Showing posts with label Lyme disease. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lyme disease. Show all posts

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Antibiotic cream is NOT 100% effective in preventing Lyme disease

A topical antibiotic cream applied to tick bites did not perform any better than placebo in preventing Lyme disease, according to results of a randomized clinical trial conducted in Europe.  The study was published in Lancet Infectious Diseases.

I wasn't planning to blog about the study, but I changed my mind after a reader emailed me a link to a news article reporting that the antibiotic cream was 100% effective.  The lead investigator even claimed, "None of the test subjects went on to develop Lyme borreliosis."  As described by the news sources, seven subjects in the control group developed Lyme disease.  But the abstract of the paper states clearly that the antibiotic cream (azithromycin being the antibiotic) was not any better than the control cream; the investigators were even told to stop recruiting additional patients because the results was so clear with the patients who had already completed the study:

The trial was stopped early because an improvement in the primary endpoint in the group receiving azithromycin was not reached.  At 8 weeks, 11 (2%) of 505 in the azithromycin group and 11 (2%) of 490 in the placebo group had treatment failure.

So how is it possible for the lead author to claim that "none" of the subjects treated with azithromycin came down with Lyme disease?  The answer lies with the very last sentence of the abstract:

A subgroup analysis in this study suggested that topical azithromycin reduces erythema migrans after bites of infected ticks.

The subgroup analysis was done post-hoc (after looking at the data).  I won't dwell on why we shouldn't make definitive conclusions from any post-hoc analysis since the investigators themselves emphasized its exploratory nature in the Discussion of their paper.  However, even if you set that aside, you'll find another problem with the post-hoc analysis if you dig into the numbers.

Before I tell you what the problem is, let me first describe the study in greater detail so that you understand the issues that led to the post-hoc analysis.

The subjects were adults who had been bitten by a tick within the previous 72 hours and were able to save the tick.  The subjects were randomized to receive a topical azithromycin cream or placebo cream.  The cream was applied over the tick bite twice a day for three straight days.  The patients were followed for 8 weeks.  They were monitored for erythema migrans (EM), the characteristic rash of Lyme disease.  Blood was drawn for serological testing at the beginning and at the end of the 8 week study period.  "Treatment failure" was defined as the appearance of EM, seroconversion, or both by the end of 8 weeks.  The ticks were tested for the bacteria that cause Lyme disease (Borrelia garinii, B. afzelii, and B. burgdorferi) by PCR.

As I alluded to earlier, the independent committee monitoring the trial recommended that the investigators stop recruiting new subjects.  Among the patients who already completed the study, the group receiving azithromycin did not fare any better than the placebo group, and recruiting more patients to the study was unlikely to change the conclusion.  I provided the numbers above, but you can also find them in the table below ("ITT population," first row of data).


The researchers also did a pre-planned subanalysis with the per-protocol group, an idealized situation to directly test the question, "Does topical azithromycin prevent Lyme disease in those who are bitten by an infected tick?".  Patients bitten by a PCR-negative tick were excluded from the subanalysis.  The small number of patients who failed to follow or complete the study protocol were also excluded.

Again, azithromycin was not any better than placebo in preventing EM or seroconversion (see table, "Per-protocol population").  Treatment failure was observed in 5% (3/62) of the azithromycin group and 7% (5/72) of the placebo group (P = 0.34).

The researchers could have stopped the analysis there and write up the study, but the monitoring committee pointed out that none of the patients in the azithromycin group had erythema migrans by day 30 whereas five in the placebo group did.  The committee suggested that the investigators do a post-hoc subgroup analysis using a modified definition of treatment failure as EM by 30 days.  Seroconversion was removed from the modified definition.

Looking at the numbers in the table ("Reanalyzed ITT population"), we now see where the news media got their numbers.  No one in the azithromycin group (0/87, 0%) had EM by day 30, but seven in the placebo group (7/87, 8%) did.  The difference was statiscially significant (absolute risk reduction in those receiving azithromycin: 8.05%, 95% CI 1.18-14.91).  So, it's true that azithromycin prevented Lyme disease in all who were bitten by an infected tick - but only if you ignored the two patients who came down with EM after day 30 and a third patient who seroconverted.

This is why I'm so baffled by the lead author's quote, which I will repeat:  "None of the test subjects went on to develop Lyme borreiosis."  I'm guessing that the two patients with delayed EM would disagree.


Reference

Schwameis M, Kündig T, Huber G, von Bidder L, Meinel L, Weisser R, Aberer E, Härter G, Weinke T, Jelinek T, Fätkenheuer G, Wollina U, Burchard GD, Aschoff R, Nischik R, Sattler G, Popp G, Lotte W, Wiechert D, Eder G, Maus O, Staubach-Renz P, Gräfe A, Geigenberger V, Naudts I, Sebastian M, Reider N, Weber R, Heckmann M, Reisinger EC, Klein G, Wantzen J, & Jilma B (2016). Topical azithromycin for the prevention of Lyme borreliosis: a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 efficacy trial. The Lancet. Infectious Diseases PMID: 28007428


Related posts

Thursday, February 11, 2016

How a new species of Lyme disease bacteria was discovered

A new agent of the tick-borne illness known as Lyme disease has emerged in the upper Midwest.  The bacterium is genetically related to Borrelia burgdorferi, until now believed to be the only cause of Lyme disease in the United States.  The name proposed for the bacterium is Borrelia mayonii because the work was conducted at the Mayo Clinic.  B. mayonii has not been detected in patients outside of the Midwest (so far).  The findings are described in The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

