The Value of Openness: The PatientsLikeMe Blog

PatientsLikeMe made the following announcement last night at the TEDMED conference.  For more on Jamie Heywood’s presentation, check out what people are saying on Twitter.

- - - - - - -

PATIENTSLIKEME ADDS ONLINE COMMUNITY FOR PEOPLE WITH CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME
Researchers Use Open Medical Network to Measure Real-World Impact of XMRV Virus

Cambridge, MA–October 30, 2009–PatientsLikeMe (www.patientslikeme.com), the leading online community for people with life-changing conditions, announces the expansion of its fibromyalgia community to welcome patients with chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), also know as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). By sharing information about their experience with CFS, patients can now find others just like them, including other patients who may have the newly discovered xenotropic murine leukemia virus-related virus (XMRV). The purpose of this expansion is for PatientsLikeMe to research the impact XMRV has on CFS patients.

“With 1 million patients diagnosed with CFS, and potentially 10 million Americans who could be infected with the XMRV virus, there is an unique opportunity to use the power of our open medical network to understand this illness and accelerate the validation and development of new biomarkers and treatments,” says Jamie Heywood, co-founder and chairman of PatientsLikeMe.

There are currently more than 7,000 patients, many who have CFS, in the PatientsLikeMe fibromyalgia community sharing meaningful data for researchers to analyze about the condition. As part of this expansion, the PatientsLikeMe platform will allow patients who test positive for XMRV to indicate that on their profiles, much how ALS and Parkinson’s patients can now add their genetic information.

Adds David S. Williams III, head of business development at PatientsLikeMe, “This discovery may spur research into the efficacy of anti-retrovirals for patients with CFS, which could have a dramatic impact on the $10 billion market for these medications.”

Heywood will announce the new CFS community on stage at the health technology conference TEDMED in San Diego, CA today. CFS marks the 17th condition available to patients on PatientsLikeMe, which now boasts more than 45,000 patients sharing health data on treatments, symptoms and outcomes. The company’s next community for people with epilepsy is scheduled to launch in early 2010. More about PatientsLikeMe partnerships can be found on its partner site: http://partners.patientslikeme.com.

# # #

Primary Lateral Sclerosis (PLS) and Progressive Muscular Atrophy (PMA) are two rare variants of the disease ALS. Normally, ALS affects the upper motor neurons in the brain and spinal cord, as well as the lower motor neurons that send signals from the spinal cord directly to muscles. PLS and PMA are different because PLS only affects the upper motor neurons, and PMA only affects the lower motor neurons. It’s an important distinction for patients to be told about because the prognosis is less severe in these conditions.  On average, survival in ALS is typically reported to be 2-5 years, whereas for patients with PMA it’s more like 5-10 years and for PLS it’s even longer (often several decades).

ALS itself is a rare condition, affecting some 30,000 people in the United States at any one time.  PLS and PMA each represent approximately 5% of the overall ALS community, so there’s approximately 1,500 patients with each condition in the U.S at any given time.  In April 2008, PatientsLikeMe added the ability for members of our ALS community to change their diagnosis to these rare conditions.  To date, we now have 182 patients with PLS and 270 with PMA. This is truly exciting because even the largest studies in the literature have only examined 40 or so PLS patients and a similar number of PMA patients. One of our most useful features on our site for people with ALS is the percentile curves, which we display as a backdrop on their profiles to put each individual’s rate of progression into context. However, as you can see in the figure below, when you compare the progression curves of ALS patients on our site with those of a typical PLS patient, the PLS patient progression deviates significantly from the ALS curves.

With so many PLS and PMA patients sharing such valuable information about their disease on PatientsLikeMe, we had enough information to generate a new set of percentile curves for each of those communities.  To do this, we used self-report ALSFRS-R (ALS functional rating score - revised) data from 104 PLS patients and 59 PMA patients that met our criteria for data quality. We have good data for the first 4-5 years of disease after onset, and after that point we rely on linear extrapolation to make the plots.  Here we see the value of openness in action.  When you see the potential value in contributing your data, it drives a virtuous cycle: the more data you enter, the more value you get, so you enter more data!

As any of our patients in these communities will tell you, being diagnosed with a rare disease can be a frustrating experience. Aside from dealing with the condition itself, there’s the lack of public awareness, a lack of research investigating your condition, and a sense that you are being “lumped in” with a similar disease because your community doesn’t have the critical mass to merit its own attention.  These new percentile curves for PLS and PMA patients demonstrate the value and power of openness.  By sharing their health data in an open fashion, patients are providing new insights that are changing how we think and act when it comes to these very rare conditions.

