“I got this call from my brother Stephen, and he said the news doesn’t look good. At that point, he’d been through enough processes to know what that meant – he had ALS. So I began this journey with my brother and my family…. We were thinking there had to be a way to make this about the patient. But it started like everyone else. You get that phone call, and your life changes.” – Jamie Heywood, Co-Founder

Recently, we launched a new and improved About Us page that included a short video about our company history. Now, we’re pleased to unveil a longer, more in-depth video that allows you to hear our founding story from four PatientsLikeMe executives and learn what drew each of them to become a part of our groundbreaking concept.

Tune in below to hear where it all started and why, five years later, we’re committed to continuing the journey we’re all on – as a company, as patients and as family members of those affected by disease.

You can also watch this insightful piece (~15 minutes) in three smaller segments:  Chapter 1, Chapter 2 and Chapter 3.

“Patients know what patients want to know.”
– Dave deBronkart

Blogger, author and international keynote speaker Dave deBronkart is a familiar name at PatientsLikeMe, as his writings and health talks tend to strike a chord with us.

You see, “E-Patient Dave,” as he calls himself, has a story that underscores exactly why we founded PatientsLikeMe. After being diagnosed with Stage IV kidney cancer, Dave faced a grave prognosis. He read that the median survival for his condition was just 24 weeks from diagnosis. Then he joined a social network for cancer patients and learned of a treatment called interleukin-2 that most patients never hear about. Happily, this treatment would eventually save his life.

Today, E-Patient Dave is a healthy fellow as well as an outspoken advocate for many things we support. For example, he believes patients are “the most underutilized resource in healthcare,” and that patients should have access to their own medical data. He argues that only with complete data can a patient crack the code on his or her own health situation. As co-sponsors of the Declaration of Health Data Rights in 2009 and proponents of our own unique Openness Philosophy, we wholeheartedly agree.

To learn more about Dave’s remarkable story, as well as his plea to the medical world to “let patients help,” check out his recent TEDx Talk below.  (If you’ve never heard of TED or TEDMED, it’s another concept we support because of how it generates ideas and stories that produce “wow” – another core value of our company.  Our Co-Founder Jamie Heywood has even appeared on their stage for his own TEDMED talk.)

Finally, here is a powerful anecdote from E-Patient Dave about how other patients continued to help him throughout treatment.  ”The side effects of interleukin-2 are, as the American Cancer Society puts it, ‘often severe and rarely fatal,’” he says.   “That statement left me pretty powerless, so I collected 15 firsthand stories from my patient peers who had the treatment.  And when my side effects hit – the first was uncontrollable chills and shaking – I knew what is was.  I knew what to expect, and I knew how other patients like me had gotten through it.”

It’s MS Awareness Month and we’re excited to bring you information from our nonprofit partner, Accelerated Cure Project for MS.  We briefly mentioned the Accelerated Cure Repository in our blog interview with Devic’s patient, Gracie.  We thought we’d take the opportunity to ask The Accelerated Cure Project for MS a bit more about the repository and what it means for MS patients.  Here’s the interview between Molly Cotter (PatientsLikeMe nonprofit development) and Accelerated Cure’s Operations and Repository Director, Sara Loud.