The new species was discovered at the Mayo Clinic during routine testing of specimens (blood, cerebral spinal fluid, and joint fluid) received from all regions of the U.S.  Over 100,000 specimens collected from 2003 through 2014 were tested for Lyme disease bacteria by real-time PCR . The PCR probes were designed to detect the oppA1 gene from Borrelia species belonging to the Lyme disease group, known in the scientific literature as "B. burgdorferi sensu lato."  The Lyme disease group comprises 18 species that fall into the same genetic cluster within the genus Borrelia.  They include species known or suspected to cause Lyme disease (B. burgdorferi, B. garinii, B. afzelii, B. spielmanii, B. valaisiana, B bissettii, B. bavariensis, and B. lusitaniae) and another ten species that do not cause illness.  The PCR probes do not react with DNA from species belonging to the other cluster of Borrelia, the relapsing fever group.

The key to the discovery of the new species was the melting temperature analysis routinely programmed onto the end of real-time PCR runs.  The oppA1 PCR products amplified from B. burgdorferi strains have melting temperatures of 63.6 through 64.9°C.  For other Lyme disease species, the melting temperature ranges from 52.3°C (B. valaisiana) to 59.2°C (B. californiensis).  Therefore, the melting temperature of the oppA1 PCR product was used to distinguish B. burgdorferi from other Lyme disease Borrelia.

Over 9,000 specimens were collected from the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and North Dakota from January 2012 through September 2014.  102 were PCR positive, and most of the PCR products had the melting temperature profile of B. burgdorferi.  However, six had melting temperatures ranging from 60.4°C to 61.2°C, too low to be B. burgdorferi but too high to be any other member of the Lyme disease group.  The novel spirochetes were cultured from the blood of two of the patients.  The DNA sequence of several "housekeeping" genes of the new isolates differed enough from those of other Borrelia species to signify that a new Borrelia species has been found.  The investigators named the new spirochete Borrelia mayonii.  No specimen collected from other regions of the U.S. exhibited the atypical melting temperatures, and neither did any collected earlier than 2012 from the Midwest.  These findings led the authors to conclude that B. mayonii has recently emerged in the upper Midwest and that the six patients are the first known cases of Lyme disease to be caused by the new species.

The investigators also collected Ixodes scapularis ticks in Wisconsin.  PCR and melting temperature analysis showed that 19 of 658 ticks (2.9%) were positive for B. mayonii, 195 (29.6%) positive for B. burgdorferi, and two positive for both.

One striking feature of B. mayonii infections is the large number of spirochetes circulating within the patients.  The densities ranged from 420,000 to 6,400,000 bacterial cells per milliliter, at least a hundred times higher than observed in the blood of patients with B. burgdorferi infections.  The numbers were high enough that spirochetes could be seen in blood collected from one of the patients.

Fig. 1b from Pritt et al., 2016

The six patients had many of the typical Lyme disease symptoms:  headache, neck pain, muscle aches, joint pain, and fatigue.  Although mild fever is also common in Lyme disease, two of the six patients had severe fevers with temperature readings approaching 40°C (104°F).  Four had nausea or were vomiting, which are also uncommon Lyme disease symptoms.  Two patients were hospitalized because of the severity of their illness.  Lyme disease may be missed in those infected with B. mayonii because of the unusual symptoms.

The standard two-tier antibody test, which uses B. burgdorferi antigens to detect reactive antibody, may help with the diagnosis.  Blood specimens from five of the six patients were tested.  Four patients either tested positive or, if negative initially, tested positive with blood drawn weeks later.  The one patient who tested negative had blood drawn only on the first day of illness, so it's likely that the antibody response hadn't kicked in fully.  The test appears to help with the diagnosis of Lyme disease caused by B. mayonii, but the number of patients tested was too small to draw firm conclusions.

The authors conclude:

In view of the differing clinical manifestations for patients infected with the novel B burgdorferi sensu lato genospecies, it is likely that Lyme borreliosis is not being considered—and therefore not diagnosed—in some patients with this infection. The clinical range of illness must be better defined in additional patients to ensure that physicians can recognise the infection and distinguish it from other tick-borne infections. Many tick-borne pathogens have global distribution, therefore studies are needed to establish the geographic distribution of human beings and ticks infected with the novel B. burgdorferi sensu lato genopecies. Finally, clinicians should be aware of the potential role of oppA1 PCR for diagnosing infection with this novel pathogen.

Reference

Pritt BS, Mead PS, Johnson DK, Neitzel DF, Respicio-Kingry LB, Davis JP, Schiffman E, Sloan LM, Schriefer ME, Replogle AJ, Paskewitz SM, Ray JA, Bjork J, Steward CR, Deedon A, Lee X, Kingry LC, Miller TK, Feist MA, Theel ES, Patel R, Irish CL, & Petersen JM (2016). Identification of a novel pathogenic Borrelia species causing Lyme borreliosis with unusually high spirochaetaemia: a descriptive study. The Lancet. Infectious diseases. PMID: 26856777

Sunday, September 6, 2015

Do Lyme disease spirochetes produce a toxin?

According to the current view of Lyme disease pathogenesis, tissue damage is caused by the inflammatory response to the spirochetes.  Borrelia species do not produce toxins that injure the host directly.  A new study published in BMC Microbiology may force us to modify our view.

