http://bmj.com/cgi/content/full/323/7317/858
|
|||||||
|
|
George A Venters
Lanarkshire Health Board, Hamilton ML3 OTA
george.venters@lanarkshirehb.scot.nhs.uk
Epidemiologists use certain criteria to assess the likelihood of a link
between cause and effect for disease. When these criteria are applied
to the case for new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease being caused
by the bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion the evidence seems
weak. Such study also raises the question of whether this is a new
disease, as the hypothesis of the infectivity of the bovine
spongiform encephalopathy prion to humans and the novelty of the
condition are inextricably linked. In this paper I examine the
evidence for a causal link between new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
and the bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion and argue in favour
of the alternative hypotheses that the variant is not caused by the
prion and is not new.
|
Summary points
The causal link between the
bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion and new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease is open to question Assessment of the evidence
against relevant epidemiological criteria reveals the weakness of the case
for a link The rate of growth in the number
of cases is very much less than would be expected from a foodborne source The rate of growth is consistent
with a previously misdiagnosed but extremely rare disease being found |
|
|
Criteria
to assess causality |
A link between cause and disease can be self evident, but often it can be
established or refuted only by a process of extensive observation,
hypothesis testing, and experiment. In such cases systematic application
of criteria that illuminate different aspects of causation can give
an indication of the robustness of the hypothesis. Such criteria are
These criteria are applied below to the case for the bovine spongiform
encephalopathy prion being the cause of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease. The results are summarised in the table.
|
Biological plausibility
The bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion is known to produce prion
encephalopathies when ingested by other species, and by analogy such
infection may be possible in humans. However, there is no direct
evidence that this prion is infectious to humans. To be infectious
it would have to survive cooking, digestion, and the human immune
system.
There is evidence for a robust species barrier between
humans and prions from ungulate species. Prions produced in ungulates and
humans have different sequences of amino acids. People do not get
scrapie, and intracerebral injection of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy
prion does not cause transmissable prion encephalopathy in mice
genetically engineered to carry the gene for the human prion
protein.3
Also, ingestion is an inefficient route of transmission of prions
other than by cannibalism. Infection of humans from eating the
bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion is therefore unlikely.
Strength of association
Details of individuals' exposures to the prion and the occurrence of
subsequent disease are unknown.
Consistency of findings
A single unit is both the original proponent and the ultimate
arbiter of this diagnosis, and the uniqueness of the circumstances
in the United Kingdom makes comparative study difficult. There are,
however, inconsistencies in findings. It is presumed that the
general British population has been exposed to the bovine spongiform
encephalopathy prion, but the disease is found predominantly in
young people. Also, cases have been reported in France despite a
much lower level of possible exposure of the population to the prion.
Temporality
There are two main components of temporality. The first component is
the novelty of the disease as an entity, and the second one is the
relation of detected cases to patterns of population exposure to the
bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion.
Novelty of the disease
To prove that a disease is new it is necessary to review and
legitimately reject other possibilities. Discovery of new variant
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease followed the epidemic of bovine spongiform
encephalopathy in cattle and occurred within an incubation period
compatible with that observed for kuru, the only previous foodborne
epidemic in humans known to be caused by a prion.4 Kuru is a
prion encephalopathy found in the Fore people in Papua New Guinea
and spread by cannibalism.
The spectrum of clinical and neuropathological features
found in kuru includes those found in new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease,
and both diseases involve the lymphoreticular system. Neuropathological
differences between them may be more of degree than of kind, in that
survival of patients with new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is
likely to be longer because they will generally have received better
health care than was available to people with kuru. Also,
Creutzfeldt's original case died in Breslau aged 23 with
clinical features and gross neuropathology entirely consistent with
new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. 5 6 The
novelty of the disease is therefore open to question.
Pattern of infection relative to exposure
The pattern of distribution of cases in a foodborne epidemic from a
time limited source has a characteristic shape (fig 1). Initial small
numbers of cases are followed by a rapidly accelerating rise to a
peak. The rate of the rise to the peak is proportional to the rate
at which susceptible people are exposed and infected, and the height
of the peak depends on how many people are exposed and infected. The
duration of the curve reflects the length of time the infectious
agent persists as a threat.
|
The shape of this curve holds for foodborne
infections no matter whether the incubation period is days, as for Escherichia
coli 0157, or years, as is the case for prions.7-10 The
curve has guided estimation of the rate of bovine spongiform
encephalopathy infection in cattle, which is considered to have
risen exponentially between 1983 and 1988, peaking at around
350 000 in 1988.9
As these cattle entered the food chain they became a
potential source of infection for humans. Consequently, the rate at which humans
were likely to have been exposed to infection should have paralleled
that curve. As susceptible individuals were exposed and then
incubated the disease, we would expect the rate of increase in the
number of cases similarly to follow this curve. Cases have been
appearing since 1994. Their rate of increase since then falls far
short of what would be expected if this was a foodborne infection (fig
2). Temporality of
association between cause and effect is therefore at best uncertain.