—

	(Molly) What is the Accelerated Cure Repository?
	Accelerated Cure Project, (www.acceleratedcure.org), is a research-focused national nonprofit whose mission it is to cure MS by determining its causes, triggers, and disease mechanisms.  Our main resource to accomplish this is our Repository, a collection of biological samples and data collected from people with MS and related demyelinating diseases.  We collect these samples and data at our 10 collection sites across the country and then distribute them to scientists, both academic and commercial.  The Repository is a critical resource to the research community.  We’ve taken on the burden (time, cost, complexity) of sample and data collection so that scientists can spend their time and money doing their most important work, the research.  The Repository provides the research community with a large (samples from nearly 2,000 people so far!), well-characterized, high-quality set of samples and data.
	(Molly) How can it benefit MS patients?  Are there any other patients that can participate?
	(Sara) While there’s no direct benefit to an individual who participates in the Repository (we don’t offer any treatment, for example), the Repository offers the potential of a tremendous benefit to those with MS and their families.  The scientists who are using our samples are working on developing better diagnostic tools, learning more about treatment effects, and making great strides into understanding what triggers MS.  Enrolling in the Repository is a terrific way to participate in research.We’re not only enrolling people with MS but also folks with other demyelinating diseases such as Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO), Transverse Myelitis (TM), Optic Neuritis (ON), and Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (ADEM).  There is so much to be learned by studying these diseases in conjunction with each other.  We are also collecting control samples from family members who don’t have one of these diseases.  We enroll parents, children, siblings, and even spouses.  The whole family can be involved!
	(Molly) As we state in our Openness Philosophy, we believe openly sharing data is a good thing.  How does the Repository encourage this concept?
	(Sara) At Accelerated Cure Project, we wholeheartedly believe that collaboration and open sharing of information are key to solving the puzzle that is MS.  Our Repository is open access meaning that anyone can apply for samples and data.  We’re currently supporting more than 30 studies worldwide with our samples and/or data.  One of the requirements for access to the Repository, however, is that the researcher must agree to return their research results back to us at Accelerated Cure Project for inclusion in our database and sharing with other researchers.  This means that researchers who have never met or spoken with each other are learning from and building upon each other’s research.  This type of information sharing is likely to be critical to curing MS.
	(Molly) How is the data being used that is collected from the repository?  Do patients have access to the research results?
	(Sara) The data is being used in a number of ways.  Scientists using our samples nearly always request supporting data to enhance their research.  We’ve also had requests for just data, no samples, from scientists who are doing data mining, looking for correlations and new findings on what may trigger MS.  Don’t forget that these scientists are not only studying the data that we’ve collected from participants but also the data that has been generated by other scientists studying the samples.  We anticipate supporting many more projects relating to analyzing the vast amount of data collected!Because the samples and data collected from participants are stored anonymously, there’s no way for us to report back individual research results.  We do report regularly on the research being done using the Repository on both our web site and in our quarterly newsletter.  We are always very excited to update everyone with the new findings that come about through the use of the Repository. I hope that people contact me to learn more about participating in the Repository. Contact me any time.
	(Molly) Thanks so much, Sara!

Openness.  Privacy.  These philosophies stand in direct opposition in the question of which is better for consumer health.  Should people be open with their health information or private?  Certainly there are times for both, right?

Not according to some privacy advocates.  On October 22, 2008, Deven McGraw from the Center for Democracy and Technology cited a survey on their blog entitled “National Dialogue on Health Information Technology and Privacy” that 67% of respondents were either “somewhat” or “very concerned” about the privacy of their personal medical records.  A glass half-full perspective would say that one-third of respondents think openness is appropriate, at least somewhat.  McGraw summed up the post this way:

Without appropriate protections for privacy and security in the healthcare system, patients will withhold information from the health care providers – or decide not to seek treatment – because of fears about how their personal health information could be misused. Ignoring concerns about privacy – or inadequately address[ing] them – will significantly threaten public trust in these new e-health technologies, and in our overall healthcare system.

It may be a stretch to say make a blanket statement that patients will decide not to seek treatment based on fears about how their information would be used.  Let’s hear from patients themselves.  We asked members of our Multiple Sclerosis community to respond to this statement in our forum.  Here are excerpts from some of their responses:

1. I would withhold info or not seek care due to privacy concerns.  I was thrown into MS and was very forthcoming with everyone, including my former employer.  If I had to do it all over again, I would keep my mouth shut, with the exception of telling my family.  I like the anonymous nature of PLM.  I don’t include my full name so I’m comfortable in noting my dx and symptoms.

