A new day, a new negative CCSVI study from the Annals of Neurology. Dr. Hauser is digging in.
But before I share the abstract, to add some context, I do have a wonderful published quote from the lead author, Dr. Diego Centonze, to the LA Times--
“We will see many new drugs on the market and many new options for patients,” says Dr. Diego Centonze, a neurologist at Tor Vergata University in Rome, who is running clinical trials for three new experimental compounds, including one called fingolimod that is the first oral MS drug to move to Phase 3 clinical trials.
In the early 1990s, there were no Food and Drug Administration-approved therapies for MS on the market. Today, there are at least half a dozen, and Centonze expects as many as eight or nine by 2010.
http://www.bacrutland.org/new-drugs-to-battle-multiple-sclerosis/
Dr. Centonze has received personal compensation for activities with Teva Neuroscience, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Merck Serono. Dr. Centonze has received research support from Sanofi-Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bayer Schering Pharma, Merck Serono, Novartis, and Teva Neuroscience.
Now that we have some context....Here's Dr. Centonze's research on CCSVI.....
(What I find most amusing is that in this study, these doctors actually FOUND CCSVI....but they do not address that. Instead they say, "yes, we found CCSVI, but it really doesn't matter, in our opinion." Here is the abstract. I do not have the full paper.)
Objective:
It is still unclear whether chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI) is associated with multiple sclerosis (MS), because substantial methodological differences have been claimed by Zamboni to account for the lack of results of other groups. Furthermore, the potential role of venous malformations in influencing MS severity has not been fully explored. This information is particularly relevant, because uncontrolled surgical procedures are increasingly offered to MS patients to treat their venous stenoses.
Methods:
In the present study, CCSVI was studied in 84 MS patients and in 56 healthy subjects by applying the Zamboni method for CCSVI identification.
Results:
We found no significant differences (p = 0.12) in CCSVI frequency between MS and control subjects. Furthermore, no differences were found between CCSVI-positive and CCSVI-negative patients in terms of relevant clinical variables such as disease duration, time between onset and first relapse, relapsing or progressive disease course, and risk of secondary progression course. Statistically significant differences were not found between CCSVI-positive and CCSVI-negative MS subjects by analyzing direct measures of disability such as mean Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) (p = 0.07), mean progression index (p > 0.1), and mean MS severity score (p > 0.1). The percentage of subjects who reached EDSS 4.0 and 6.0 milestones was not different among CCSVI-negative and CCSVI-positive subjects, and no significant correlation was found between severity of disability and number of positive CCSVI criteria.
Interpretation:
Our results indicate that CCSVI has no role in either MS risk or MS severity. Ann Neurol 2011
...and for additional context today, watch the videos linked below, as the brilliant and soft-spoken Dr. Schelling is continually interrupeted and yelled at by the lead neurologist in Poland. CCSVI is upsetting the order of things. CCSVI has batted and poked at the neurologists' hive, and they are angry and swarming. Patients, caregivers and researchers are saying that the EAE model, resultant and ineffective drugs and autoimmunity paradigm are done. It's time for answers. We are watching, we are united, and we come from around the world....
Joan