Note:  A potential limitation of these curves is that they represent the outcomes for patients that are members of PatientsLikeMe and may not be generalizable to the entire population; we are working hard to better understand and correct for the biases in our population and data. As the size and longevity of each community increases, we will be in a better position to address these issues.

There are rare diseases, and there are rare diseases. Here at PatientsLikeMe our first community was built for patients with ALS (estimated US Prevalence: 30,000), and in common with our other neurological communities there is a familiar list of challenges: low public awareness, little funding for research, and a lack of adequate treatments. However, over the past year or so I’ve really had my eyes opened to the differences between “rare” and what you might call “super-rare” conditions, such as Devic’s neuromyelitis optica. Nobody really knows how many people Devic’s affects as it is frequently confused with MS, but there are probably only a few thousand patients with this condition in the world. That’s why we’re incredibly proud that our Devic’s community currently has 136 registered patients sharing health data with one another; that’s more than 5 times larger than the largest study I’ve seen on the condition in the scientific literature (which included collaborators from around the world in seven specialist centers over the course of several years).

I was privileged to be invited to speak at the annual meeting of Eurordis (The European Organization for Rare Diseases) in Athens, Greece, to meet with some of the leading online health efforts in this space. Attendees included non-profit organizations, medical professionals, and patients themselves from all over Europe.  We all convened to discuss some of the most innovative tools available on the web for patients to find other patients like them, share their data, and improve their outcomes. PatientsLikeMe was featured as an ambitious and innovative effort to accelerate the pace of research in rare diseases but we also saw great initiatives that had come from the frontlines of rare diseases.  In fact, the point about ultra-rare diseases was driven home in the opening keynote by Yann Le Cam when we heard that there are some 5,500 rare diseases cataloged by Orphanet (including Devic’s) which are not in the ICD-10 taxonomy of diseases. Ultimately, at PatientsLikeMe, our goal is to build a community for every life-changing illness that exists, but what can patients with these conditions be looking for in the meantime?

The highlight of the meeting for me was seeing the incredible work being carried out at Duchenne Connect.org (The Netherlands) and Duchenne Connect.org (USA). Founders Elizabeth Vroom and Pat Furlong gave an overview of their experiences building patient-focused programs that allowed parents of children with Duchenne’s Muscular Dystrophy to support one another, accelerate the efforts of researchers, and bring greater attention and focus to patients affected by this rare disease. From the other side of the Atlantic, Mary Dunkle from NORD (National Organization for Rare Diseases) made a clear statement that online communities have the power to be far more than just bulletin boards and blogs for patients to use for emotional support. In her presentation, she stated: “We want to move beyond simply providing emotional support…to facilitate action that produces results”; we couldn’t agree more. Videos of the talks from these amazing patient advocates (along with many other talks from the meeting) can be viewed online here at the Eurordis website.

There were a number of challenges that were highlighted during the meeting. David Golub was the first to articulate that there are serious ethical issues implicit in for-profit companies (like us!) being involved in patient research that was traditionally the remit of academics and clinicians. He asked us to all consider what we can all do to “protect the public commons?”. Unsurprisingly for a European audience, there was much concern about language specialization.  Patient advocates insisted on better localization to allow broader access to non-English speakers, and for providers like us trying to find innovative ways to ensure excellent content that can be dynamic and accessible for all. My own view is that technology (like Google Translate) will outpace any system we could possibly resource with human translators.

Finally, there was the question put to us by event organizer Denis Costello from Eurordis; how can small non-profits in ultra-rare diseases partner with organizations like PatientsLikeMe?  It’s something we think about every day. Our Devic’s community came out of our MS Community; PSP and MSA came from Parkinson’s; and PLS and PMA came out of ALS. We are developing strategies to build communities for “clusters” of communities that will allow us help a broader swathe of patients with both prevalent and rare conditions. It was hugely encouraging to see the energy, ingenuity, and determination that you see when advocates are passionate about helping patients.

We do not live our lives alone. We live our lives in collaboration with others. We communicate our needs and our goals, and together we work to achieve them. This is exceptionally true for families and individuals dealing with illness. Whether you’re dealing with depression, or pain, or perhaps the fear and stigma of HIV, or the impairment that comes from MS, Parkinson’s or ALS, what helps us the most is when those around us reach out and share their support and advice.

You would think that your ability to share would be as much your right as speech, but is it? It’s not clear that is true in healthcare today, nor is it clear that such a right will be protected tomorrow. Privacy is also a right – a right to not share what you do not want shared. It’s a fair and just expectation that the doctors and clinicians you employ to support you in your illness will not share your information without your permission. Today, I fear that privacy has become much more than a right; it has become a goal. When that happens, people begin to find ways to make it difficult to share in the name of privacy.

