Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Did he really bring the war home with him? – Authors' reply

2009, The Lancet

Correspondence The toxicokinetics of lead (and uranium) are such that cellular toxic effects cannot occur unless the plasma concentrations are elevated. Ballardie and colleagues report that they were unable to detect lead in blood. The patient was treated with a chelating agent and his symptoms improved. However, urinary excretion of lead in the quantities reported would be expected in a healthy individual.2 It also indicates that lead must have been present in the bloodstream, even if this was in the form of the rarer isotope 207Pb. No analysis of uranium was reported in blood or urine. We do not believe that the apparent improvement in this man is strong evidence of efficacy. If chelation therapy has been effective, we can only hypothesise that Ballardie and colleagues have identified a new treatment for stiff person syndrome or another neurological disorder. Since chelating agents can also extract essential metals and can affect immune function,2 the decision to treat “until heavy-metal excretion is undetectable” is potentially dangerous. We declare that we have no conflict of interest. *D Nicholas Bateman, Peter G Blain, Robert D Jefferson, Simon H L Thomas [email protected] NPIS Edinburgh, Scottish Poisons Information Bureau, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh EH16 4SA, UK (DNB); Medical Toxicology Centre, University of Newcastleupon-Tyne, Newcastle, UK (PGB, RDJ); and Northern & Yorkshire Regional Drug & Therapeutics Centre, Wolfson Unit of Clinical Pharmacology, Newcastle, UK (SHLT) 1 2 Ballardie FW, Cowley R, Cox A, et al. A man who brought the war home with him. Lancet 2008; 372: 1926. Trigwell SM, Radford PM, Page SR, et al. Islet glutamic acid decarboxylase modified by reactive oxygen species is recognized by antibodies from patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Clin Exper Immunol 2001; 126: 242–49. Authors’ reply In their toxicology-based critique of our Case Report, Nicholas Bateman and colleagues fail to assess all of the data we presented and misunderstand central issues. www.thelancet.com Vol 373 February 14, 2009 Their conclusion therefore reflects “diagnostic greed”.1 Blood lead was indeed undetectable by standard tests, which might have resulted in our missing a vital diagnosis. But since the patient had symptoms of poisoning2 and heavy metal deposits and cellular poisoning in vital organs, our purpose was then to treat him, not to examine other techniques. The patient made an exceptional recovery from two insidiously progressive diseases, spinal interneuronitis and IgA nephropathy; in our Case Report we speculate on heavy metals causing the metabolic and immune aspects of the illness. Both renal and liver tissue—not only renal as suggested by Bateman and colleagues—revealed giant mitochondria with cristae disruption, consistent with, but not pathognomic of, lead poisoning. Non-osmiumstaining electron microscopy revealed ultrastructural abnormalities, and laser-ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and secondary ion mass spectrometry, undertaken independently in four laboratories, identified specific uranium and lead isotopes in intensities of up to 100-fold higher than controls. This is incontrovertible and comprehensive evidence of cellular poisoning. We question what alternative explanation Bateman and colleagues propose. Their contention that blood tests alone are needed to confirm cellular toxicity takes no account of disequilibrium into body tissues after exposure ceases: in our patient, exposure ceased 5 years previously. The assumption that blood levels continue to reflect tissue levels is unjustified: evidence for this requires long-term studies in human beings, which remain untested. Likewise, the significance of chelation challenge tests is derived from patients with heavy metals detectable in blood,3 and extrapolation is similarly flawed. There are no studies long after exposure cessation: mobilising sequestered deposits is disparate pharmacokinetically, since clearance half lives for lead or uranium are years for bone versus hours for blood, with fewer data for other tissues. The total clearance of lead to date in our patient exceeds 12 mg: 20-fold greater than the quantity of lead excretion required for toxicity in human beings.3 Bateman and colleagues seem unfamiliar with evidence that chelation therapy is effective and justified in related diseases.4 Thus, a view that our patient was not poisoned with heavy metals, nor merits treatment, is an incomplete understanding of the issues. Occult heavy metal poisoning in this patient is not in question. What is important is the finding of enriched uranium deposits in his tissues, which should be raising questions about risks to the indigenous population, which could be even higher than to the patient described. We declare that we have no conflict of interest. *Francis Ballardie, Richard Cowley, Alan Cox, Alan Curry, Helen Denley, John Denton, Jeremy Dick, Jean-Luc Guerquin-Kern, Anthony Redmond [email protected] Manchester Royal Infirmary, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9WL, UK (FB, RC, ACu, HD, JD); Hope Hospital, Manchester, UK (JD, AR); University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK (ACo); and Curie Research Institute, Paris, France (JLGK) 1 2 3 4 Papworth MH. A primer of medicine. London: Butterworths, 1971. Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses. Gulf War illness and the health of Gulf War veterans: scientific findings and recommendations. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2008. http://sph.bu.edu/insider/ index.php?option=com_content&task=view &id=1579&Itemid=150 (accessed Jan 28, 2009). Lin JL, Lin-Tan DT, Hsu KH, Yu CC. Environmental lead exposure and progression of chronic renal diseases in patients without diabetes. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 277–86. Lin-Tan DT, Lin JL, Yen TH, Chen KH, Huang YL. Long-term outcome of repeated lead chelation therapy in progressive non-diabetic chronic kidney diseases. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2007; 22: 2924–31. 543