The study shows that some Borrelia strains carry a set of genes with the potential to generate a peptide resembling streptolysin S (SLS), a potent toxin produced by the pathogen Streptococcus pyogenes.  The enzymes that produce SLS in S. pyogenes are expressed from a cluster of genes surrounding sagA, a tiny gene encoding the SLS precursor.  The peptide produced from sagA is nontoxic; it has to undergo several alterations to its structure to become toxic.  A critical modification is carried out by the SagBCD protein complex, which converts the side chains of cysteine, serine, and threonine into ring structures.
Figure 2 from Molloy et al., 2011

Other genes surrounding sagA encode a peptidase that is thought to trim the leader peptide from the amino terminus of the SLS precursor and an ABC transporter that may be responsible for expelling SLS from the cytoplasm.

Figure 1A from Molloy et al., 2011

SLS targets neutrophils and possibly other immune cells during S. pyogenes infection.  SLS-like toxins are also produced by other Gram-positive pathogens, including Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes and Clostridium botulinum.

The investigators mined the genomes of other bacteria in search for genes encoding the machinery that generates SLS-like toxins.  They found SLS-like gene clusters in various Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, both Gram-positive groups of bacteria.

The researchers also found the gene cluster in the genomes of Borrelia afzelii strain PKo, Borrelia valaisiana strain VS116, and Borrelia spielmanii strain A14S.  B. afzelii is a major cause of Lyme disease in Europe and Asia.  B. valaisiana and B. spielmanii are responsible for occasional cases of Lyme disease.

Figure 4 from Molloy et al., 2015.  Top: organization of SLS-like gene cluster in S. pyogenes and three Borrelia strains. Bottom: sequence of the SLS precursor (SagA) and the borrelial SLS-like precursors.

They also used PCR to screen the DNA of 140 patient and tick isolates of Lyme Borrelia for the genes encoding the SLS-like biosynthetic machinery.  Most of the isolates were obtained from Europe and the U.S., with a few coming from Asia.  Design of the PCR primers was based on the sequence of the B. valaisiana bvalB, bvalC, and bvalD genes, which encode homologs of the S. pyogenes sagB, sagC, and sagD gene products.  Most of the B. garinii, B. afzelii, B. valaisiana, B. spielmanii, and B. lusitaniae isolates that were examined tested positive.  On the other hand, none of the 22 isolates of B. burgdorferi or 13 isolates of B. bavariensis were PCR positive.  These results indicate that SLS-like sequences are widespread among Lyme disease spirochetes (though not in B. burgdorferi).

The next step was to show that the SLS-like borrelial gene actually encoded a peptide that damages mammalian cells.  A simple assay based on the ability of many toxins to rupture (hemolyze) red blood cell in vitro is available.  Hemolysis is measured easily by mixing the toxin with sheep red blood cells.  Hemoglobin released from the ruptured cells is quantified with a spectrophotometer.

They decided to test the SLS-like peptide encoded by B. valaisiana, BvalA, for hemolytic activity.  The researchers succeeded in expressing and purifying a recombinant form of BvalA.  Not surprisingly,  BvalA was not hemolytic because its amino acid side chains had to be converted into ring structures necessary for the peptide to injure red blood cells.  They wanted to mix BvalA with the BvalBCD protein complex so that the peptide would be modified, but they could not generate the protein complex.  Instead, they used the SagBCD complex from S. pyogenes to modify the BvalA peptide.  When they did this, they finally observed hemolytic activity.

Red blood cells are unlikely to be a major target of borrelial SLS-like peptides during infection.  So what is the real target?  More studies are needed to answer this question, but we should consider the possibility that the toxin has nothing to do with Lyme disease.  Instead, it may help the spirochete to survive during its residence within the tick vector.  A number of nonpathogenic bacteria carry gene clusters distantly related to the ones that produce SLS.  Several peptide toxins produced by these bacteria are known to kill competing microbes.  Like us humans, ticks have a microbiome inhabiting their gut.  Some Lyme spirochetes may need to secrete the toxin to ward off their microbial neighbors.

References

Molloy EM, Casjens SR, Cox CL, Maxson T, Ethridge NA, Margos G, Fingerle V, & Mitchell DA (2015). Identification of the minimal cytolytic unit for streptolysin S and an expansion of the toxin family. BMC Microbiology, 15 PMID: 26204951

Molloy EM, Cotter PD, Hill C, Mitchell DA, & Ross RP (2011). Streptolysin S-like virulence factors: the continuing sagA. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 9 (9), 670-81 PMID: 21822292

Monday, February 4, 2013

An autoantigen targeted during Lyme arthritis

Infection by the spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi, if left untreated, can lead to a form of Lyme disease called Lyme arthritis.  About 10% of Lyme arthritis patients end up with a chronic form that doesn't go away with antibiotic treatment.  Allen Steere's group has long suspected that the antibiotic-refractory form of Lyme arthritis involves an autoimmune process.  This notion seems reasonable since those with antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis tend to have certain forms of the HLA-DR gene that are also common among those afflicted with the autoimmune disease rheumatoid arthritis.