More than once we have been asked by people in the medical system whether patients are allowed to share information with each other like they do on PatientsLikeMe. In fact, in some countries you can read their rules in a certain way and reasonably deduce that this type of sharing is not allowed. It is vitally important that we do not let this become a reality in the U.S.  There are some that would take away your right to share because they do not believe you are competent to weigh the risks and benefits of sharing, and make a sound decision. Imagine being forced to sign a document before you email a friend on PatientsLikeMe with a question about a symptom? This could be a possible consequence of ill intentioned privacy legislation.

We are working to ensure that sharing is preserved as a right. We know that you share with us, and each other, because you trust that we will do the right thing with that knowledge. At PatientsLikeMe, we are working hard to ensure we earn your trust every step of the way. To do this, we focus our energies on ways to help discover new things about each disease here and support the research system. We do this in the spirit of openness espoused in our Openness Philosophy. We work to be transparent about our business model and our decisions, and try to be accessible to you to answer your questions as you participate in our communities.

It remains our hope that you are wowed like we are about what is possible when we work together to make our healthcare system, and our lives, better. We have seen so much healing between all of you here on PatientsLikeMe, and it is because we are all sharing together – not alone.

PatientsLikeMe was recently asked to testify before the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Committee for Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS). The NCVHS Subcommittee on Privacy, Confidentiality and Security is responsible for exploring these aforementioned issues as they relate to healthcare, and ran a 3-day hearing to spur informative dialogue about the future of e-healthcare. I was honored to represent PatientsLikeMe, and the thousands of patient members of our communities, as I testified on all of our behalf at that hearing.

As I said in the hearing, openness is what is and can help patients. It’s what matters. We believe in the concept called “The Network Patient” - an approach that puts patients first by giving you what you need to know when you need to know it, and empowering you to act on that information. As members of PatientsLikeMe, you have chosen to embrace openness and take control of your health. You volunteer your health information, your experiences, your life - all in an effort to improve your care, support others, and move research forward.

Here are a few excerpts from our prepared testimony statement that expand on privacy, openness and the future of our health system.

“From our experiences at PatientsLikeMe, we know patients are aware of the issues. They understand and weigh the risks and benefits, and are intelligently making rational choices about where they are comfortable sharing information and how their information will be used to help. If we infringe on this right to share or speak (in the interest of preventing discrimination), we are preventing the flow of information and, by our read, acting contrary to the values on which our country was founded.

Privacy is also more than a legal concept, it is also a philosophical concept. A modern focus on privacy as a goal, not as a right, has moved the line to the point that medicine is slowed, treatments are delayed, and patients die for failure to have what they need when they need it. We have substituted real harm for mostly theoretical harm. We would even argue that the philosophical focus on privacy is a bad thing. We believe that openness is much more powerful concept than privacy in medicine, and one that gives patients the power to take control of their health…

We have to begin to work on building a society that allows the variation in human health and the variation in human condition, one that allows people to be philosophically created equal. We need to work on building a society where information is not used to discriminate, but to assist and support and improve. Restricting the flow of information will not advance solving this problem.

This is not a simple transformation, but we believe it is inevitable. The major privacy issues are not only about health records, but the invisible trail of “breadcrumbs” we leave behind us day to day in life. Health is not a separate concept. It is an integrated concept and, in an integrated world, we have to decide how to build a society that can handle the reality that not all are healthy. We need to work together to get the most productivity and life from all of us.

We believe openness can lead the way to such a society.”

The full testimony is available here and posted to the NCVHS website (along with audio archive of the 5/20/09 hearing). A transcript will also be made available soon. These hearings, and of course our blog, are open to the public for comment on these issues. In the spirit of sharing, please share your thoughts with us here.

This month marks the 3-year anniversary of our flagship ALS community.  While there have been so many exciting milestones we’ve reached in that time, we’re always looking at ways to bring new insight to this disease.

In today’s issue of the journal Science two papers describe the discovery of a new gene for ALS (you can read the abstracts here and here). Around 90% of ALS cases are sporadic, i.e. we don’t know what causes them, but for 5-10% of patients the disease runs in their family (known as familial ALS, FALS). Until today, there was only one major causative gene that we knew about, called SOD1, which accounted for 20% of familial cases. Today’s new discovery of the gene FUS (also known as ALS6) accounts for an additional 3-5% of familial cases and was the result of an international collaboration between scientists in Boston, London, and Sydney. This is very exciting for research because the more we know about what causes ALS, the better our chances of finding an effective treatment through better understanding of the pathways involved in motor neuron degeneration.

