Here's a report on ECTRIMS from a Canadian neurological blog, "Neuro Sens" My comments/corrections will be in (parenthesis)
http://neuro-sens.com/congress-news/3-general/209224-ccsvi-interventions-not-justified
REPORT FROM THE 26TH CONGRESS OF THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR TREATMENT AND RESEARCH IN MS (ECTRIMS), GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN, OCTOBER 13-16, 2010 - “We should not be using any interventions to treat CCSVI (chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency) until we can demonstrate that it has a pathological role,” stated Dr. Giancarlo Comi, Milan, Italy, at a special symposium organized by the European Charcot Foundation. “CCSVI is not a cause of MS,” he said, “and what is the evidence that it influences the MS disease process?”
Several negative CCSVI studies were also presented.
(Actually, there were only 3 negative studies presented, and one of them was the already published Doepp study. That's more like "a couple." There were actually several positive studies presented)
Doepp and colleagues performed extracranial and transcranial Doppler ultrasound and analysed extracranial venous blood flow in 59 MS patients and 20 controls (ECTRIMS 2010; abstract P579). Stenosis of the internal jugular vein was not detected in any subject and blood volume flow (internal jugular and vertebral veins) in the supine position was comparable for the two groups. Indeed, the decrease in total jugular blood volume flow in moving from the supine to upright positions was less pronounced in MS patients versus controls (173 vs. 362 mL/min).
In addition, a separate study presented at ECTRIMS reported abnormal venous sonographic findings in 52% of patients with clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) suggestive of MS, versus 32% of healthy controls and 68% of patients with transient global amnesia (Baracchini et al. ECTRIMS 2010; abstract 81). A total of 8 of 50 CIS patients (16%) met criteria for CCSVI, a lower proportion than that reported for healthy subjects by Zivadinov and colleagues, indicating that CCSVI does not appear to play a causative role in the pathogenesis of MS.
(We've discussed these three negative studies in the "notes." It appears that none of them followed Dr. Zamboni's protocol for testing CCSVI--that is, looking for refluxive flow, absent of valsalva manuever.)
Audience members at the Charcot symposium were more vocal in their opposition to CCSVI than participants at the AAN’s recent press conference, which generally barred clinicians from attending. At the ECTRIMS event, one U.S. physician criticized the use of the term, “Liberation Treatment”, as grossly misleading. Prof. Zamboni said that it only referred to the liberation of blood flow, but maintained that he does not use the term himself.
________________________________________________________________________
(There was some anger coming at Dr. Zamboni from the neurological audience. I find it ironic that a US physician was indignant about the phrase "Liberation Treatment"---a term Dr. Zamboni used to describe a return of blood flow. This phrase was picked up by the press and is now being mocked by neurologists who seek to demean the research. Here are some wonderful terms that the Neurological Community has given us for their treatments and projects---tell me, who uses more "grossly misleading" language?)
The EndMS Campaign!! Now taking your donations in Canada!--Since the launch of the endMS capital campaign two years ago, donors from across the country have contributed more than $49.2 million to fund MS research activities and establish the endMS Research and Training Network, a nationwide initiative formed to accelerate discovery in Canadian MS research.
Fast Forward! Fast Forward, founded by the National MS Society, focuses on expediting the drug development process, bridging the gap between promising discoveries and the commercial expertise and funding to move them forward. We provide critical funds to academic groups and emerging biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies involved in drug research and development. By connecting people, ideas, and resources, promising drug treatments can now break through barriers, move through the pipeline, and enter clinical trials - faster.
CareMS I !-- The purpose of this study is to establish the efficacy and safety of alemtuzumab as a treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS), in comparison with Rebif® (interferon beta-1a).
CareMS II I --The purpose of this study is to establish the efficacy and safety of two different doses of alemtuzumab as a treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis(MS), in comparison with Rebif® (interferon beta-1a).
RebiSmart! ---The Electronic Device - The RebiSmart™ is an electronic injection device that is being studied for the delivery of Merck Serono's Rebif® New Formulation. The RebiSmart™ device is a stand-alone hand-held device with internal power supply. It is used for subcutaneous (under the skin) injections with single-use sterile disposable needles. The device will be kept in a storage box and placed in the refrigerator after each use.
Promess (sounds like promise!) --The primary objective of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy of IV cyclophosphamide as compared to IV methylprednisolone administered every 4 weeks during 1 year and every 8 weeks during 1 year, on the delay to confirmed disability deterioration as assessed by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.
PROOF! -A Multicenter, Prospective and Retrospective, Long-Term Observational Study of AVONEX® and Rebif® to Determine the Efficacy, Tolerability, and Safety in Subjects With Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
How dare Dr. Zamboni have called an endovascular procedure which liberates blood flow from diseased veins the "Liberation Treatment"??? Because neurologists are the ones that "care" and are working "fast forward". They "promess" to "endMS!"
Joan