ME-de-Patiƫnten Foundation, Zonnedauw 15, 1906 HB Limmen, The Netherlands; frank.twisk@hetnet.nl; Tel.: +31-72-505-4775
Received: 3 August 2018; Accepted: 6 September 2018; Published: 8 September 2018
(In Revised & In Reply to, 4th September 2025 by Larrin Carney)
Abstract:
Dr. Stephen Straus (American Physician, immunologist, virologist and science administrator) for the NIH
As predicted,
CFS, unjustly considered to be a synonym for M.E.,
...pushed M.E. to the background.
For that reason, an
operational definition of
M.E. is
indispensable.
This article proposes an
operational definition based on the most recent
formal definitions and
symptoms observed in
M.E..
M.E. is a multi-systemic illness, which
(3) has an unique clinical pattern deviating from other post-viral states;
(5) is accompanied by symptoms relating to
"Neurological Disturbance", especially of
Neurocognitive, Autonomic and
Sensory functions;
(6) can be accompanied by symptoms associated with cardiac and other systems;
(7) is characterized by fluctuation of symptoms (within and between “episodes”);
(8) has a prolonged relapsing course; and
(9) has a tendency to become CHRONIC.
In conclusion, a discriminative definition for M.E. contains four mandatory elements:
(2) operational criteria for “
Neurological Disturbance", especially of
Neurocognitive,
Autonomic and
Sensory functions”;
(3) Fluctuation of Symptoms; and
(4) A prolonged relapsing course.
1. Introduction
Dr. Stephen Straus (American Physician, immunologist, virologist and science administrator) for the NIH
The case criteria for CFS define a heterogeneous group of patients with chronic fatigue (accompanied by 163 different combinations of “minor” symptoms).
M.E. and CFS are entirely different constructs: M.E. is an acute-onset, polio-like, diagnosable, and distinct neurological disease attributed to enteroviral infection; whereas CFS is an ill-defined syndrome encompassing a heterogeneous group of patients, characterized by chronic or profound fatigue, and treated as a “diagnosis of exclusion.”
Chronic fatigue has
never been described as a
distinctive feature of
M.E....
...specific neurological symptoms, discriminative features of
M.E....
...are
not required to meet the
non-diagnosis of
CFS.
Thus, the vast majority of studies into “ME/CFS” published since 1990 relate to patients fulfilling the case criteria for CFS.
The confusion with regard to diagnosis and abnormalities which has arisen as a result of the introduction of the "non-diagnosis" of CFS was forecasted in 1988 by the renowned M.E. expert Dr. Betty Dowsett, who stated;
Studies adopting "CFS" research criterias have become
much more prominent, since his death.
"At the first meeting on the 27th of October 2005, the Chairman of the Joint Committee, Dr. Ian Gibson, asked me to prepare a report and definition that might assist the committee in its further deliberations. The following are my original recommendation. Dr. Bruce Carruthers, who chaired the 2003 Canadian Clinical Case Definition for ME/CFS, was also present when I gave this definition. I strongly disagreed with Dr. Carruthers in the merging of the definitions of M.E. and CFS since on basis of the physical total body assessment of both M.E. and CFS patients; these two names represent two entirely different spectrums of illnesses. The present 2016 definition is confined to the defining of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (M.E.). The term CFS is mentioned from time to time to clarify differences.
It is increasingly obvious that too much importance was being placed upon the definitions of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), and not enough upon the actual disease, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (M.E.). These two illness spectrums are not the same and shouldn't be considered the same. Nor is there any doubt in my mind that the various definitions of CFS actively impede physicians' ability to make a rapid and rational diagnosis as well as a scientific confirmation of any testable illness. Such is not true of M.E. where a rapid and rational diagnosis can be confirmed by laboratory and other technological testing."