Here at PatientsLikeMe, we’ve recently upgraded our ALS platform to capture data on familial ALS patients’ known genetic mutations. The goal is to help familial ALS patients find another patient like them, and to enhance understanding of the phenotype of each mutation, e.g. if different types of mutation cause a faster or slower disease progression. Ultimately our aim is to try and establish whether there might be any treatments that have a differential effect on patients with different disease-causing mutations. There are examples of this already known in other diseases; for instance the presence of absence of the Philadelphia chromosome in chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) predicts whether the patient will respond to the drug Gleevec. Although there is currently only a single effective treatment for ALS (Rilutek), there are a number of trials underway investigating the potential of drugs for patients with specific gene mutations.

The unique outcome data captured on the PatientsLikeMe platform also allows us to learn more about the nature of the disease for FALS patients with different genetic mutations. In the graph above you can see the average rate of progression for patients with three different FALS mutations; the common and aggressive A4V mutation (sadly average survival is ~18 months), the rarer recessive D90A mutation (much longer average survival of ~13 years), and a very rare and recently identified mutation of VAPB, referred to as ALS8. Collecting genetic data and combining it with high-quality patient-reported outcomes helps a patient to answer the question “Given my status, what is the best outcome I can expect to achieve, and how do I get there?”.

Note: If you have familial ALS and know your genetic mutation status please consider joining our ALS community and sharing your genetic information through your diagnosis history.

This blog post is the second in a series from our attendance at the 19th International Symposium on ALS/MND in Birmingham UK in November 2008. When PatientsLikeMe attended the previous ALS/MND Symposium in Toronto Canada in December 2007, I was given a platform presentation to show the assembled clinicians, scientists and researchers what we had developed for patients with the condition. This year, as part of a session on the history of ALS/MND patients online, I was given the opportunity to show attendees some of the improvements we had made to the site since that time.

* Percentile curves for patients with PLS - When I said that we had more than 100 patients with PLS registered on the site, there was a collective gasp from the audience. Our large sample has allowed us to show PLS patients how they compare with other PLS patients for the first time. (Available to PLS members of the ALS/MND community)

* Geomapping - Patients on our system can see a map of the world and see registered users nearby using a Google Maps API developed by our resident geomapping whiz Steve Hammond. This allows patients in isolated areas, or even busy cities, to find other patients like them who they might want to meet up with or talk to on the phone. (Available to users in all our communities)

* Treatment database - By integrating the Multum Drug Database into our treatment system, users are presented with an accurate list of possible dosages for the treatments they are taking. We have also added an evaluation system that lets users share their opinions about a drug’s efficacy, adherence, burden, and side effect profile. (Available to users in all our communities)

* Lithium study tool - We have showcased our custom lithium study tool in a number of recent blog posts, but for many delegates this was the first time they had seen the evidence we’ve been collecting on lithium in ALS/MND.

* Future state modeling - Simply “tracking” a patient’s progression has never been the goal for us; we’ve always wanted to take past information and use it to predict the future state of an individual patient. In relatively linear diseases like ALS, that means we can help patients to plan in advance for when they might need a wheelchair or other equipment. It’s often the case that ALS/MND patients don’t get the equipment they need until several months after they could have benefited from having it. Such a tool would give a customized prediction for the individual patient. After all, most of us don’t want to know about the “average” patient, we want to know about a “patient like me”!

Back in November, Jamie Heywood and I attended the 19th International ALS/MND Symposium in Birmingham, UK.  As part of an ongoing series of blog posts reporting from that conference, I have put together a narrated slideshow which is an abridged version of a platform presentation I was asked to give at the conference about the past, present, and future of the internet for patients with ALS/MND.

As you will see in the presentation, there has been a strong online presence in the ALS/MND world since the early 1990s. Over time, the proportion and representativeness of the patients participating has increased dramatically, to the point that we now have some 10% of the USA’s ALS/MND population registered on the site.

Next up in our series…a blog post looking at some of our recent improvements to PatientsLikeMe for people living with ALS/MND.

PatientsLikeMe members share health data on the site adding their own individual-level health experience to a repository of structured outcome data. The result? An unprecedented data set that informs medical conversation not only within the patient community but also with the larger scientific one.