Several groups have been searching for autoantigens (self antigens) that could drive the joint inflammation seen in Lyme arthritis patients.  Several candidate protein autoantigens were identified based on their short sequence similarities (molecular mimicry) to a T-cell or antibody epitopes in the B. burgdorferi OspA protein, which is targeted by the immune system in many Lyme arthritis patients, especially those with the antibiotic-refractory form.  However, further studies demonstrated that none of these autoantigens were likely to stimulate a sufficiently robust T-cell or antibody response that could account for the prolonged joint swelling experienced by patients with antibiotic-refractory Lyme disease (see this excellent review article for the complete story).  Therefore, an additional approach is needed to identify additional autoantigen candidates, an approach that does not assume that molecular mimicry underlies antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis.

An unbiased approach for finding autoantigens is to gather all of the different self-peptides being displayed by the HLA-DR molecules in the synovial tissue of the swollen joint and then figure out which of these peptides are capable of stimulating T cells.  At one time this approach wasn't possible since the individual peptides presented by HLA-DR molecules are found in such tiny amounts in human tissues, but the sensitivity of today's liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry systems have improved to the point where many of the peptides can now be sorted and sequenced.

Steere's new study, which appeared in January's print issue of Arthritis and Rheumatism, was conducted in collaboration with Catherine Costello's group in Boston University.  The study was a follow-up to an earlier one published two years ago.  The authors extracted the inflamed synovial tissue from the swollen knee of a 12 year old boy suffering from antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis (see picture below).  He had gone through three months of antibiotic therapy a year prior to the procedure.  The tissue was culture and PCR negative.  When the patient's HLA-DR genes were examined, he turned out to have a copy of the DRB1*0101 allele, one of the HLA-DRB gene variants that places individuals at a higher risk for antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis.

Figure 1A from Drouin et al., 2013

The boy's synovial tissue was ground up, and HLA-DR-specific antibodies were used to capture the HLA-DR molecules with their bound peptides.  The peptides were then analyzed by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry.  The authors identified 120 different self-peptides from this analysis.  When each peptide was chemically synthesized and mixed with the boy's blood mononuclear cells, one peptide turned out to stimulate proliferation of his T cells.  This peptide came from a human protein called endothelial cell growth factor, or ECGF.

What's the function of ECGF?  The protein stimulates angiogenesis, the sprouting of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones.  Angiogenesis is a general feature of inflammatory arthritis, including Lyme arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.

The authors went on to examine the T- and B-cell responses to ECGF in other Lyme arthritis patients.  The T-cell response was determined by measuring the amount of interferon-γ secreted by the patients' blood mononuclear cells upon exposure to ECGF in vitro.  In antibiotic-refractory patients, the T-cell response was observed in 38% (14/37) subjects against 30% (8/27) among Lyme arthritis patients who responded to antibiotics. The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant.  The B-cell (antibody) response was examined by ELISA in a larger group of patients.  17% (19/109) of antibiotic-refractory patients and 8% (6/77) of antibiotic-responsive patients had an IgG antibody response against ECGF that was higher than among healthy controls, yet the difference between the antibiotic-refractory and -responsive groups again was not statistically significant (P = 0.09).  So a link between an autoimmune response to ECGF and antibiotic-refractory arthritis was not clear-cut.  However, in support of a link, the authors mentioned that almost all of the Lyme arthritis patients with a T-cell response to ECGF (20/21, 98%) had one of the HLA-DR alleles known to be a risk factor for antibiotic-refractory arthritis.

The authors also looked at the levels of ECGF in the swollen joints of Lyme arthritis patients.  Those with antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis had much higher levels of ECGF in their joint fluid (mean 448 ng/ml, 37 subjects) than those whose arthritis responded to antibiotic treatment (mean 154 ng/ml, 19 subjects, P < 0.0001)

Further evidence for a link between an immune response to ECGF and chronic Lyme arthritis came from a group of untreated Lyme disease patients who were followed in the late 1970s, before the cause of Lyme disease was known.  Sera from sequential bleeds were still available from many of these patients.  If an autoimmune process involving ECGF was responsible for the disease, then the immune response to the autoantigen should have appeared before the disease symptoms.  This turned out to be the case.  Six of the seven Lyme arthritis patients who had antibodies against ECGF developed the antibody response before their joints swelled up.  The duration of the arthritis attack was longer in Lyme arthritis patients with an immune response to ECGF, lasting a median of 67 weeks in the seven patients with an ECGF antibody response and only 17 weeks in the 20 Lyme arthritis lacking the response (P = 0.004).

Steere's paper proposes that the immune response to ECGF leads to a persisting, autoimmune form of arthritis in those who have a high level of ECGF in their joint fluid.  In those patients, T cells that recognize ECGF would be activated more easily because of the high levels of ECGF available for phagocytes to engulf, process, and display to the T cells.  These events would lead to a chronic form of arthritis that would persist even when the spirochetes were cleared from the joints by the immune system or antibiotics.  These patients also have a lot of ECGF in their synovial tissue.  Antibody against ECGF could bind to the tissue and trigger attack by complement, contributing to the tissue damage.

Molecular mimicry doesn't appear to be involved in triggering an immune response to ECGF.  The authors were unable to identify any B. burgdorferi proteins that could cross-react with ECGF.

The immune response to ECGF can't be the whole story since most patients with antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis don't generate a T-cell or antibody response to the protein.  An autoimmune process in these other patients may involve other self-antigens waiting to be discovered.  Other host and spirochete factors also influence the course of Lyme arthritis (see this post, which gives the spirochete's point of view).


