Lisa
|
Let me get back into this conversation a bit so that I can clarify a few things.
First, about seeing Dr. Smith, I've given to some of you his email. Please write to him DIRECTLY and don't take the chance of letting the Mayo choose the "right guy" for your profile! This is a MISTAKE!! Most neurologists are clueless as to MCs and if you don't end up in Dr. Smith's hands, or that of his colleague, Dr. Cutrer, then they are likely to think it's all psychosomatic! You do NOT want to run that risk!
Now, as to the autoimmune masto, this is not that complicated Brigitte, it only means that your MCs are being triggered by your own serum, that you are triggering by all the other pathways that masto patients trigger with and that you also will trigger with your own serum. In fact, I suspect that these patients really have a greater amount of triggering. Nancy Gould had told me that she wished that more masto patients would have the ASST test run on them cause she felt that bunches more of us would prove positive to it. I think she's right!!! But until some kind of study or case history is published on autoimmune masto, this will continue to be ignored and brushed off as not being an MC disorder! And again, Brigitte, this is indeed placed under the MCAS diagnostic group. As far as I'm concerned, patients who are "true" Autoimmune Urticaria patients have ONLY THAT, and nothing more! They should not be flushing or having gastrointestinal problems, or anaphylaxis and it should be stuck with only urticaria in order to remain considered only as autoimmune urticaria. When it goes outside of the box, then MCAS should and must be considered. My opinion, anyway!
Now, I'd like to bring a bit of balance to this discussion. Pam, I need to make a few comments as to your statement, if you don't mind.
[quote author=60515D785F545755300 link=1360727813/7#7 date=1362081683]When a person has syptoms of Mastocytosis, but fall short of the WHO criteria for Mastocytosis they are considered to have MCAS. This is true. However, the patient needs to be investigated for SM because it is the more serious form of masto. The extreme simple explaination for the difference...With Mastocytosis you make too many Mast Cells and they behave badly. When you have too many mast cell degranulating you have way too much histamines etc. Well, kinda right. Where research stands right now, you have the proliferative form and what they are calling for now the non-clonal form of masto. The proliferative form is Systemic Mastocytosis, MMAS and even some MCAS. What they are calling the non-clonal MCAS is the patient group where they can not find any proof of pathological changes, and thus presumed that there is no clonal activity, however, this is still being discussed and the reason why is because when we go back 25 years ago, Roberts and Oates had claimed that there was an activation form of masto. The researchers who argued against this were saying that without being able to PROVE any reason for an activation form, it could not, therefore, exist. They could easily see the proliferation and they presumed that it was due to this that you had proof of activation, that the MCs behaved badly, but this they are questioning as well.
Masto research has progressed impressively so in the past 3-4 years and even what they wrote 5 years ago has become outdated! The researchers have always been puzzled as to why you have some patients who suffer terribly from all of the reacting and yet others, with SM and even aggressive SM who haven't a clue they are sick! The issue is the activation of the disease. ALL masto patient have the genetic defect on their MCs, that much they know for certain. But since there is no longer just one defect, but many, they are suspecting that this is the real issue. Yes, theoretically when you have too many MCs that this would be the excuse for all the extra triggering and thus mediator release, but this is not what is going on. Again, there are aggressive masto and ISM patients who have the proliferation of their MCs, but they are not showing much activation. WHY??? This is likely due to the genetic defect which has allowed for the MC to be to sensitive thus degranulate with too easily and not due to the proliferation. This would explain why some patients merely leak and others take a real beating from anaphylaxis. The proliferation might be only one angle and the activation another. Until more research is done, we won't know what it is.
With MCAS you have the correct number of mast cells, but they too behave badly...so once again you have too much histamine etc. Well.....I'm not so sure about this either and the reason why is because it may not have anything to do with the correct number of MCs at all! SM patients have a proliferative disorder to their MCs, and those MCs invade tissues, yes. But they are too many because they don't die off when they should and hang about allowing for the accrual of more of the same type of clonal cell. However, Dr. Molderings told me that ALL mast cells in masto are clonal, which blew me away when he said that too me! Yet it makes total sense for there are forms of masto where if you look at the MC it appears totally normal - nice and round and full of granules. Well Differential Systemic Mastocytosis (WDSM) is one of them and this is why this patient was so hard to "see" because their MCs give the appearance of normalcy. So what if there were a type of MC which didn't show any kind of obvious difference in their BMB? It doesn't mean that their MCs are totally normal nor does it mean that there is no prolideration going on either. It may well be, only because to the eyes of the resarcher it look totally NORMAL and which would explain why these patients are so challenging to treat! Until more research and more sophisticated testing is done, we just don't know right now. One thing they do know, the clonal form of MCAS is so extremely slow growing that it shows no damage upon organs. Interesting, huh?
I hope this helps cut some of the confusion!
Lisa
|