| June 2003 BOSTON Overdiagnosis and
over-treatment of Lyme disease are common problems.
There are many reasons for misdiagnosis, said Paul Mead, MD, of
the CDCs Division of Vector-borne Infectious Diseases.
Specifically, some people will get an immediate reaction at the site
of a tick bite that is not necessarily caused by the disease; others
have skin diseases like eczema and fungal infections that can cause
ring-like lesions that may resemble Lyme disease.
Still another problem with misdiagnosis are false positives for
the spirochetes that cause Lyme disease some months or years after
successful antibiotic treatment, according to an article in
The Journal of Infectious Diseases.
But overdiagnosis and overtreatment can be reduced with a careful
history.
The highest rate of reported Lyme disease is in kids between the
ages of 5 and 9 years old, so they are certainly a high risk group,
Mead said. He said physicians need to take a careful history about
the nature of the rash, exposure to ticks, and the patients recent
activities, such as camping trips or outdoors hikes. Early Lyme
disease typically presents as an influenza-like illness, with fever,
chills, fatigue, muscle and joint pain, swollen lymph nodes, and a
characteristic bulls eye rash, erythema migrans, that spreads
outward from the site of a recent tick bite.
Late-stage Lyme can have many manifestations, including
arthritis, central nervous system effects and even an irregular
heartbeat.
Treatment for early Lyme disease usually includes two to three
weeks of oral antibiotics, typically doxycycline in adults and
amoxicillin in children younger than 8.
But antibiotics may be overused for Lymes treatment. One study
recently revealed that tests might show the apparent persistence of
spirochetes that may not actually be present.
![[bar]](/sites/default/files/DailyNews/2003/July/01/gradient.gif)
Spirochetal persistence?
| |
| |
Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of Lyme
disease can be reduced with a careful
history. |
|
Miikka Peltomaa, MD, PhD, research fellow here at the
Otolaryngologist Center for Immunology and Inflammatory Diseases,
division of rheumatology, allergy and immunology, Massachusetts
General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, led a study which looked
at patients with early or late disease, for whom archival samples
were available at the time of antibiotic treatment and about six
months or years later.
Eight of the 24 patients with early manifestations and 18 of the
21 patients with late manifestations had a fourfold or higher
decline in immunoglobulin G (IgG) anti-variable surface antigen
(VlsE) of Borrelia burgdorferi titers about six months
after successful antibiotic treatment. Of 32 additional patients, 13
with early manifestations and five with late still had positive
anti-VIsE titers 8 to 15 years after successful treatment.
With their results,
Peltomaas group concluded that antibody response to the VlsE (IR6)
peptide of B. burgdorferi often persists after successful
antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease, particularly in those with
late infection. They concluded persistence of the anti-VlsE antibody
titers for months or years after antibiotic treatment cannot be
equated with spirochetal persistence.
They postulated that during hematogenous dissemination of the
spirochete, bloodborne spirochetes expressing the VIsE lipoprotein
may stimulate naive B cells in the spleen to produce antibodies to
the immunodominate VIsE peptide in the absence of T-helper cells. If
antibiotics are administered quickly, memory T and B cells may not
develop. However, the B cells may present antigen to T-helper cells,
and spark adaptive immune responses presumably to the VIsE peptide
and most other B. burgdorferi proteins, thus leading to the
generation of memory T and B cells. They said this response might
persist, despite apparent spirochetal eradication. idn
For more information:
- Peltomaa M, McHugh G, Steere AC. Persistence of the
antibody response to the VIsE sixth invariant region
peptide of Borrelia burgdorferi after successful
antibiotic treatment of Lyme disease. J Infect Dis.
2003;187(8):1178-1186.
|