"In my 27-year investigation of M.E. and CFS patients, I can state with clarity that there is less psychiatric among M.E. or CFS patients than in the general public"
"Garbage Bag Disease: Unfortunately, many physicians appear to be using CFS (currently erroneously labelled ME/CFS) as a convenient garbage bag disease, simply telling patients whom they have no time to investigate, "Oh, you have Chronic Fatigue Syndrome". It is most unfortunate that the Americans, who have now promoted the idea that CFS is the same as M.E. have only compounded the disaster. Due to this garbage bag phenomena mentality many CFS patients are never properly investigated for serious disease and most CFS patients have significant and often treatable pathologies."
"This document is an excellent and timely antidote to the scientifically unsupportable ICC - the latest unhelpful CFS redefinition being endlessly promoted by "ME/CFS" advocates - and so is highly recommended by HFME" - Jodi Bassett
Canadian Consensus Criteria (CCC) - MEPedia
Beyond Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome - Redefining an illness - Ellen Wright Clayton, Margarita AlegrĆa, Lucinda Bateman, Lily Chu, Charles Cleeland, Ronald Davis, Betty Diamond, Theodore Ganiats, Betty Keller, Nancy Klimas, Martin Lerner, Cynthia Mulrow, Benjamin Natelson, Peter Rowe and Michael Shelanski (Institutional Medicine of Medicine (IOM) / The National Academy Press, 2015)
Dr. Ramsay was a consultant physician in infectious diseases at the Royal Free Hospital in London (United Kingdom) during an outbreak of M.E. in 1955.
From that date until his death
Ramsay was closely involved in
M.E. cases.
For that reason an
operational definition of
M.E. is
indispensable.
The aim of this study was to compose an operational definition of
M.E. based on the definition and description in the most recent relevant articles, the symptoms and signs observed in the various
epidemics (1934–1983) and
endemic cases of
M.E., and the symptoms often and less-often experienced by
420 patients with
M.E..
2. Method
The starting point of the search of an operational definition of
M.E. are the last two formal descriptions of
M.E..
As can be seen from Tables 1 and 2, the definitions of
M.E. in these two publications are essentially the same.
The elements were classified as symptomatic features or characteristic features of the disease (Figure 1, Step 1).
Based on the text, elements were classified as mandatory or optional (Step 2).
For example the phrase “a tendency to chronicity” implies it does not apply to all patients: it is an optional feature.
This also applies to “variable involvement of cardiac and other systems”.
Table 1. The most recent formal definitions of M.E. (1990)
Definition of M.E. (1990)
The pathognomonic features (of M.E.) are:
1. Complaint of
general or local muscular fatigue following minimal exertion with prolonged recovery time.
3. Variable involvement of cardiac and other systems.
4. A prolonged relapsing course.
Other characteristics include a prolonged relapsing course and variation in intensity of symptoms within and between episodes, tending to chronicity.
Definition of M.E. (1992)
The cardinal features, in a patient who has previously been physically and mentally fit, with a good work record are:
1.
Generalised or
localised muscle fatigue after
minimal exertion with
prolonged recovery time.
3. Variable involvement of cardiac and other bodily systems.
4. An extended relapsing course with a tendency to chronicity.
5. Marked variability of symptoms both within and between episodes.”
The symptoms mentioned in
epidemic and
endemic cases of
M.E. were
analysed and
classified (Steps 3 and 5).
The
symptoms and
symptom categories were checked against
symptoms observed in 420 patients with
well-defined M.E. (Step 4).
The
basic assumption was that a patient should experience
at least one symptom related to
neurocognitive dysfunction,
at least one symptom related to
autonomic dysfunction, and
at least one symptom associated with
sensory dysfunction in order to meet
this operational criteria of M.E..
However, considering the frequency of the symptoms reported by
420 patients with
M.E. and the number of times specific symptoms were mentioned in the description of cases of
M.E., two changes were made (Step 7a).
First, since
only three symptoms observed relate to
cognitive disturbance, and
not all patients experience these three symptoms, it was decided that
Neurocognitive Dysfunction symptoms
should be combined with three other symptoms often reported by patients with M.E. (
two unclassified neurological symptoms related to sleep and headaches) in order to meet
the first operational criterion for “
Neurological Disturbance”. Second, because symptoms related to "
Sensory Dysfunction" are diverse and this category contains various symptoms often experienced by patients, it was decided that a patient should report
at least two symptoms of the “Sensory Symptoms” subcategory to meet the minimal requirement for “Sensory Dysfunction”.