|
Specificity
Interspecies prion infection differs from the conventional
understanding of the infectious process, in which an infective agent
reproduces itself in the infected cell or animal. Cells can only
produce prion specific to the species they belong to, so the bovine
spongiform encephalopathy prion can only induce production in the
host species of prion with similar physicochemical characteristics
to the bovine prion. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion itself
can never be detected in human brains or in any species other than
cattle. Arguments in favour of specificity of the agent are based on
strong similarities between the prions for bovine spongiform
encephalopathy and new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in
physicochemical properties and strain typing in laboratory experiments
with other species. 3
11-13
Consequently, the specificity of the link between the prion and the
disease can only be inferred and remains an open question.
Dose-response relation
The dose-response relation is not known for humans.
Quality of evidence
Given that it is impossible to prove that the bovine spongiform
encephalopathy prion is infectious to humans, evidence for the case
has to be indirect. The evidence that has been amassed is directed
towards confirming the hypothesis rather than testing it. Salient
contrary information has been either played down or ignored.
Creutzfeldt's eponymous case was not cited in the original
paper, nor was kuru considered as a possibility.1 Similarities
between kuru and new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease were used to
justify the likelihood of ingestion as a route of infection, yet the
possibility of them being the same disease was not raised.14
Despite the obvious improvement in detection and reporting
of all prion encephalopathies after the establishment of the UK Creutzfeldt-Jakob
Disease Surveillance Unit in 1990 (fig 2), better ascertainment
does not seem to have been adequately considered as an explanation
for the appearance of what was claimed to be a new disease. In the
original paper, it was noted that the 10 index cases
"would not ordinarily have been referred to the Unit."1 That
they were was a result of the widespread concern about the potential
infectiousness of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion. This
resulted in a qualitative change in the type of patients referred to
the unit, and among those referred were the index cases.
Extensive experimentation in other species has been
undertaken. A theoretically key experiment was the inoculation of human prion
protein transgenic mice with bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion.
Although the experiment was initially thought to have been successful,13 it
failed.3
Therefore, another experiment infecting bovine prion protein
transgenic mice with human new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
prion was performed.3
The similarity of lesions produced by this and by bovine spongiform
encephalopathy prion in bovine prion protein transgenic mice was used
as an argument for the bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion being
the cause of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. However, it is
the wrong experiment
we
do not feed human brain to cattle.
Evidence for the case is of variable quality. It seems to
have been selectively developed along the lines of the "faggot
fallacy."15
(The faggot fallacy is a belief that multiple pieces of suspect or
weak evidence provide strong evidence when bundled together.)
Reversibility
The hypothesis will be falsified as and when the disease occurs in
people born after the bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion has
been eliminated from the human food chain in the United Kingdom.
|
|
Discussion |
The quest for precision in medical diagnosis is a perennial and evolutionary
process. Over the 80 years since Creutzfeldt's report many
attempts have been made to define the boundaries of Creutzfeldt-Jakob
disease and identify subtypes within it. Jakob's series became the
diagnostic benchmark, and the attributes of his cases prevailed to
define what we now call sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
Creutzfeldt's case was ignored or forgotten.
In the 1960s British neurologists and neuropathologists were supporting the
definition of a condition
subacute
spongiform encephalopathy
as
different from Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, partly because they
believed it to have a vascular aetiology.16 Other
European neurologists were more inclusive, considering that what was
being observed were differences in degree within one disease rather
than fundamental distinctions between two, and time has proved them
right. 17
18
However, new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is clearly a
different disease from sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Whether
it is different from kuru or from Creutzfeldt's case will also be
clarified with the passage of time.
The final arbiters of the diagnosis of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
are those who first described it. Diagnostic criteria are already
evolving,19
and the age range in which the disease is being sought has been
considerably extended. This means that more cases are likely to be
diagnosed, giving the appearance of an increase in frequency that is
spurious and derives from widening the sampling frame from which
cases are drawn. The rate of growth in the observed curve is
entirely consistent with the view that improved ascertainment of a
previously misdiagnosed disease has occurred.
Failure to refute that either Creutzfeldt's original case or kuru is a
previous example of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease justifies
an open verdict on the novelty of the disease and hence the causal
link with the bovine spongiform encephalopathy prion. The
epidemiological evidence weighs heavily against such a link.
There is a case to be made for the recategorisation of human prion
encephalopathies. Apart from inherited and perhaps iatrogenic disorders,
they seem to fall into two main groups
one
familiar "sporadic" disease (that is, Jakob's disease) and
another affecting a younger age group, as in Creutzfeldt's case. The
differing features between the groups may reflect infection with a
differently conformed prion with a particular pattern of spread
throughout the central nervous system. Lymphoreticular system
origins of, or infection by, this prion may contribute to the
different clinical picture.
