Discrepancy in NIH paper

Pre-print archived here: https://archive.ph/dsqz0

Hmm it looks like they did a sloppy job at mis-reporting the data. One section on page 9 states:

Three patients who had persistent symptoms of small fiber neuropathy and dysautonomia for 5-9 months were treated with one cycle of IVIg (2g/kg divided over 5 days). Two had been previously treated with corticosteroid with no improvement. In all three, symptoms improved dramatically within 2 weeks of IVIg treatment with complete resolution in one and mild residual symptoms in the other two.

Table 4 claims that all 3 IVIG-treated patients had a full recovery.

The abstract doesn’t make a lot of sense if you just read the abstract by itself:

At 5-9 months post-symptom onset, 3 non-recovering patients received intravenous immunoglobulin with symptom resolution within two weeks.

Why mention “5-9 months post-symptom onset” if symptom resolution was within 2 weeks?

I would guess that the original abstract mentioned 5-9 months and then they changed it to something else.

CC: @bridressen

The 5-9 months was when we were brought in.
Then the 2 weeks was when they evaluated us. But they had longer time span post vax than 2 weeks and no these symptoms were not mild after treatment.