3. Results
3.1. Characteristics
M.E. has been described since 1905...
...the
outbreak in the
Royal Free Hospital (London, UK) in 1955.
However, in the 1950's it became evident that
M.E. can also occur in
sporadic form : “
Endemic prevalence alternates with periodic epidemics, showing a curious predilection for female staff of health care and teaching institutions”.
3.1.2. Sudden Onset
It could be describing having an earlier encephalitic illness, and having a relapse into another 'acute onset' encephalitic or encephalomyelitic illness.
Gradual could be mistaking an underlying asymptomatic carrier from a previous infection, in which didn't completely clear, but becomes more symptomatic over time, and in which the infection remained more asymptomatic to the patient, to then becoming more symptomatic upon a new immune system challenge. (e.g. maybe a previous enterovirus infection from childhood, upon catching a later one in adolescence, or adulthood, and then developing a more substantial illness as a result, later on at some point. Enterovirus Persistence has been demonstrated by Dr. John Chia and others) (e.g. Andrew Chia)
3.1.3. An Acute and a Chronic Phase (Biphasic)
“The onset is usually acute with systemic prodromata such as are common in poliomyelitis.”.
In the outbreaks,
the prodromal phase was usually followed by
improvement for a few hours, days or weeks, after which
the symptoms returned more severely with
additional symptoms, including marked
muscle weakness.
In many cases the symptoms become chronic with a periodic relapsing course.
3.1.4. Not Just Like Other Post-Viral Fatigue States
M.E. should be distinguished from other forms of
“post-viral debility following Epstein-Barr mononucleosis, influenza and other common fevers” since
M.E. has
“an unique clinical and epidemiological pattern” and these other post-viral states “lack the dramatic effect of exercise upon muscle function, the multisystem involvement, diurnal variability of symptoms and
prolonged relapsing course”.
3.1.5. A Prolonged Relapsing Course
A
distinctive feature of M.E. is a
prolonged relapsing course. Years can pass
between two relapses.
Relapses can be caused by physical and mental stress (very often) and intercurrent infection (often).
Although outbreak patients appear to recover much often than sporadic patients, the illness often lasts for years or even decades.
3.1.6. Diurnal Variability of Symptoms
In addition to
periodic relapses or partial remission,
M.E. is characterized by a strong fluctuation of symptoms during the course of the day, and over time.
Physical and/or Mental Stress can have a (prolonged) Negative Effect on the symptoms.
3.2. Symptoms
...and specific neurological symptoms.
Patients often report various other symptoms relating to the
"muscles" and
“variable involvement of cardiac and other bodily systems”, e.g.,
myalgia (80%),
"Restoration of muscle power after
exertion can take
three to
five days or
even longer.”. This implies that
muscle fatigability/prolonged muscle motor weakness after exertion is a
discriminative feature of
M.E..
Long-lasting 'muscle weakness' after exertion can be
validated objectively by measuring muscle power of the arms, hands, legs, etc., during repeated 'muscle contractions' on two consecutive days using 'dynamometers'.
3.2.2. "Neurological Disturbance" is an Essential Feature of M.E.
...neurological symptoms are distinctive for
M.E..
Many symptoms observed in
epidemic and
endemic cases of
M.E. are related to
Neurological Dysfunction.
Considering the most recent definitions of M.E. and
the frequency of symptoms reported by
420 patients, a patient should experience
at least one symptom related to "
neurocognitive dysfunction" (n = 3) or "
one unclassified neurological symptom" (n = 3), "
one symptom related to "
autonomic dysfunction"
(n = 11) and
two symptoms related to
sensory dysfunction (n = 19)
to meet the proposed operational definition of M.E.
Table 3. Neurological symptoms of patients observed in endemic and epidemic cases.