Earlier this fall, the venue for this conversation was the annual meeting of the American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA). Typically, AMIA is a forum for medical researchers to discuss clinical-facing informatics projects like electronic medical records, doctor decision-support systems, and standards. This year, the event agenda included its first-ever panel on patient collaboration, with PatientsLikeMe presenting on how our members use informatics systems to spearhead original research.I presented a paper co-authored with Michael Massagli chronicling the activity on the ALS site regarding the site-based evaluation of Lithium. Questions about the paper were enthusiastic and challenging as medical researchers contemplated the full implications of patients conducting research outside of the healthcare system. The most provocative comment came from Danny Sands of Cisco who introduced the possibility that while he saw the value of PatientsLikeMe, we may also be “polluting clinical trials” - when patients with rare diseases take experimental treatments before being enrolled in (his) randomized clinical trials. My response was that he and others in the clinical trial world may feel differently if someone he cared for was diagnosed with ALS – a disease where patients have limited time to explore treatment options. As medical researchers, we should be proud of our patients who are taking an active role in their health care; I know I am.

The truth is, whether practitioners discuss it or not, people have long experimented with novel, off-label, and alternative treatments (some with and some without their physicians). Barring the few cases that are published in academic journals, these individual efforts only resulted in a tiny group of people learning anything from their experience. By organizing these individual efforts, PatientsLikeMe allows the data to be pooled and recorded systematically for analysis.

Of course, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the most rigorous means to systematize experimentation, but they have their draw-backs. They are expensive to run, time consuming (they take years, our study took months), and may be subject to more confounds than their organizers would like to believe.

While coordinated patient-led research on PatientsLikeMe is new, and as such presents novel challenges in its methods and credibility, we have now glimpsed its promise, its potential. Lithium was a first effort to study one treatment in one condition; it is just the beginning. There are many other treatments being used listed on the site by our patients that are not – for a variety of reasons - being studied systematically anywhere else. For example: Low Dose Naltrexone (LDN), Stem Cell Transplants in ALS, 4-Aminopyridine (4-AP), Botox injections to manage excess saliva, etc. These demand our attention.

Regarding the Lithium experiment, one patient described the situation better than I ever could in this forum post: “This is an amazing process.  Instead of sitting on the sidelines searching for promising research we are for the first time ever (from what I can determine) taking a group of people with a particular disease and taking an active role in researching a treatment.”

PatientsLikeMe’s members are not only learning how to best care for themselves, they are contributing their otherwise anecdotal experience to a body of data. Motivated by their own desire for better outcomes, patients are reporting directly to the website and building a body of evidence not being collected anywhere else. Together, with our carefully designed tools to capture, display, discuss and analyze this data, we are creating a repository of patient reported outcomes that will add patient data to evidence-based medicine and advance our knowledge.  Isn’t that what it’s all about?

Mimi Yin over at The Common Data Project blog posed some interesting questions about data in our communities:

Back in April, I wrote about the site PatientsLikeMe.com, which provides a wonderful new service that allows individual users to share the most intimate details of their medical conditions and treatments, which in turn creates a pool of invaluable information that is publicly available. However, I also wonder about how their data may be skewed because their users are limited to the pool of people who are comfortable sharing their HIV status and publicly charting their daily bowel movements. The question we have for PatientsLikeMe is: Who isn’t being represented in your data set? And how does that affect the relevance of your data to the average person who comes to your site looking for information? Who won’t find your data helpful because it’s not relevant to their personal situation?

First of all, Mimi brings up outstanding questions.  Let’s take the overall philosophy first, openness.  PatientsLikeMe is built around the idea that patients can drive their own health outcomes through sharing their health information.  This is a movement away from privacy as a paradigm for health management.  That being the case, the people who choose to be members have weighed the potential benefits and risks of sharing information and land on the benefits side.

PatientsLikeMe is certainly not for everyone.  As the early-adopters have been called the “vanguard” by Thomas Goetz in our recent New York Times Magazine article entitled Practicing Patients, these people are joining a movement to move the control of patient data back to the hands of patients and not the other stakeholders.  So it’s these people who have chosen to share their information with each other, with about 10% choosing to share with the world for everyone’s benefit.

The time is now for patients to take control and embrace this openness philosophy.

Now, to address those issues individually:

• How representative is our dataset? This varies by each community according to the size of our sample and the characteristics of the “typical patient” with that disease. For instance, our flagship ALS community contains over 1,400 registered patients, accounting for about 5% of the US population of 30,000 patients. Our community’s mean age at onset is 49 years old, relative to the population norm which is 54 years old, suggesting we get slightly younger users on the site; we also tend to have a higher proportion of longer survivors than one would find in the broader population. The larger the PatientsLikeMe community and the smaller the patient population, the more representative we are.

• How does that affect the average person who comes to your site looking for information? Not much! When you join PatientsLikeMe, we don’t show you the experience of the average patient. We show you the outcomes of a patient just like you. Through our advanced search feature you can find other patients who are similar to you demographically, geographically, or in terms of your illness profile.

