Replacing Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome with Systemic Exercise Intolerance Disease Is Not the Way forward

Videoconference-delivered group Cognitive Behavioral Stress Management for ME/CFS patients who present with severe PEM: A randomized controlled trial

Background

In Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), post-exertional malaise (PEM) is associated with greater distress and symptoms. Cognitive Behavioral Stress Management (CBSM) has demonstrated beneficial effects for ME/CFS and may mitigate stress-related triggers of PEM. We tested a virtual CBSM intervention to increase access, and we report on its effects on stress and symptoms in ME/CFS patients with severe PEM.

Methods

Data were from a randomized controlled trial (NCT01650636) comparing 10-week videoconference-delivered group CBSM (V-CBSM, n=75) to a 10-week Health Information active control (V-HI, n=75) in Fukuda criteria ME/CFS patients (71 classified as highPEM, 79 lowPEM). Linear regression explored PEM-by-Treatment interactions on overall symptom frequency and intensity, perceived stress, and fatigue-specific interference and intensity, at 5-month follow-up. Logistic regression tested V-CBSM effects on 5-month PEM status. Analyses controlled for age, gender, race/ethnicity, mode of symptom onset, and time since diagnosis.

Results

The sample was middle-aged (47.96±10.89 years), mostly women (87%) and non-Hispanic White (65%), with no group differences on these variables or baseline PEM. For highPEM patients, V-CBSM (versus V-HI) demonstrated medium to large effects on follow-up symptom frequency, symptom intensity, fatigue interference, and fatigue intensity (p's < .05) and trending to significant reductions in perceived stress (p =.07). Differences were not evident for lowPEM patients. Treatment predicted follow-up PEM status at a trend (p = .058), with patients receiving V-CBSM demonstrating half the risk of highPEM classification versus V-HI.

Conclusions

V-CBSM demonstrates benefits for ME/CFS patients presenting with severe PEM and may reduce the expression of PEM over time.

Separating Patients with SEID from Those with CFS in the French ME/CFS Association, with Some Thoughts on Nomenclature

In 2015, the American Institute of Medicine, now called the National Academy of Medicine, (IOM/NAM) proposed new diagnostic criteria for both Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) and a new label: Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease (SEID). This study aimed to evaluate the SEID criteria among members of the French Association of ME/CFS (ASFC) and their opinion about this new name. We sent an anonymous questionnaire to 494 ASFC members, using French-translated questions derived from the IOM/NAM tool kit. Among the 178/231 responding subjects who reported ME/CFS diagnosis, 150 (84%) met the criteria of SEID. For each set of questions, we identified some of them that significantly distinguished SEID from non-SEID patients concerning unrefreshing sleep, cognitive disorders, and orthostatic intolerance items. Forty-six percent of the respondents considered the “SEID” terminology as more appropriate than “CFS”, 39% considered it inappropriate, and 15% had no opinion. Some questions better identified the SEID criteria. The IOM/NAM SEID criteria captured a large part of ASFC members suffering from ME/CFS. However, this new SEID label was not well accepted by the subjects, nor were the other denominations, suggesting that a better term should be found. Pending development of specific markers, further work with patient communities is needed to find a more suitable label.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME)

Background

Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) has been emerging as a significant health issue worldwide. This study aimed to systemically assess the prevalence of CFS/ME in various aspects of analyses for precise assessment.

Methods

We systematically searched prevalence of CFS/ME from public databases from 1980 to December 2018. Data were extracted according to 7 categories for analysis: study participants, gender and age of the participants, case definition, diagnostic method, publication year, and country of the study conducted. Prevalence data were collected and counted individually for studies adopted various case definitions. We analyzed and estimated prevalence rates in various angles: average prevalence, pooled prevalence and meta-analysis of all studies.

Results

A total of 1291 articles were initially identified, and 45 articles (46 studies, 56 prevalence data) were selected for this study. Total 1085,976 participants were enrolled from community-based survey (540,901) and primary care sites (545,075). The total average prevalence was 1.40 ± 1.57%, pooled prevalence 0.39%, and meta-analysis 0.68% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]. The prevalence rates were varied by enrolled participants (gender, study participants, and population group), case definitions and diagnostic methods. For example, in the meta-analysis; women (1.36% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]) vs. men (0.86% [95% CI 0.48–0.97]), community-based samples (0.76% [95% CI 0.53–1.10]) vs. primary care sites (0.63% [95% CI 0.37–1.10]), adults ≥ 18 years (0.65% [95% CI 0.43–0.99]) vs. children and adolescents < 18 years (0.55% [95% CI 0.22–1.35]), CDC-1994 (0.89% [95% CI 0.60–1.33]) vs. Holmes (0.17% [95% CI 0.06–0.49]), and interviews (1.14% [95% CI 0.76–1.72]) vs. physician diagnosis (0.09% [95% CI 0.05–0.13]), respectively.