2. unfortunately, there really isn’t enough privacy anymore. I just figure to heck with it. If they really want my info they’ll find a way to get it anyways.

3. I believe the benefits of participating in a health care system using online records outweigh privacy concerns. What privacy? Given the resources, anyone can find out anything about my background.

4. Like many, I have mixed feelings about this.  Working in healthcare, I know that there is a HUGE advantage to having all your medical info readily available to any provider.  I can think of many times where I’ve had a patient who couldn’t tell me their history, or what meds they’re taking, and struggling to figure out what was going on.  On the other hand, I also know, from personal experience, that having unauthorized people get access to your health info can have major negative consequences.

5. That [online medical records is] inevitable is probable,but I still believe that we should have the right to say who knows what,when,and if about ourselves.Its about freedom of choice,will and about human dignity!

6. My medical records are open, wanna see? Just look at PLM!!!!!

What a popular question!  We got dozens of responses in less then 24 hours.  What we found is that the one-in-three ratio holds.  Of our patient member responses, two out of three have either not sought treatment or wouldn’t seek treatment because of privacy concerns.  The other third believes that privacy doesn’t exist or doesn’t help people.  Although anecdotal, this is quite a finding and reflects what we believe to be the true nature of this debate:  There are times for openness and times for privacy.  Patients simply want control over when each is employed.

Do we ultimately know that sharing health information online is “safe”?  We answer that question in one of our FAQs, but the short answer is we don’t know.  Yes, there are risks that information will be misused.  But what we also know is that there is a benefit/risk equation for people and their health.  And when research is slow and treatment options are scarce, patients turn to each other for help and support.  They can’t wait 10 years or more for traditional clinical research.  Sharing becomes the best option.  The internet then becomes the most powerful medium to share information, identify new best practices, and ultimately create new medical evidence.

Our Openness Philosophy discusses how sharing health information is actually a way to democratize health data for the benefit of all stakeholders, patients, physicians, researchers, caregivers, and industry as well.  We can’t answer the question for you posed in the title.  Only you can decide if sharing health information online is for you.  We just want to give you the opportunity if and when you’re ready.

We would love to hear what you think!  Continue the conversation by leaving us a comment.

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….

In one of the greatest honors in our young company to date, PatientsLikeMe was featured in today’s New York Times Magazine. The article, entitled Practicing Patients, appropriately discusses the pros and cons associated with sharing data-rich personal health information in an open community.

PatientsLikeMe seeks to go a mile deeper than health-information sites like WebMD or online support groups like Daily Strength. The members of PatientsLikeMe don’t just share their experiences anecdotally; they quantify them, breaking down their symptoms and treatments into hard data. They note what hurts, where and for how long. They list their drugs and dosages and score how well they alleviate their symptoms. All this gets compiled over time, aggregated and crunched into tidy bar graphs and progress curves by the software behind the site. And it’s all open for comparison and analysis. By telling so much, the members of PatientsLikeMe are creating a rich database of disease treatment and patient experience.

With amazing patient successes balanced by medical leaders’ skepticism, author Thomas Goetz strikes a critical chord within the current healthcare debate. Is the American health system broken? Can patients fix it through aggregation of collective experience? Are patients to be trusted to report their own health conditions? What does PatientsLikeMe mean for the medical establishment?

PatientsLikeMe is a tool that allows patients to manage their disease with a sophistication and precision that would have been unimaginable just a decade ago. The 7,000 members of PatientsLikeMe, in other words, are beta testers — they may be the vanguard of how we all will care and treat our résumé of chronic diseases.

The article cites the PatientsLikeMe Openness Philosophy; the manifesto that draws our company line in the sand. Openness can lead to better outcomes and accelerate research like never before. This is our goal for PatientsLikeMe. This isn’t health science fiction. It’s happening today with the help of thousands of patients.

So read the article–and join PatientsLikeMe–to see where you stand.