References

Drouin, E.E., Seward, R.J., Strle, K., McHugh, G., Katchar, K., Londoño, D., Yao, C., Costello, C.E., & Steere, A.C. (2013). A novel human autoantigen, endothelial cell growth factor, is a target of T and B cell responses in patients with Lyme disease. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 65 (1), 186-196 DOI: 10.1002/art.37732

Seward, R.J., Drouin, E.E., Steere, A.C., & Costello, C.E. (2010). Peptides presented by HLA-DR molecules in synovia of patients with rheumatoid arthritis or antibiotic-refractory Lyme arthritis. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics, 10 (3) DOI: 10.1074/mcp.M110.002477

A helpful review

Steere, A.C., Drouin, E.E., & Glickstein, L.J. (2011). Relationship between immunity to Borrelia burgdorferi Outer-surface protein A (OspA) and Lyme arthritis. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 52 (Supplement 3) DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciq117

Related post

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Spirochete research: 2012 in review

Here are some of my favorite spirochete papers from 2012.  Direct access to all research articles (some behind a paywall) is provided via the DOI links.  Where present, the links above the citations lead to my blog posts about the studies.

PATHOGENESIS

Two distinct regions of the Borrelia burgdorferi BBK32 lipoprotein sequentially mediate binding to the vessel wall in vivo during escape of the spirochete from the bloodstream.
  • Moriarty TJ, Shi , Lin Y-P, Ebady R, Zhou H, Odisho T, Hardy P-O, Salman-Dilgimen A, Wu J, Weening EH, Skare JT, Kubes P, Leong J, and Chaconas G (December 2012).  Vascular binding of a pathogen under shear force through mechanistically distinct sequential interactions with host macromolecules.  Molecular Microbiology 86(5):1116-1131.  DOI: 10.1111/mmi.12045

The Leptospira interrogans LigB protein protects the spirochete from complement by capturing complement regulatory proteins.
  • Castiblanco-Valencia MM, Fraga TR, da Silva LB, Monaris D, Abreu PAE, Strobel S, Jozsi M, Isaac L, and Barbosa AS (March 15, 2012).  Leptospiral immunoglobulin-like proteins interact with human complement regulators factor H, FHL-1, FHR-1, and C4BP.  The Journal of Infectious Diseases 205(6):995-1004.  DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jir875
  • Choy HA (July 2012).  Multiple activities of LigB potentiate virulence of Leptospira interrogans: inhibition of alternative and classical pathways of complement.  PLoS One 7(7):e41566. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0041566

A B. burgdorferi lipase with hemolytic activity in vitro:
  • Shaw DK, Hyde JA, and Skare JT (January 2012).  The BB0646 protein demonstrates lipase and haemolytic activity associated with Borrelia burgdorferi, the aetiological agent of Lyme disease.  Molecular Microbiology 83(2):319-334.  DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2011.07932.x

TRANSMISSION

Borrelia burgdorferi needs the alternative sigma factor RpoS to flee from the tick's midgut
  • Dunham-Ems SM, Caimano MJ, Eggers CH, and Radolf JD (February 2012).  Borrelia burgdorferi requires the alternative sigma factor RpoS for Dissemination within the vector during tick-to-mammal transmission.  PLoS Pathogens 8(2):e1002532.  DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002532

MOTILITY

Video microscopy of B. burgdorferi swimming around in gelatin and mouse tissue:
  • Harman MW, Dunham-Ems SM, Caimano MJ, Belperron AA, Bockenstedt LK, Fu HC, Radolf JD, and Wolgemuth CW (February 21, 2012).  The heterogeneous motility of the Lyme disease spirochete in gelatin mimics dissemination through tissue.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 109(8):3059-3064.  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1114362109

L. interrogans sheath protein homologs that are not needed for flagellar sheath formation:
  • Lambert A, Picardeau M, Haake DA, Sermswan RW, Srikram A, Adler B, and Murray GA (June 2012).  FlaA proteins in Leptospira interrogans are essential for motility and virulence but are not required for formation of the flagellum sheath.  Infection and Immunity 80(6):2019-2025.  DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00131-12

ULTRASTRUCTURE

A close look at the ultrastructure of Leptospira without the artifacts generated by conventional electron microscopy:
  • Raddi G, Morado DR, Yan J, Haake DA, Yang XF, and Liu J (March 2012).  Three-dimensional structures of pathogenic and saprophytic Leptospira species revealed by cryo-electron tomography.  Journal of Bacteriology 194(6):1299-1306.  DOI: 10.1128/JB.06474-11

METAL TOXICITY

B. burgdorferi BicA, a protein that protects the spirochete from the toxic effects of copper and iron:
  • Wang P, Lutton A, Olesik J, Vali H, and Li X (December 2012).  A novel iron- and copper-binding protein in the Lyme disease spirochaete.  Molecular Microbiology 86(6):1441-1451.  DOI: 10.1111/mmi.12068

ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY

Inflammatory spirochete debris left behind following antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease
  • Bockenstedt LK, Gonzalez DG, Haberman AM, and Belperron AA (July 2, 2012).  Spirochete antigens persist near cartilage after murine Lyme borreliosis therapy.  The Journal of Clinical Investigation 122(7):2652-2660.  DOI: 10.1172/JCI58813