Intolerance of extremes of temperature/hypersensitivity to climatic change;
Sensory Dysfunction
Paraesthesia (abnormal sensations such as tingling, tickling, pricking, “pins and needles”, numbness, itching or burning of the skin with no apparent cause);
Hypoesthesia (reduced sense of touch or physical sensation/local numbness);
Hypoalgesia (decreased sensitivity to painful stimuli);
Diminished or absent position sense of hands/fingers and feet/toes;
Diminished or absent vibration sense of hands/fingers and feet/toes;
Dysesthesia is the term for symptoms that disrupt how you experience touch-based sensations. What you feel with your sense of touch can be unpleasant, unusual or painful?;
Muscle tenderness (pressure induces pain);
Blurring of vision; with a sensory cause from virus or inflammation associated with optic nerve/visual tracts (less common)
Sensory Ataxia (lack of coordination of muscle movements, including gait abnormality); and tendency to stumble when walking, unsteady gait.
Motor Dysfunction (Motor Disorder)
Hyporeflexia (Lower Motor Neuron Lesion or Peripheral Nerve Involvement) : Depressed tendon reflexes of the upper and lower limbs (decrease in amplitude and duration of muscle contraction in response to an impulse);
Flaccid Paralysis (Lower Motor Neuron Lesion) : complete loss of voluntary muscle movement with reduced tone; limb hangs limp;
Flaccid Weakness (Lower Motor Neuron Lesion) : partial loss of muscle strength with reduced tone; limb movement is weak and floppy;
Neurogenic Muscle Atrophy (Lower Motor Neuron Lesion) is the wasting or thinning of muscle mass. It can be caused by disuse of your muscles or neurogenic condition;
"Peripheral" Facial Palsy
Poor movement of the soft palate;
Nystagmus (involuntary eye movements, “dancing eyes”);
Diplopia (simultaneous perception of two images of a single object);
Blurring of Vision; with a motor cause from virus or inflammation associated with brainstem/ocular motor nerve pathways affected
Fasciculation of Muscles (Lower Motor Neuron Sign) (local, involuntary muscle contraction and relaxation);
Muscle Spasms (often in limbs)
(More classically associated with Upper Motor Neuron Sign but Lower Motor Neuron Sign can also apply in M.E.);
Muscle twitches/jerking of the limbs/
Myoclonus;
Hyperreflexia (Upper Motor Neuron Lesion) : Exaggerated tendon reflexes of the upper and lower limbs (increase in amplitude and duration of muscle contraction in response to an impulse).
Spasticity (Upper Motor Neuron Symptom) is a symptom and characteristic of certain neurological conditions. It causes certain muscles to contract all at once. It ranges in severity and can affect movement and speech;
Spastic Paralysis (Upper Motor Neuron Lesion) : complete loss of voluntary movement with spasticity, stiffness, hyperreflexia.
Central (spastic) Weakness (Upper Motor Neuron Lesion) : weakness with increased muscle tone and exaggerated reflexes, due to upper motor neuron pathway damage.
Ankle
clonus (Upper Motor Neuron sign) (series of involuntary, rhythmic, muscular contractions and relaxations usually initiated by a reflex);
Cereballar Ataxia (lack of coordination of muscle movements, including gait abnormality); and tendency to stumble when walking, unsteady gait.
Motor Clumsiness, Fumble (
Dysmetria) with simple manoeuvres; and
Unclassified Neurological Symptoms
Reversal of sleep rhythm (Hypersomnia followed by Insomnia) (not sleepy at night, sleeping in the day);
Headaches (often frontal or occipital, sometimes accentuated by movement).
3.2.3. M.E. often coincides with a number of symptoms Related to Other Body Systems
...and
neurological dysfunction,
M.E. patients
often, but
not always,
suffer from many
other symptoms related to other bodily systems, including
musculoskeletal symptoms, e.g.,
myalgia (with or without exercise),
paresis and
joint pain, immunological symptoms, e.g.,
sore throat,
tender lymph nodes (
lymphadenopathy),
gastrointestinal symptoms, e.g.,
nausea,
anorexia,
diarrhoea, constipation and
abdominal pain, and
respiratory symptoms, e.g.,
respiratory distress,
intercostal myalgia (
often made worse on breathing) and
exertional chest pain, with or without palpitations.