• Who won’t find your data helpful because it’s not relevant to their personal situation? We believe that more data is always better; if that data is from someone who’s not quite like you, we show you the ways you differ. That way you can make your own adjustments and draw your own conclusions. At some point though it stops being about the availability of data and starts being about the ability of the user to act; our treatment database in HIV is of little use to someone without access to antiretroviral drugs. That said, the tools we provide can still help a patient through social support, sharing their outcomes with others who have been in the same position, and record their blood counts (if available).

Our favourite part of Mimi’s post states:

To state my case more strongly: Participating as a data point in data-driven research is a passive form of voting, the most basic of rights in a functioning democracy.

We’d even go one further and say that sharing important data about decisions you’ve made in order empower others is actually more important than casting your vote in a democracy; it’s more meaningful, you immediately gain experience and insight right back, and perhaps somewhat idealistically, it brings people together rather than driving them apart. Part of our mission is to make the case that sharing data works out better for everyone; the more people we convince, the more reliable our data will be, the better decisions people can make, the more people will be convinced to share their data…The movement begins….

One of the things we’re most proud of at PatientsLikeMe is our ability to rapidly carry out research. There are some obvious benefits online: patients can can take part whenever they want, take as much time as they need (often using assistive technology), and are more likely to be open and honest about subjects that could be embarassing.

We recently published a paper in the European Journal of Neurology that’s a great example of this. For many years doctors have known that a small number of patients with ALS (~5%) develop frontotemporal dementia, which causes personality changes, unusual behaviour, and severe cognitive problems. A larger proportion (~33-50%) suffer much milder cognitive problems, such as getting words “stuck on the tip of their tongue”, finding it difficult to multi-task, or difficult to plan complex sequences of events like planning a vacation. A recent review in Lancet Neurology gave a thorough run-down of the literature, the ALS Association has published a guide for families, and there have even been two conferences held just on this topic.

Despite this, our study of 247 ALS patients found that:

• 85% of patients were told they might experience problems walking
• only 11% were told they might experience cognitive change
• The patient literature around ALS continues to promote the myth that “the mind remains unaffected” in ALS.

Doctors may feel that they shouldn’t burden families with knowledge about a symptom that may never affect them, but we found that most patients and carers would have liked to have been told. It’s not even clear that witholding the information had much effect anyway, as many respondents reported having found this out through other sources, regardless of what their doctor had told them. One caregiver told us:

My husband… had uncontrollable crying the last few months of his disease, as well as frontal lobe confusion. This was not ever discussed with the neurologist, but when I called about it I was told that it does happen sometimes with this disease… I called the doctor to be told it sounded like the frontal lobe thing. I think doctors need to do a better job educucating the patient throughout about all possibilites of what could happen so the patient’s caregivers aren’t so helpless.

Whilst we understand that healthcare professionals are doing their absolute best to manage people’s expectations and fears about their disease, it seems clear that when it comes to patients accessing information about their disease, the genie is out of the bottle. Now that doctors are no longer the sole conduit of specialist knowledge we need to have a dialogue about how to help patients get the best outcomes.

PatientsLikeMe was born of a passion to provide the best tools for patients to participate in their own care, share experiences and change the way medical research is done.Thanks to our members and the dedication of our growing team, our first community, ALS, has now been open to the public for two years! The community includes over 1650 patients, the U.S. members represent over 4% of all the ALS patients in the States.

Over three quarters of our members have entered substantive information about their treatment history and status. Each time a member adds information, that information benefits how other people care for themselves and heightens how we as a community contribute to medical knowledge and drug discovery.

Already we have published exciting findings from our community. For example, hundreds of ALS patients completed Paul Wick’s survey on Excessive Yawning and the results were published in a psychiatry journal (Acta Psychiatica Scandinavica). Another exciting development in ALS is first real time drug study - on the use of Lithium in ALS. More published and presented research will soon be featured on our blog and in a new section on the site. Each project demonstrates how we, as a community, can conduct research quickly and easily to accelerate the pace of gathering and disseminating new knowledge. SO THANK YOU.