A critical analysis of a study that demonstrated persistence of B. burgdorferi in infected rhesus monkeys that were treated with antibiotics:
  • Wormser GP, Baker PJ, O'Connell S, Pachner AR, Schwartz I, and Shapiro ED (July 2012).  Critical analysis of treatment trials of rhesus macaques infected with Borrelia burgdorferi reveals important flaws in experimental design.  Vector-borne and Zoonotic Diseases 12(7):535-538.  DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2012.1012
  • Embers ME, Barthold SW, Borda JT, Bowers L, Doyle L, Hodzic E, Jacobs MB, Hasenkampf NR, Martin DS, Narasimhan S, Phillippi-Falkenstein KM, Purcell JE, Ratterree MS, and Philipp MT (January 2012).  Persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi in rhesus macaques following antibiotic treatment of disseminated infection.  PLoS One 7(1):e29914.  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029914

A tale of two more studies: topical antibiotics applied to tick bites to prevent Lyme disease
  • Wormser GP, Daniels TJ, Bittker S, Cooper D, Wang G, and Pavia CS (March 15, 2012).  Failure of topical antibiotics to prevent disseminated Borrelia burgdorferi infection following a tick bite in C3H/HeJ mice.  The Journal of Infectious Diseases 205(6):991-994.  DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jir382

DIAGNOSTICS

Not so golden?  Microscopic agglutination test for diagnosis of leptospirosis
  • Limmathurotsakul D, Turner EL, Wuthiekanun V, Thaipadungpanit J, Suputtamongkol Y, Chierakul W, Smythe LD, Day NPJ, Cooper B, and Peacock SJ (August 1, 2012).  Fool’s gold: Why imperfect reference tests are undermining the evaluation of novel diagnostics: A reevaluation of 5 diagnostic tests for leptospirosis.  Clinical Infectious Diseases 55(3):322-331.  DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis403

ECOLOGY

Do nonspiral spirochetes help clean our environment?
  • Caro-Quintero A, Ritalahti KM, Cusick KD, Loffler FE, and Konstandtinidis KT (May/June 2012).  The chimeric genome of Sphaerochaeta: Nonspiral spirochetes that break with the prevalent dogma in spirochete biology.  mBio 3(3):e00025-12.  DOI: 10.1128/mBio.00025-12
  • Ritalahti KM, Justicia-Leon SD, Cusick KD, Ramos-Hernandez N, Rubin M, Dornbush J, and Loffler FE (January 2012).  Sphaerochaeta globosa gen. nov., sp. nov. and Sphaerochaeta pleomorpha sp. nov., free-living, spherical spirochetes.  International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 62(Pt 1):210-216.  DOI: 10.1099/ijs.0.023986-0

 

BIOFILM

Biofilms of the Lyme disease spirochete
  • Sapi E, Bastian SL, Mpoy CM, Scott S, Rattelle A, Pabbati N, Poruri A, Burugu D, Theophilus PAS, Pham TV, Data A, Dhaliwal NK, MacDonald A, Rossi MJ, Sinha SK, and Luecke DF (October 2012).  Characterization of biofilm formation by Borrelia burgdorferi in vitro.  PLoS One 7(10):e48277.  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048277

 

HISTORY

Looking for the syphilis spirochete in ancient bones
  • Montiel R, Solorzano E, Diaz N,  Alvarez-Sandoval BA, Gonzalez-Ruiz M, Canadas MP, Simoes N, Isidro A, and Malgosa A (May 2012).  Neonate human remains: A window of opportunity to the molecular analysis of syphilis.  PLoS One 7(5):e36371.  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036371

Presenting flawed studies directly to the public to bypass the scientific peer-review process:
  • Armelagos GJ, Zuckerman MK, and Harper KN (March 2012).  The science behind pre-Columbian evidence of syphilis in Europe: research by documentary.  Evolutionary Anthropology 21(2):50-57.  DOI: 10.1002/evan.20340

REVIEWS

Here are two excellent review articles that appeared during the past year:
  • Radolf JD, Caimano MJ, Stevenson B, and Hu LT (February 2012).  Of ticks, mice and men: understanding the dual-host lifestyle of Lyme disease spirochaetes.  Nature Reviews Microbiology 10(2):87-99.  DOI: 10.1038/nrmicro2714
  • Charon NW, Cockburn A, Li C, Liu J, Miller KA, Miller MR, Motaleb MA, and Wolgemuth CW (2012).  The unique paradigm of spirochete motility and chemotaxis.  Annual Reviews of Microbiology 66:349-370.  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-micro-092611-150145

Sunday, October 30, 2011

A tale of two more studies: topical antibiotics applied to tick bites to prevent Lyme disease

Feeding Ixodes ticks harboring Borrelia burgdorferi deposit the Lyme disease spirochete in the skin of the victim.  The spirochetes remain in the skin for a few days before entering the bloodstream to spread throughout the host.  The delay in dissemination provides a window of opportunity to stop the infection by simply applying antibiotics to the skin where the tick was feeding.  Topical application of antibiotics would allow patients to avoid experiencing side effects associated with ingesting antibiotics.

ResearchBlogging.orgI recently posted a critique of a study by Knauer and colleagues, who tested the ability of a topical antibiotic to prevent B. burgdorferi infection in lab mice bitten by infected ticks.  As I explained in the post, the antibiotic appeared to prevent infection, but the investigators had used a weakened B. burgdorferi strain to inoculate the mice.  Consequently it wasn't possible to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of their antibiotic formulation in preventing infection.