M.E. patients can experience “
extreme physicial exhaustion" after
physical or cognitive exertion and
emotional strain, but
looking at the definitions and
symptoms reported,
the abstract concept of post-exertional “malaise”,
cannot be considered a mandatory feature for the diagnosis of M.E..
3.3. An Operational Definition of M.E.
Based on the most recent definitions, definitions, the symptoms experienced by
420 patients, and the symptoms observed in endemic and
epidemic cases of
M.E., a discriminative operational definition comprises the following four elements:
2. Neurological Disturbance (see Table 3):
c. at least two symptoms related to sensory dysfunction;
3. Fluctuation of Symptoms (within and between “episodes”); and
4. A prolonged relapsing course.
This definition contains the basic requirements to comply with the diagnosis of
M.E.. The tentative case definition described above should be used in conjunction with a full clinical assessment, with consideration of differential diagnoses.
Future surveys should make clear if stricter requirements can be imposed on the three neurological criteria, and
if symptoms not mentioned in the original description of endemic and epidemic cases can be added to these neurological symptoms clusters, without
excluding patients meeting the minimal requirement for “
Neurological Disturbance”.
Prospective studies should also investigate the overlap and differences between patients meeting the four different system clusters within this operational definition of M.E. and with
non-diagnoses of
ICC,
CFS, and
SEID, and
the relative numbers of patients fulfilling one, or more of these criterias.
Future research should also clarify which signs are exhibited by all patients meeting the operational definition (the “minimum criteria”) of M.E. and
can be included in the definition, and
which comorbidities (symptom patterns) are often present in
M.E.
4. Discussion
This observation is completely independent of the question whether the name “M.E.” is appropriate or not.
The discussion with regard to the definition (case criteria) should be separated from the discussion with regard to the most accurate label.
Since
the cause of M.E. is now known, the
operational definition of M.E. proposed in this original article,
initially depended on the self-report of symptoms.
Beyond Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome - Redefining an illness (Read Online, Page 28) - Ellen Wright Clayton, Margarita AlegrĆa, Lucinda Bateman, Lily Chu, Charles Cleeland, Ronald Davis, Betty Diamond, Theodore Ganiats, Betty Keller, Nancy Klimas, Martin Lerner, Cynthia Mulrow, Benjamin Natelson, Peter Rowe and Michael Shelanski (Institutional Medicine of Medicine (IOM) / The National Academy Press, 2015)
...several neurological symptoms, can be assessed with objective tests.
This is a major departure from the original descriptions according to the original definition.
Beyond Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome - Redefining an illness (Read Online, Page 60) - Ellen Wright Clayton, Margarita AlegrĆa, Lucinda Bateman, Lily Chu, Charles Cleeland, Ronald Davis, Betty Diamond, Theodore Ganiats, Betty Keller, Nancy Klimas, Martin Lerner, Cynthia Mulrow, Benjamin Natelson, Peter Rowe and Michael Shelanski (Institutional Medicine of Medicine (IOM) / The National Academy Press, 2015)
(Post-Exertional “Malaise”) is a different feature of “ME/CFS”
However,
Post-Exertional “Malaise”, an
ill-defined notion, has
NEVER been
described as a
distinctive feature of
M.E. in the literature
...(and is not a synonym of Post-Exertional “Malaise”)
..post-exertional “malaise”, as two different concepts.
...I did and do experience it to be the hallmark symptom as Dr. Melvin Ramsay had historically described. But Frank Twisk is correct in calling them two different concepts.
The
tentative definition described here
deviates from the
London criteria on
two crucial points.
For that reason, an operational definition is indispensable.
This article proposes an operational definition of
M.E., based on the last formal definitions of
M.E., and the symptoms observed in the
epidemic and endemic cases of
M.E. and reported by a large group of patients with well-defined
M.E..
A discriminative operational definition of M.E. should consist of the four mandatory features (minimum criteria for the diagnosis M.E. :
3. Fluctuation of Symptoms (within and between ‘episodes’); and
4. A prolonged relapsing course.
The first two criteria of this tentative definition of M.E. justify the qualification “Neuromuscular Disorder”, with specific characteristic and discriminative symptoms.
