Response to AHRQ's continued support of PACE

On February 3, 2016, a group of patient organizations and advocates (including #MEAction) sent a followup letter to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) further detailing concerns with the 2015 AHRQ Evidence Review and reiterating their request, originally made in November 2015, to reanalyze the conclusions of AHRQ’s Evidence Review in light of the long-known concerns with PACE and with the Oxford definition. #MEAction signed onto the original letter after running a poll which showed almost unanimous support from our members.

Background

In November 2015, a group of U.S. organizations sent a letter to the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) requesting a review of the concerns raised with PACE in a series of articles by journalist David Tuller. Based on these concerns and the call by the National Institute of Health (NIH) Pathways to Prevention report to retire the Oxford definition because it could “impair progress and cause harm”, the letter recommended the following steps as appropriate and necessary to protect patients:

  • The AHRQ revise its evidence review to reflect the issues with PACE and with Oxford studies in general;
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) remove findings based on PACE and other Oxford studies from current and planned medical education;
  • HHS use its leadership position to communicate these concerns to other medical education providers;
  • HHS call for The Lancet to seek an independent reanalysis of PACE.

The Agency Responses

In AHRQ’s response the authors of the evidence review noted that the review had already considered some of the concerns raised by Tuller and that the additional information would not change the review’s conclusions. Yet, the evidence review ranked PACE as a “Good” study with “undetected” reporting bias, a rating that is not consistent with the long-known concerns with PACE but one that could presumably influence conclusions. Further, AHRQ’s response did not address the concerns with using Oxford studies as the basis of recommendations of treatment benefits and harms for ME/CFS patients. The February 3, 2016 letter from patient organizations and advocates details these concerns and reiterates the request to reevaluate the evidence review conclusions.

CDC’s response, further clarified by a followup email, stated that the IOM and P2P “have placed the findings of the PACE trial in an appropriate context for moving the field forward.” They stated the need for research and that CDC would be conducting a collaborative initiative to prepare new medical education materials. However, CDC’s response did not address the question of whether findings and recommendations based on Oxford studies would be allowed in new medical education materials for this disease. The CDC has been asked to specifically respond to this question. That response will be shared when it is available.

HHS did not responded to the request to call on The Lancet to seek an independent review.

If you have not done so, please join in with us and sign this petition calling for AHRQ and CDC to act to protect patients.

Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp
Email

2 thoughts on “Response to AHRQ's continued support of PACE”

  1. Hi there, Thank you for this article! It appears that three links to dropbox content are not working (?) – you may want to double-check: “a letter” “AHRQ’s response” and “CDC’s response”

    1. thanks! I am not sure why those links sometimes worked and sometimes didn’t. I uploaded the documents to #MEAction and changed the links– would you mind letting me know if they all work for you?

Comments are closed.

Latest News

Text across top of image reads: "Experts in infection associated chronic illness" with "WE WANT YOU!" bolded below it. Hand with finger pointed out at viewer. "Apply now" buttons to the left and right with mouse cursor clicking on them.

Infection-associated chronic disease experts needed at ARPA-H

Congress launched ARPA-H (the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health) this past March to focus on high-risk, high-reward research projects with the goal to solve intractable health problems. As ARPA-H is in the process of hiring its first cohort of program managers, #MEAction and a coalition of chronic disease advocacy groups have published an open

Read More »

BOLD ACTION is a Commitment to Healthcare Justice for People with ME

BOLD ACTION to me, means mobilizing our community to publicly demonstrate our deep and intense—as opposed to shallow and passive—commitment to seeing healthcare justice for people with ME. It is about bringing our issues to the forefront of public consciousness and putting strong pressure on our leaders to act. Taking BOLD ACTION is both a

Read More »

Help keep our work going

We rely on donations from people like you to keep fighting for equality for people with ME.

Donate

Get actions alerts and news direct to your inbox

You can choose what you want to be kept up to date on.

Subscribe
Scroll to Top