To show you how the research process works and to celebrate our second anniversary, we have put together a report on our ALS community. In it we observe that the community is a good one to study in that it looks a lot like the ALS patient population at large. As is true for ALS generally, there are 3 men for each 2 women in the community and mostly sporadic cases (8% hereditary, 92% sporadic). And, PatientsLikeMe members experience all types of onset with the most common being leg and arm onset (39% and 37% respectively). The only real difference is that site members are a little younger than the average (48.4 at onset on the site compared to 55 generally). In the report, we also looked at how different ways to better understand ALS and connect patients. In the figure below, we look at the relationship between age at onset and onset type. Separating each age group, we see whether different types of ALS present themselves at different times of life. This can contribute to scientific understanding of the disease. Arm onset appears to affect slightly younger people than bulbar and leg onset. Also, when each number in the chart is a link on the site, it will help you locate others like you and of interest to you. See the next figure. We also report early stage research of our own. Specifically, we look at how patients are utilizing health services and how our members with different types of onset are doing over time. One surprising finding is how long some people report between experiencing their first ALS symptom and receiving a diagnosis. In the figure below, the most common length of time between onset and diagnosis was 12 – 18 months. There are also a number of patients who did not receive a diagnosis for several years. We are going to do some more research into these results.

Lastly, we begin to look at how ALS differs by onset. We see from our user reported Functional Rating Scale that bulbar onset patients experience a faster decline than users with arm or leg onset. People with bulbar onset experience the same level of decline in 8 months as leg and arm onset patients experience in 16 months.

Through member participation, we are gathering the information we need to better understand the course and characteristics of ALS. At the same time, we are creating methods to use patient supplied data to discover and evaluate the effects of new possible treatments. If you are an ALS patient or caregiver, please take a look at the full report (Note: you must be a registered user).

by James Heywood

Update (March 7, 2008):  PatientsLikeMe ALS Lithium Research released.

Does it work?
On February 12th of this year, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (one of the leading science journals) published a paper entitled — Lithium Delays Progression of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. After 10 years researching ALS, I believe it is fair to say this paper includes the most promising suggestive set of data from a clinical trial ever published. I say “suggestive” because there are many flaws with both the information presented and with the publication process itself. These flaws make it so that patients and their doctors are left trying to draw conclusions about the use of Lithium to treat ALS, without actually having any realistic confidence in the data or its meaning.

For a patient, there is genuine risk either way. Lithium is not a harmless drug, and, although it is widely used, it can have significant side effects if it is not monitored properly. In addition, the reality is that in several of the last clinical trials in ALS, including minocycline and topiramate, the patients in the treatment group did worse than those in the control group. So, fears about the risk of an unproven drug are well founded. However, there is also the risk of doing nothing. If the paper turns out to be even half true, the effect on the progression of the disease could be dramatic.

We also must consider the consequences of waiting for more information. For someone with a life expectancy of several years, the consequence is obvious. Unfortunately, the harsh reality is that the traditional medical research system will not provide any better data to patients for at least 2 years – that is, 6 months to start a trial, 15 months of evaluation, and 3 months to share the data. In fact, 2 years is being optimistic, if truth be told. History teaches us that it will most likely be much longer.

History also teaches us that patients sharing stories with each other will not answer the question alone. Chinese stem cells, herbal supplements, nutraceuticals — all have been discussed extensively on the internet with some claiming cures and some describing great harm; yet we have no definitive answer. Despite the thousands of postings, very little knowledge has advanced the treatment of ALS, and patients are still left unable to make effective treatment decisions.

We can and will do better
PatientsLikeMe was built to solve this problem and accelerate the transfer of knowledge about what works and what does not. Today, PatientsLikeMe has data on the progression and history of more than 1600 ALS patients - twice the number in the largest ALS trial in history. Even before the trial results were published, 50 patients worldwide who had elected to start taking lithium, in collaboration with their doctors, have been tracking their progression and blood levels on PatientslikeMe. This is more than twice the number of patients participating in the trial itself! We have data on historical forced vital capacity, the ALS Functional Rating scale, and a full symptom battery for most of the patients who have started, as well as for all the other non-lithium users in our system.

PatientsLikeMe is committed to solving this problem. We are collaborating with Humberto Macedo, a patient, and Karen Felzer, who’s father has ALS, to recruit all patients taking lithium. Together, with all the patients involved, we will run the first real-time, real-world, open and non-blinded, patient-driven trial. We believe we will have the power, within months, to begin answering the question of how much lithium modifies the progression of ALS. Unlike a blind placebo control trial, we are watching the use of this drug in the real world, and because of the number of patients and our system’s sophisticated data modeling, we can determine the significance of each reported change in each patient as he/she deviates from his/her predicted course. There are many risks to our approach, patient optimism, the placebo effect, uncertain quality, and many other variables will compromise our data. Despite these, and many other challenges, we remain committed to solving this problem.

