On 2016 Apr 03, Robert Garry commented:
To the editors, administrators and board of PLoS Pathogens,
An erratum for this paper has now been published. Revised Figure 1 still contains important errors.
ERRORS (among others): Sierra Leone and other West African countries are now properly labeled, but omitted is the fact that Sierra Leone has experienced Lassa fever cases. In fact the incidence of Lassa fever in Sierra Leone is considered to be the world’s highest. Likewise, Guinea also has many documented Lassa fever cases, but this is omitted. Other the hand, Ghana has never had a documented Ebola virus disease case. Ivory Coast has had one documented case of human infection with Tai Forest virus, which is a filovirus in the same family as Ebola virus.
The authors took this opportunity to change the name of “Bas-Congo hemorrhagic fever” to “Mangala hemorrhagic fever.” I object to both terms as the authors have not established by virology community standards that any human subject discussed in their original manuscript actually had a viral hemorrhagic fever or that their illness was caused by Bas-Congo virus. The new term “Mangala hemorrhagic fever” was not used in the manuscript and its use in this still multiply flawed revised figure is not justified.
The authors provided "raw, uncropped blots” used previously to prepare Supplemental Figure 2. They acknowledge that the original blot used to generate this figure 1) contained additional lanes that had been removed, 2) the incorrect lane 4 was inserted into the published figure and 3) a black-and-white inversion and global gamma correction was applied to the entire image. This is an incomplete accounting of the image manipulations that are now apparent upon inspection of the original image. It would also be appropriate for the authors to acknowledge that further unannounced image manipulations occurred in the published figure resulting in duplications of background artifacts (for example, artifacts resembling question marks near the control band) and other incongruences, such a lighter background around the control band.
The authors of this paper should make available for review the data used to derive Table 1 in Grard, Fair, Lee et al., 2012. Table 1 includes very explicit information about abdominal pain, epistaxis, conjunctival injection, oral hemorrhage, hemorrhagic vomiting, hemorrhagic bleeding, etc. This is an incredible amount of clinical detail to come from a village health unit, particularly in a retrospective analysis of cases. As an expert in viral hemorrhagic fevers, I made a reasonable open data request under the PLoS guidelines to review the patient charts used to compile Table 1.
There are several reasons why I believe that an independent review of this data by an independent expert is necessary and important:
It is extremely difficult to make a diagnosis of any viral hemorrhagic fever on clinical grounds alone, yet the authors wrote definitively that these represented a “ cluster of three human cases of typical acute hemorrhagic fever.” This can only be verified by examining the patient records.
For background I suggest the article found at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1473309915001607
Regarding the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of Ebola virus disease, these authors write, “Furthermore, the specificity of the WHO case definition was strikingly low at 31·5% (95% CI 26·0–37·6). This implies that 68% of patients who would be selected for admission to a holding unit would not actually have Ebola virus disease (false-positive results)—indeed, a toss of a coin might have yielded a better chance of an accurate result.”
This begs the question that if Ebola clinical diagnosis at the height of the still ongoing West African outbreak was worse than a guess, how can “Mangala hemorrhagic fever” [sic] be diagnosed years later from patient records found in a small African village public health unit?
As for whether the paper meets community standards for causation, it does not. I can do no better to justify this statement than one of the co-authors of Grard, Fair, Lee et al., 2012.
From Future Microbiol. 2010;5(2):177-189:
"The discovery of a novel virus in a clinical sample from an individual with an acute or chronic disease does not imply causation or even bona fide association of the virus with the disease."
Bas-Congo virus has been isolated from only a single individual. You cannot have proof of causation with n=1.
Another reason to review the data records is to resolve a discrepancy between the findings reported in Grard, Fair, Lee et al., 2012 who only reported 3 cases and the original reports of the cases, which stated that there were more cases, including others that died. This cluster of cases was first reported in a June 22, 2009 ProMED report stating, “5 people out of almost a dozen ill individuals have died within a few days from an as yet unidentified disease in the village of Mangala.” The original newswire reports, “Patients are being treated with a combination of antibiotics, antacids and other tonics, as well as transfusion and rehydration suggesting that possible bacterial etiologies are being considered.” In this regard, it is worth noting that case three in Grard, Fair, Lee et al. 2012 from whom Bas-Congo virus was isolated recovered quickly after antibiotic treatment. I am interested in examining all the clinical data to determine why other cases were excluded from Grard, Fair, Lee et al. 2012.
My prior request to PLoS Pathogens to see original patient data used to derived Table 1 data was rejected because, “In addition, because the data requested includes records with confidential patient information, we will not pursue this matter any further as potential compromise of patient privacy is a stated exception to our data policy.”
While the PLoS journals should be commended for strengthening their data access policies, in particular to extend their open data requirement to all PLoS manuscripts including those published in 2012, confidentiality is absolutely no grounds to reject my request to see the key elements of the data (the signs and symptoms listed in Table 1) from the patient records in Mangala village in DRC in 2009. The parents of the two children who died (cases one and two) and the nurse that attended them (case three) gave consent to give use private information as case reports in the paper. Age, date of death of the children, and the name of the village (Mangala) are all provided in the paper. It is a trivial matter to redact all of the identifying information from these patient records.
I am publicly requesting access to the patient records used to compile Table 1 of Grard, Fair, Lee et al., 2012, with all identifying information redacted so as to completely avoid confidentiality issues.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Garry, PhD
This comment, imported by Hypothesis from PubMed Commons, is licensed under CC BY.