Germany study xmrv virus in 500 prostate cancer

Discussion in 'Fibromyalgia Main Forum' started by hensue, Oct 16, 2009.

  1. hensue

    hensue New Member

    All of them tested negative, it was a little over 500. We have had two studies here I think in the Us. I am not with it but some dude from here said it could be the geographic link.

    Or like other people are saying it could be how they were tested.
    I think this is what it says
    I will post the link if any one wants it
  2. Andrew111

    Andrew111 Member

    My first question is whether these men also had an RNase L problem. In the U.S. tests, only the men with an RNASE L problem had XMRV.
  3. hensue

    hensue New Member - 16 hours ago
  4. hensue

    hensue New Member

    later hensue
  5. Andrew111

    Andrew111 Member

    Thanks. It looks like they did check for RNase L.
  6. hensue

    hensue New Member

    That they might not have done the test exactly like we did or it might be geographical??
    That is scary

  7. jasminetee

    jasminetee Member

    Yeah, that's not encouraging. But this study still is in a lot of ways. If they're right then that narrows down XMRV for us more.

    Plus, the WPI said that they're getting the same 95% results from testing 500 PWC in London.[This Message was Edited on 10/16/2009]
  8. Andrew111

    Andrew111 Member

    I will breath a sigh of relief when the WPI study is replicated by someone outside the group of people who did the study.
  9. hensue

    hensue New Member

    to me it could be so infectious so they have to test for it now. It is out there whether we have it or not.
  10. TigerLilea

    TigerLilea Active Member

    I doubt that XMRV is infectious, at least not in the same way that HIV or Hepatitis is.
  11. hensue

    hensue New Member

    Until I started reading what Dr li gr something from the cancer institute about the germany study of prostate cancer. As you know the xmrv was found in some percentage of patients with aggresive tumors. I believe two studies have been done now.

    Then a study in Germany on prostate cancer and they found no xmrv virus and our US cancer doctor said it could be geographical.
    So what else would that mean? I am asking I do not know and when I was talking to the guy at the lab to get my test he was talking about different parts of the test the infectious part.

    It really had not hit me till then it could be transmitted, like you said hopefully not like aids or hep c.
    [This Message was Edited on 10/16/2009]
  12. denis321

    denis321 New Member

    is that the population used in the German studies is not the same as the ones in the US studies.

    That is, the link talks about 40% of FAMILIAL prostate cancers (e.g. men with a history of prostate cancers in their families) but the article we have is not clear whether the German cases were familial or even if they were aggresive cancers.

    The other point I've come across is that XMRV also is present in aggressive prostate cancers in people WITHOUT the RNase L defect.

    So a lot to sort out for XMRV and prostate cancer.

    It might be interesting for scientists to study prostate cancer in people with CFS -- e.g. are they more prone to it than the general population?
  13. hensue

    hensue New Member

    Now I got what you are saying I cannot believe my brain is fogged that bad. I sat there and read it and read it again then it hit me what you are saying.

    That makes more sense about the population used in German studies is not the same.

    I will be frank I do not know anything about the RNase L defect?? Can you explain that to me and maybe it would get through to my blonde head.....

    I guess this is why I was not a scientist or doctor researcher you get the pic
  14. GFK

    GFK New Member

    Neither Ila Singh's PNAS prostate paper from about a month ago nor the WPI's 'Science' paper found evidence for the previously found "link" between a genetic predisposition in RNaseL and XMRV infection. I'm not sure what this ultimately means. Perhaps the XMRV virus is a particularly elusive beast. It seems WPI have found a way to make it more detectable - but as long as it isn't showing up in controls the 'Science' data continues to look good. Roll on replication in other labs and countries.
    P.S. It's not as bleak as it looks in Germany - a previous attempt to find XMRV in prostate cancer in Germany actually turned up evidence of infection in a single control ! Interesting stuff....
  15. GFK

    GFK New Member

    1: J Clin Virol. 2008 Nov;43(3):277-83. Epub 2008 Sep 27. Links
    Prevalence of human gammaretrovirus XMRV in sporadic prostate cancer.Fischer N, Hellwinkel O, Schulz C, Chun FK, Huland H, Aepfelbacher M, Schlomm T.
    Institute for Medical Microbiology and Virology, University Medical Center Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.

    BACKGROUND: We previously identified a novel exogenous gammaretrovirus (xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related gammaretrovirus (XMRV)) using a pan-viral microarray. XMRV is the first MLV-related virus found in human infection. Forty percent (8/20) of familial prostate cancer patients homozygous for a mutation in RNase L (R462Q) were positive for XMRV, while the virus was rarely (1/66) detected in familial prostate cancer patients heterozygous for R462Q or carrying the wild type allele. OBJECTIVES: To determine the presence of XMRV in non-familial prostate cancer samples. STUDY DESIGN: RNA from prostate tissue was analyzed for XMRV using nested RT-PCR. In all samples, RNase L (R462Q) genotyping was performed using an allele-specific PCR. RESULTS: XMRV-specific sequences were detected in one of 105 tissue samples from non-familial prostate cancer patients and from one of 70 tissue samples from men without prostate cancer. The two XMRV-positive patients were wild type or heterozygous for the R462Q mutation and thus carried at least one fully functional RNase L allele. CONCLUSIONS: XMRV was rarely detected in non-familial prostate cancer samples from Northern European patients. The homozygous mutation R462Q (QQ) was significantly underrepresented (<6%) in this cohort when compared to other studies (11-17%).

  16. hensue

    hensue New Member

    This is all so confusing!
  17. denis321

    denis321 New Member

    This is a small sized study but what it suggests is that non-familial cancers are much less likely to have XMRV. What might this mean? Perhaps XMRV is passed down in families through genetic material (since viruses can embed themselves in our DNA) or the RNaseL defect is passed down and some family members get XMRV leading to cancer and some do not. This is speculation on my part.

    The PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences - prestigious national US science group publication) shows you can have XMRV and prostate cancer without RNaseL defect though.

  18. Svette_Palme

    Svette_Palme New Member
    That link to another opinion on the study that found no XMRV in 589 prostate cancer patients...

    i.e. > "No link between XMRV and prostate cancer" ;
    and > "Prostate cancer myth busted: No XMRV virus found in patients"

    I am going to get a reputation here aren't I? I just thought I should post this opinion, my jury is still out on XMRV until more concrete evidence is found by, hopefully, several different research groups.

  19. GFK

    GFK New Member

    It's a good thing to listen to other opinions. Unfortunately, "naturalnews" aren't interested in any opinions but their own unscientific ramblings. Their articles are a ridiculous series of unfounded rantings and they make a number of factually wrong statements to suit their agenda. Both articles on XMRV - CFS and prostate cancer - suggest that the author doesn't understand the basic science involved in either ( nor do most of us but we don't go mouthing off about things we don't understand in the manner they do ).
    But don't take my word for it - check the articles out for yourself. I wouldn't waste my time trying to argue with people like that, however. It's very obvious that the site has a number of agendas ( not based on good science either ) and will not allow inconvenient things like scientific facts to get in their way.....Svette_Palme this is a good post to show people the kind of devious people who are out there !