Over the past seven months of working at PatientsLikeMe, I’ve come to think that the idea of sharing medical and health information is completely normal. Since giving birth to my nearly 3 year old daughter, I have continued to be eternally grateful to other mothers who have willingly and openly shared their deeply personal experiences and advice so readily. There are some unexpected things you have to deal with, and nothing is so helpful as the wisdom of others who’ve been there. Then this December, I had a moment of pause. All of us at the company received a year-end gift of 23andMe‘s Personal Genome Service. Here was my chance to find out what my genes have in store for me and to find out what I might have passed onto my little girl. But do I really want to know? And once I find out, do I want share that information?

Well, it took a while to decide and I hadn’t expected that. I realized that deciding to put very personal details about my health, current or future, out into the world is no small thing. I commend each and every person who has chosen to share their information in our PatientsLikeMe communities. I wouldn’t have made it this far into motherhood without the nitty-gritty, honest information that other mothers have shared with me, and I’ve been truly and deeply inspired by the information that people have so willing shared on our site. I would certainly want access to that knowledge and experience if I needed it. But, if I want to have access to that kind of information, then I have to do my part too. So in the end, I decided to spit. Now I’m waiting to find out what my genes have in store for me and my family. Openness, here I come.

Bringing the New Year in right, Benjamin Heywood, CEO of PatientsLikeMe, was interviewed by David E. Williams, publisher of the Health Business Blog (not to be confused with David S. Williams who works with PatientsLikeMe). In the interview, Ben discusses the future of the company, its ground-breaking Openness Philosophy, and the differentiation of PatientsLikeMe versus other Health 2.0 companies.

Here’s how David E. Williams characterized PatientsLikeMe:

PatientsLikeMe is one of my favorite Health 2.0, social networking websites. The online community enables patients with serious illnesses to build content-rich connections to similar patients. Patients are motivated to provide all the relevant information about themselves and to stick with the site over time to help one another. As a consequence, PatientsLikeMe users collectively generate robust data sets that have the potential to generate meaningful insights for researchers and commercial entities. That leads to some interesting business opportunities for the company.

The interview provides great insight about PatientsLikeMe. Enjoy!

Welcome to the PatientsLikeMe blog. Here you will get firsthand accounts of our growth and how we are impacting global health care. Why have we chose the name “The Value of Openness”? Read our Openness Philosophy below, and you’ll see why.

________________________

Openness is a good thing.

Most healthcare websites have a Privacy Policy. Naturally, we do too. But at PatientsLikeMe, we’re more excited about our Openness Philosophy. It may sound counterintuitive, but it’s what drives our groundbreaking concept.

You see, we believe sharing your healthcare experiences and outcomes is good. Why? Because when patients share real-world data, collaboration on a global scale becomes possible. New treatments become possible. Most importantly, change becomes possible. At PatientsLikeMe, we are passionate about bringing people together for a greater purpose: speeding up the pace of research and fixing a broken healthcare system.

Currently, most healthcare data is inaccessible due to privacy regulations or proprietary tactics. As a result, research is slowed, and the development of breakthrough treatments takes decades. Patients also can’t get the information they need to make important treatment decisions. But it doesn’t have to be that way. When you and thousands like you share your data, you open up the healthcare system. You learn what’s working for others. You improve your dialogue with your doctors. Best of all, you help bring better treatments to market in record time.

PatientsLikeMe enables you to effect a sea change in the healthcare system. We believe that the Internet can democratize patient data and accelerate research like never before. Furthermore, we believe data belongs to you the patient to share with other patients, caregivers, physicians, researchers, pharmaceutical and medical device companies, and anyone else that can help make patients’ lives better.

Will you add to our collective knowledge… and help change the course of healthcare?

________________________

Thoughts? Comments? We’re always eager to engage in conversation regarding openness of health data.

Thanks, and welcome to “The Value of Openness”.