Now let's look at two more studies that tested the ability of topical antibiotics to prevent infection in the mouse model of Lyme disease.  These studies were conducted properly with highly infectious B. burgdorferi strains.  One study was published almost 20 years ago.  The other appeared online just last month.  Both studies were published in The Journal of Infectious Diseases.

In their 1993 study Shih and Spielman were able to prevent B. burgdorferi infection by applying at least 1 milligram of tetracycline starting up to two days following the tick bite.  The antibiotic had to be applied twice a day for at least three consecutive days (see table below).  The presence of infection four weeks after tick feeding was assessed by xenodiagnosis, which tests whether the spirochetes could be recovered by ticks placed on the skin at a location distant from the original tick bite.  The investigators also found that penicillin, amoxicillin, ceftriaxone, doxycycline, and erythromycin applied for three days beginning one day after tick feeding prevented infection.


Although this study demonstrated the promise of topical antibiotics in preventing Lyme disease in those who discover a tick feeding on them, a limitation of the study was that most of the antibiotics were dissolved in DMSO, which is not approved for use on humans.  The only antibiotic dissolved in a solvent suitable for humans was erythromycin, which was added into 70% ethanol.

For their 2011 study, Wormser and colleagues decided to dissolve the antibiotics in something else that would be acceptable to apply to human skin.  They rubbed a 2% erythromycin ointment or 3% tetracycline gel over the tick bite 1-2 days after the infected ticks finished feeding on the mice.  The antibiotics were applied twice daily for three days.  Four weeks later urinary bladder and ear tissue were cultured to see whether the mice had a disseminated infection.  The authors found that their antibiotic formulations failed to prevent systemic infection, although erythromycin was able to prevent a persistent infection at the tick bite site in some of the mice (see table below).


Erythromycin and tetracycline were tested in both studies.  Why the stark difference in the effectiveness of the same antibiotics in the two studies?   In the Discussion of their paper, Wormser and colleagues highlighted the major methodological differences between the studies:
  • Different antibiotic concentrations. A much higher concentration of erythromycin was applied to the tick bites in the 1993 study.
  • Different solvents.  DMSO, the solvent used for the 1993 study, may have promoted better penetration of tetracycline into the skin than the ointment and gel formulations selected for the Wormser study.
  • Different placement of infected ticks.  In the 1993 study the infected ticks were placed on the ear for feeding.  In the Wormser study the ticks were placed on the back, where the skin may be thicker and hence more resistant to antibiotic penetration.
  • Different B. burgdorferi strains.  Wormser and colleagues used ticks infected with the highly invasive BL206 strain to inoculate the mice, whereas Shih and Spielman used ticks infected with the less invasive JD1 strain.
  • Different mouse strains.  The C3H mouse strain used in the Wormser study is highly susceptible to dissemination by B. burgdorferi.
For this simple treatment approach to effective, higher concentrations of the antibiotic in a penetrating solvent such as ethanol may be necessary.  Different B. burgdorferi and mouse strains should also be tested in future studies.


References

Shih, C.-M., & Spielman, A. (1993). Topical prophylaxis for Lyme disease after tick bite in a rodent model Journal of Infectious Diseases, 168 (4), 1042-1045 DOI: 10.1093/infdis/168.4.1042

Wormser, G.P., Daniels, T.J., Bittker, S., Cooper, D., Wang, G., & Pavia, C.S. (2011). Failure of topical antibiotics to prevent disseminated Borrelia burgdorferi infection following a tick bite in C3H/HeJ mice Journal of Infectious Diseases DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jir382
Knauer, J., Krupka, I., Fueldner, C., Lehmann, J., & Straubinger, R.K. (2011). Evaluation of the preventive capacities of a topically applied azithromycin formulation against Lyme borreliosis in a murine model Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkr371


Related post

Saturday, October 1, 2011

The Lyme disease spirochete feasts on tick antifreeze

In the northeastern United States the Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia burgdorferi spreads from one white-footed mouse to another by hitching a ride in the tick Ixodes scapularis. Transmission between tick and mouse occurs during the tick's rare blood meals.  The larval tick acquires B. burgdorferi from an infected mouse during a blood meal late in the summer, and the spirochetes take up shelter in the tick's midgut.  Later the larva molts into a nymph, which then completes the transmission cycle by feeding on an uninfected mouse during the next spring or early summer.

Although blood is potentially a rich source of nutrients for both tick and spirochete, the cells lining the tick's gut rapidly engulf the nutrients, including glucose, an energy-rich sugar favored by B. burgdorferi.  The spirochetes must therefore rely on other energy sources if it is to survive the many months between tick feedings.  How does B. burgdorferi fuel its survival during this period?

ResearchBlogging.orgA study in the July issue of PLoS Pathogens has shown that B. burgdorferi metabolizes the tick's antifreeze while living in its midgut.1  Many arthropods and insects produce large amounts of antifreeze to protect themselves from freezing temperatures.  The Ixodes tick's antifreeze is glycerol, the same stuff that's often added to enzymes to keep them from freezing in laboratory freezers.  The amount of glycerol found in other organisms is too low to serve as antifreeze.  Instead glycerol is metabolized to extract the chemical energy stored in its bonds and to make cell membrane components.  I describe below how B. burgdorferi handles glycerol, but the same enzymes are found in most organisms that metabolize glycerol, including humans.