This article proposes the tentative criteria to operationalize “
Neurological Disturbance” (criterion 2):
at least 'one symptom' related to Neurocognitive Dysfunction or '
one' Unclassified Neurological Symptom, 'one' symptom related to Autonomic Dysfunction (Dysautonomia), and '
two symptoms' related to Sensory Dysfunction (listed in Table 3).
Several neurological symptoms can be confirmed objectively by medical tests.
The third and fourth criteria, “fluctuation of symptoms” and “a prolonged relapsing course” (criterion 3 and 4), will largely depend on self-report.
The notion “prolonged” is not operationalized in the literature. However, since an early diagnosis is crucial, future experiments (surveys) should make stricter requirements for fluctuation and prolonged relapsing course.
Based on the (proposed) minimum criteria for
M.E.,
which discriminate M.E. from CFS and
other disorders,
future studies into the criteria for “
Neurological Disturbance” and the
frequency of optional symptoms can be conducted.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
4.
Ramsay, A.M.; Dowsett, E.G. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: Then and now, an epidemiological introduction. In "The Clinical and Scientific Basis of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome"; Hyde, B.M., Goldstein, J., Levine, P., Eds.; The Nightingale Research Foundation: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1992; pp. 81–84.
8.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases, Eighth Revision (ICD-8): 1 (Code 323): 158; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1967.
9.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10): G93.3; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1992.
10.
Holmes, G.P.; Kaplan, J.E.; Gantz, N.M.; Komaroff, A.L.; Schonberger, L.B.; Straus, S.E.; Jones, J.F.; Dubois, R.E.; Cunningham-Rundles, C.; Pahwa, S.; et al. Chronic fatigue syndrome: A working case definition. Ann. Intern. Med. 1988, 108, 387–389.
12.
Wilson, A.; Hickie, I.; Hadzi-Pavlovic, D.; Wakefield, D.; Parker, G.; Straus, S.E.; Dale, J.; McCluskey, D.; Hinds, G.; Brickman, A.; et al. What is chronic fatigue syndrome? Heterogeneity within an international multicentre study. Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry 2001, 35, 520–527.
19.
Jason, L.; Brown, M.; Evans, M.; Anderson, V.; Lerch, A.; Brown, A.; Hunnell, J.; Porter, N.; Brown, M. Measuring substantial reductions in functioning in patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Disabil. Rehabil. 2011, 33, 589–598.
20.
Jason, L.; Brown, M.; Evans, M.; Porter, N.; Brown, A.; Hunnell, J.; Lerch, A.; Brown, A. Myalgic Encephalomyelitis: Case definitions. Auton. Control Physiol. States Behav. 2012, 1, 1–14.
21.
Jason, L.; Brown, M.; Evans, M.; Lerch, A.; Brown, A.; Hunnell, J.; Porter, N.; Brown, M. Contrasting case definitions for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic fatigue syndrome and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis. Eval. Health Prof. 2012, 35, 280–304.
24.
Hickie, I.; Davenport, T.; Wakefield, D.; Vollmer-Conna, U.; Cameron, B.; Vernon, S.D.; Reeves, W.C.; Lloyd, A. Post-infective and chronic Fatigue Syndromes precipitated by viral and non-viral pathogens: Prospective cohort study. BMJ 2006, 333, 575.
31.
Carruthers, B.M.; van de Sande, M.I.; de Meirleir, K.L.; Klimas, N.G.; Broderick, G.; Mitchell, T.; Staines, D.; Powles, A.C.P.; Speight, N.; Vallings, R.; et al. Myalgic encephalomyelitis: International consensus criteria. J. Intern. Med. 2011, 270, 327–338.
33.
Dowsett, E.G.; Goudsmit, E.; Macintyre, A.; Shepherd, C.B. London Criteria for M.E. In Report from The National Task Force on Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), Post Viral Fatigue Syndrome (PVFS), Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME); Westcare: Bristol, UK, 1994; pp. 96–98.
Comments
Post a Comment