should be investigated to help further improve outcomes.

Source: Worm-Smeitink M, Nikolaus S, Goldsmith K, Wiborg J, Ali S, Knoop H, Chalder T. Cognitive behaviour therapy for chronic fatigue syndrome: Differences in treatment outcome between a tertiary treatment centre in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. J Psychosom Res. 2016 Aug;87:43-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.06.006. Epub 2016 Jun 11. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27411751