Our Pledge to ALS Patients
We will use all our shared patients’ data to determine, to the highest predictive power possible, the effect of lithium on ALS patients in the real world. We will share that information in real time with all patients. We commit to displaying that information in a realistic manner that communicates the true confidence and uncertainties it contains. We will build a platform that allows patients, doctors and researchers the ability to drill down into all of the data in the system, to each and every data point, so that they can trust that our analysis is based on what really happened. We commit to engaging in an open and productive dialogue about our methods, so we can all learn to do this better – today and tomorrow.

What you need to do
Regardless of whether you take lithium or not, we need your data. The more patients that share their information, the more power we have to detect the effect of lithium, or any of the other 800 treatments in our system. We encourage all patients, including those who have chosen on their own in effective consultation with their doctor to take lithium, to join PatientsLikeMe and share your data with the world. We do not encourage any patient to start taking lithium. As noted above, all drugs have risks and, in general, ALS patients have experienced more harm than good trying experimental treatments. It is important to note that, either way, you help if you participate, because the more data we have, the more ability we have to answer the question of what’s working.

Realistic Hope
In the 9 years since my brother, Stephen, was diagnosed with ALS, we have been through so many cycles of hope and disappointment. We have tried treatments that turned out not to work, and we have tried treatments that were and remain unproven. Each time, we approach the data with a little more skepticism, as each time before it has been proven to be wrong. Someday a treatment will work. I hope and pray that lithium is the one, but I am realistic given the failures of the past. The realistic hope of PatientsLikeMe is that together we can accelerate the day when we know. We know most patients use PatientsLikeMe because they want to talk to someone like them and support their friends, they use PatientsLikeMe to share their insights; they use PatientsLikeMe, because, without question, we improve patients’ quality of life through the sharing of information. We value that greatly, but we also have higher goals, Today, we start achieving them. Today, we allow patients to begin to answer how to treat ALS, and that will help us answer it for all diseases.

This year PatientsLikeMe was the major sponsor of the 18th International ALS/MND Symposium held in Toronto, Canada. Research scientist Paul Wicks, marketing officer Lori Scanlon, and community liaison Emma Willey were all in attendance to tell people about the site. We first started telling the ALS/MND community about us at the Yokohama conference in 2006, with Paul walking doctors and researchers through the site on a laptop. This year we decided to invest more in setting up an eye-catching booth which had people coming up to us to admire our space-age gadgets as much as to see the site!

Over the course of 4 days we spoke to hundreds of conference delegates. Many doctors had said that they had been invited to join the site by their patients and were curious to find out more. We were able to use our new Google Mapping feature to show them where their local patients were, which had people queuing to see who they knew that was registered on the site! Several researchers were also interested in forming collaborations and we hope to be able to get our users involved in more research over the coming year.The most common questions people had for us were:

- Do people really want to know about their progress?: Our answer would be that PatientsLikeMe allows them the option to find out if they choose. Many professionals feel that it is their responsibility to protect patients and carers from distressing information. However, we believe that everyone’s information-seeking preferences are different and by giving people the choice we are empowering them.

- Don’t you get a lot of people pushing their products?: We have a few ways of preventing this. First there is our community of members, who are a very switched-on group. If anybody posts something suspicious or overtly commercial we normally hear about it in a matter of minutes and are able to respond appropriately. Secondly we have a clear emphasis on sharing what has been helpful, but we ask people not to try and persuade others to change their regime; that is a choice for them to make. Finally, by giving patients the tools to look at each other’s outcomes, we encourage people to put their data where their mouth is. If “supplement x” has worked wonders for them, we would encourage them to enter in their data so other people can see for themselves.

- What does this cost patients?: Nothing! Because our business model involves partnering with pharmaceutical companies to encourage their participation in disease communities, we don’t have to rely upon advertising, spam, or subscription fees to sustain our activities. We feel that being a neutral space from the perspective of industry and non-profits is best for everyone.

- Can we tell our patients about this?: Sure! We’d like nothing more. In the new year we’ll be distributing leaflets to all the ALS/MND clinics we can find so that they can invite patients and caregivers to join us.

On the penultimate day of the conference, one of our research team, Paul Wicks, gave a platform presentation describing PatientsLikeMe and presenting some of the research that’s been carried out on the site.

His talk was met with an enthusiastic response and was identified as a highlight of the symposium by several delegates. Click the video below to hear Paul take you through his eight minute presentation.

Without doubt, one of the most inspiring parts of any conference is meeting up with our users, and we were thrilled to see a few of them at the conference. We heard how PatientsLikeMe helped them understand more about their condition, meet other users in their area, and made them feel like they were a part of the fight against ALS/MND. Next year the conference is in Birmingham, UK, and we look forward to having lots of ground-breaking research to show off there!