Conclusions

This study comprehensively estimated the prevalence of CFS/ME; 0.89% according to the most commonly used case definition CDC-1994, with women approximately 1.5 to 2 folds higher than men in all categories. However, we observed the prevalence rates are widely varied particularly by case definitions and diagnostic methods. An objective diagnostic tool is urgently required for rigorous assessment of the prevalence of CFS/ME.

Post-exertional malaise is associated with greater symptom burden and psychological distress in patients diagnosed with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Post-exertional malaise (PEM) is often considered a cardinal symptom of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). There is no gold standard diagnostic method for CFS, however, and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Fukuda case definition does not require PEM. Research has identified differences in symptom burden between patients according to PEM, but whether it is associated with psychological distress has not been investigated.

METHODS

The CDC CFS Inventory, Fatigue Symptom Inventory, Profile of Mood States, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Perceived Stress Scale, and subscales of the Sickness Impact Profile were administered to 261 patients diagnosed with the Fukuda criteria. PEM status (loPEM/hiPEM) was determined via self-reported post-exertional fatigue severity. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVA), controlling for age and gender, assessed cross-sectional group differences, and cross-sectional linear regressions using the continuous PEM severity predictor paralleled these analyses.

RESULTS

hiPEM patients reported greater symptom intensity, frequency, and interference than loPEM counterparts (p's < .001). hiPEM patients also reported greater social disruption, depressive symptoms, and mood disturbance (p's ≤ .011). Groups did not differ in recent negative life experiences, perceived stress, or demographic variables. The results of regression analyses mirrored those of ANCOVAs.

CONCLUSION

This study replicates the association between PEM and symptom burden and additionally associates PEM with psychological distress; psychological distress could, however, be a consequence of symptom burden. Differences between hiPEM and loPEM CFS patients highlight the heterogeneity of diagnoses resulting from the Fukuda criteria. It is also possible that PEM identifies particularly distressed patients for whom psychological intervention would be most beneficial.

Myalgic Encephalomyelitis or What? The International Consensus Criteria

Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is a neuromuscular disease with two distinctive types of symptoms (muscle fatigability or prolonged muscle weakness after minor exertion and symptoms related to neurological disturbance, especially of sensory, cognitive, and autonomic functions) and variable involvement of other bodily systems. Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), introduced in 1988 and re-specified in 1994, is defined as (unexplained) chronic fatigue accompanied by at least four out of eight listed (ill-defined) symptoms. Although ME and CFS are two distinct clinical entities (with partial overlap), CFS overshadowed ME for decades. In 2011, a panel of experts recommended abandoning the label CFS and its definition and proposed a new definition of ME: the International Consensus Criteria for ME (ME-ICC). In addition to post-exertional neuroimmune exhaustion (PENE), a mandatory feature, a patient must experience at least three symptoms related to neurological impairments; at least three symptoms related to immune, gastro-intestinal, and genitourinary impairments; and at least one symptom related to energy production or transportation impairments to meet the diagnosis of ME-ICC. A comparison between the original definition of ME and the ME-ICC shows that there are some crucial differences between ME and ME-ICC. Muscle fatigability, or long-lasting post-exertional muscle weakness, is the hallmark feature of ME, while this symptom is facultative for the diagnosis under the ME-ICC. PENE, an abstract notion that is very different from post-exertional muscle weakness, is the hallmark feature of the ME-ICC but is not required for the diagnosis of ME. The diagnosis of ME requires only two type of symptoms (post-exertional muscle weakness and neurological dysfunction), but a patient has to experience at least eight symptoms to meet the diagnosis according to the ME-ICC. Autonomic, sensory, and cognitive dysfunction, mandatory for the diagnosis of ME, are not compulsory to meet the ME-ICC subcriteria for 'neurological impairments'. In conclusion, the diagnostic criteria for ME and of the ME-ICC define two different patient groups. Thus, the definitions of ME and ME-ICC are not interchangeable.

Dutch Health Council Advisory Report on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Taking the Wrong Turn

Recently, the Dutch Health Council published their advisory report on Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME)/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) which is meant to determine the medical policy with regard to ME in the Netherlands. The Health Council briefly discusses several diagnostic criteria and proposes to use new diagnostic criteria for "ME/CFS" in research and clinical practice in the future. The advisory report then summarizes organic abnormalities observed in the last decades and concludes that "ME/CFS" is a "serious, chronic, multisystem disease". According to the Health Council there are no curative treatments for "ME/CFS", due to lack of knowledge, but specific medication could bring symptomatic relief. The Health Council recommends conducting more research, to (re)educate medical professionals about "ME/CFS", to appoint three academic expertise centres, which will install a care network for patients, and to fairly judge the limitations (disability) of patients when they apply for a disability income, medical aid and care. The advisory report was welcomed by many patients, because it puts an end to the dominance of the (bio)psychosocial explanatory model and seems to offer a perspective of improving the situation of patients. However, the starting point of the advisory report, a new definition of "ME/CFS", will have serious (long-lasting) consequences for patients and researchers.