Creutzfeldt took seven years and considerable pains to determine the originality
of the disease he described. We should emulate his rigour and
acknowledge his primacy.
|
|
Conclusion |
Without doubt, general anxiety about so dreadful a possibility as bovine
spongiform encephalopathy causing a similar disease in humans
resulted in many workers involved with bovine spongiform encephalopathy
and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease having to reach precipitate conclusions
in which public safety was rightly the prime consideration. I
believe that the evidence now available casts serious doubts on the
case for a causal link between bovine spongiform encephalopathy and
"new" variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. The medical profession should,
at least, be publicly debating this as an issue. The purpose of this
paper is to start that process.
|
|
Acknowledgments |
I gratefully acknowledge the help of Dr David
Doyle, Dr Jim Miller, and my sons Drs Angus and Gregor Venters for helping me
to refine and focus my arguments. I also thank Dr David Ogilvie and
Dr Sahaya Josephine for keeping me right on causality and Ralph
Hoeninger and Dr Andreas Weser for their patience and generously given
guidance through the German of Creutzfeldt's original paper.
|
|
Footnotes |
Competing interests: None declared.
|
|
References |
|
1. |
Will RG, Ironside JW, Zeidler M, Cousens SN, Estibeiro K,
Alperovitch A, et al. A new variant of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in the UK. Lancet
1996; 347: 921-925 |
|
2. |
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. In: Chin J, ed. Control of
communicable disease manual. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association,
2000:183-186. |
|
3. |
Scott MR, Will R, Ironside J, Nguyen HO, Tremblay P,
DeArmond SJ, et al. Compelling transgenetic evidence for transmission of
bovine spongiform encephalopathy prions to humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
1999; 96: 15137-15142 |
|
4. |
Lindenbaum S. Kuru: sorcery, disease and danger in the
New Guinea highlands. Palo Alto: Mayfield Publishing, 1979. |
|
5. |
Creutzfeldt HG. Uber Eine Eigenartige Erkrankung des
Zentralnervensystems. Zeitschrift f.d. gesamte Neurologie u Psychiatrie
1920; 57: 1-18 |
|
6. |
Creutzfeldt HG. Ubereine Eigenartige Erkrankung des
Zentralnervensystems. In: Nissl F, Alzheimer A, eds. Histologische and
Histopathologische Arbeiten uber die Grosshirnrinde. , Vol 6 Jena: G
Fischer, 1921:1-48. |
|
7. |
Cornell J, Neal KR. Protracted outbreak of Salmonella
typhimurium definitive phage type 170 food poisoning related to tripe,
`pig bag', and chitterlings. Commun Dis Public Health 1998; 1: 28-30 |
|
8. |
Patterson WJ, Painter MJ. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy
and new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease: an overview. Commun Dis Public
Health 1999; 2: 5-13 |
|
9. |
Anderson RM, Donnelly CA, Ferguson NM, Woolhouse MEJ, Watt
CJ, Udy HJ, et al. Transmission dynamics and epidemiology of BSE in British
cattle. Nature 1996; 382: 779-788 |
|
10. |
Brown P. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy and variant
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. BMJ 2001; 322: 841-844 |
|
11. |
Collinge J. Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Lancet
1999; 354: 317-323 |
|
12. |
Collinge J, Sidle KCL, Meads J, Ironside J, Hill AF.
Molecular analysis of prion strain variation and the aetiology of 'new
variant' CJD. Nature 1996; 383: 685-690 |
|
13. |
Bruce ME, Will RG, Ironside JW, McConnell I, Drummond D,
Suttie A, et al. Transmissions to mice indicate that 'new variant' CJD is
caused by the BSE agent. Nature 1997; 389: 498-501 |
|
14. |
Lantos PL, Bhatia K, Doey LJ, al-Sarraj S, Doshi R, Beck
J, et al. Is the neuropathology of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and
kuru similar? Lancet 1997; 350: 187-188 |
|
15. |
Skrabanek P, McCromick J. Follies and fallacies in
medicine. Glasgow: Tarragon Press, 1989:30. |
|
16. |
Kirschbaum WR. Jakob Creutzfeldt disease. New York:
Elsevier, 1968. |
|
17. |
Garcia R, Nevin S, Alema G. Synthèse clinique. Report on a
symposium on Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease held in Venice 4th - 9th
June 1965. Acta Neuropathologica (Berlin) 1967; (suppl III): 145-147 |
|
18. |
Jakob H, Van Bogaert L. Synthèse des apports
histopathologique. Report on a symposium on Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease held in
Venice 4th - 9th June 1965. Acta Neuropathologica (Berlin)
1967; (suppl III): 148-151 |
|
19. |
Will RG, Zeidler M, Stewart GE, Macleod MA, Ironside JW,
Cousens SN, et al. Diagnosis of new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Ann
Neurol 2000; 47: 575-582 |
(Accepted 25 June 2001)
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.