Researchers find biomarker for identifying chronic fatigue syndrome

People who have chronic fatigue syndrome finally have a way to prove their condition exists – something they’ve been looking for the longest time. Researchers from Stanford Medicine have developed a blood test that offers an accurate and reliable way to diagnose the disease.

“Too often, this disease is categorized as imaginary,” explained Ron Davis, a professor of biochemistry at Stanford and a co-author of the study. “All these different tests would normally guide the doctor toward one illness or another, but for chronic fatigue syndrome patients, the results all come back normal.”

The blood test developed by Davis and colleagues measured the way a patient’s immune cells and plasma responded to stress. They put their blood test through its paces in a small trial with 40 participants: Half of whom had chronic fatigue syndrome and the other half being healthy individuals.

After analyzing blood samples, the test successfully identified all 20 patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. Further, it did not flag any of the healthy people.

Aside from diagnosing patients for chronic fatigue syndrome, the test might also help determine if a potential treatment improved the response of the immune cells. (Related: Research reveals that a plant used in Ayurvedic medicine can potentially treat symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome.)

Definitive proof for chronic fatigue syndrome

When looking for chronic fatigue syndrome, healthcare providers look for symptoms such as exhaustion, light sensitivity, and inexplicable pain. However, they usually look for this disease after testing for all other potential health conditions.

It’s estimated that at least two million people in the U.S. have chronic fatigue syndrome. However, actual figures are likely to exceed that.

One of those millions of patients with chronic fatigue syndrome happens to be Davis’ son. The boy first displayed signs of the disease around a decade ago. He also bore a biomarker that inspired his father to develop the diagnostic tool.

Davis and co-researcher Rahim Esfandyarpour came up with a nano-electronic assay. They evaluated the status of immune cells and blood plasma by measuring any changes in minuscule energy levels.

Their prototype diagnostic tool featured numerous electrodes that generated electrical current. It also had chambers for keeping blood samples.

The experiment employed simplified samples with immune cells and plasma. Once a sample entered a holding chamber, its contents disrupted the way the electric current flowed from one end to another. Any shifts in electrical activity directly correspond to the health of the person.

New diagnostic tool checks stress response of immune cells

The Stanford-developed diagnostic test applied salt to the blood samples to cause stress. They examined how each sample changed the flow of the electrical current.

The current represented the immune cell. When the current changed, so did things on a cellular level. That variance in the electrical flow matched the severity of the changes inside the cells.

Sizable spikes in the flow of the electric current indicated an unhealthy response to stress. Both cells and blood plasma failed to handle it.

Results showed that the blood samples from patients with chronic fatigue syndrome caused the electric current to spike. In contrast, the samples from healthy participants produced stable returns.

“We don’t know exactly why the cells and plasma are acting this way, or even what they’re doing,” Davis noted. “But there is scientific evidence that this disease is not a fabrication of a patient’s mind.”

The diagnostic tool might also help determine the effectiveness of potential treatments for chronic fatigue syndrome. Evaluators might run the test first, add controlled doses of a potentially therapeutic substance to the blood samples, and then perform the diagnostics again.

If a tested substance succeeded in reducing the spike in electrical activity, it might be boosting immune cells and plasma against stress.

The findings were released in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Sources include:

ScienceDaily.com

PNAS.org