The B. burgdorferi genome encodes homologs of a glycerol transporter (GlpF), glycerol kinase (GlpK), and glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GlpD), which are used by the bacteria to take up and metabolize glycerol (see figure below).  The figure also shows that B. burgdorferi can break down glucose by the glycolytic pathway (glycolysis) to supply its carbon and energy needs.
Modified from Figure 1 of Pappas et al., 2011.  The BB numbers are the gene ID numbers assigned when the B. burgdorferi genome was sequenced.  The individual steps of glycolysis are not shown.  Source

After the glycerol transporter brings glycerol into the cytoplasm, glycerol kinase (GlpK) quickly phosphorylates glycerol at the expense of ATP to generate glycerol-3-phosphate.


Glycerol-3-phosphate is located at a branch point in glycerol metabolism.  This key metabolite can be shunted to one of two pathways.  One pathway leads to assembly of lipids, and the other leads to the glycolytic pathway, which generates ATP for B. burgdorferi.

To make more lipids, additional molecules are attached to glycerol-3-phosphate by other enzymes to generate phospholipids, glycolipids, and lipoproteins.  For example, one of the two major phospholipids in B. burgdorferi membranes is phosphotidylcholine (the other is phosphotidylglycerol).  Note in the figure below that glycerol-3-phosphate (in black and blue) makes up the core of phosphotidylcholine.  (R1 and R2 denote fatty acid chains.)  The glycerol or glycerol-3-phosphate base also forms the core of other phospholipids, glycolipids, and lipoproteins needed to assemble the bacterial cell membrane.


ATP provides the energy to build lipids and other components of B. burgdorferi.  To generate ATP, glycerol-3-phosphate is converted by glycerol-3-phophate dehydrogenase (GlpD or G3PDH) into dihydroxyacetone phosphate, which feeds into the middle of the glycolytic pathway.

Glycerol is not a great energy source.  For each molecule of glycerol, one ATP is consumed to make glycerol-3-phosphate, and two molecules of ATP are made via glycolysis, netting B. burgdorferi one molecule of ATP.  On the other hand, each molecule of glucose, which is plentiful in blood, nets two molecule of ATP, twice the amount of energy extracted from glycerol.
To enlarge the glycolytic pathway, click on the image above
B. burgdorferi lacks the TCA cycle enzymes and electron transport chain, which could unleash the chemical energy stored in the bonds of pyruvate, the end product of glycolysis, to generate even more ATP.  Instead pyruvate is converted into the fermentation end product lactate by lactate dehydrogenase.
Modified from Figure 2c of Harper and Harris 2005

For their study the investigators knocked out the B. burgdorferi glpD gene encoding glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase so that the spirochete couldn't use glycerol as an energy source to make ATP.  As expected, the glpD mutant was unable to grow to a high cell density when glycerol was the major carbon and energy source in the culture medium.  Nevertheless the mutant was still able to infect laboratory mice and spread throughout their bodies almost as well as the wild-type (unmutated) strain.  This makes sense since energy sources other than glycerol (such as glucose) are readily available in mammals.

To see how well the glpD mutant survived in ticks, larval Ixodes scapularis ticks were allowed to feed to satiation on groups of mice infected with the mutant and wild-type strains.  Similar numbers of the mutant (632 ± 343 spirochetes/tick) and wildtype (737 ± 369 spirochetes/tick) ended up in the larva (P = 0.5646).  The infected larva were maintained in the lab and allowed to molt into nymphs.  7-8 weeks after larval feeding, the number of mutant spirochetes in the nymphs (254 ± 137 spirochetes/tick) was much lower than the number of wildtype (1173 ± 637 spirochetes/tick; P = 2.76 x 10-8).  This result suggests that to thrive in the tick's midgut, B. burgdorferi has to break down glycerol, the tick's antifreeze, to generate ATP.

The glpD mutation also slowed the rapid increase in spirochete numbers seen when the infected nymph starts to feed on a mouse (see below).  It's unclear how much of the blood nutrients are available to B. burgdorferi early during feeding.  Blood consumption by the tick is slow initially, and a membrane called a peritrophic matrix forms in the tick midgut to encase the blood.  The spirochetes in the midgut may therefore rely primarily on glycerol to power its rapid multiplication even as the nymph is feeding.  Within a few days a small number of spirochetes eventually break through the midgut lining and make their way to the salivary glands, where they end up as passengers in the saliva flowing into the mouse's skin.

Figure 11 from Pappas et al., 2011.  Infected nymphs were placed on mice at time zero.  Filled circles, wild-type B. burgdorferi; open squares, glpD mutant.  Source

The impaired growth of the glpD mutant in the feeding nymph also delayed their transmission into the mice.  The nymphs fed for 62 hours before the wild-type strain was transmitted to the mice, whereas 72 hours elapsed before transmission of the glpD mutant was detected.

Why does the glpD mutant survive at all in the ticks?  The answer is that there are probably other energy sources available to B. burgdorferi.  The authors proposed that the sugar chitobiose, a component of the tick's cuticle and peritrophic membrane, can be consumed by B. burgdorferi living in the midgut.  The transporter encoded by chbC brings chitobiose into the spirochete, where it is processed by several enzymes before being fed into the glycolytic pathway.  In fact the authors found that B. burgdorferi expressed larger amounts of the chbC mRNA when in the unfed nymph than it did when in the mouse host.  This result would be expected if B. burgdorferi was trying to metabolize the tick's chitobiose, which is not found in the mouse.

So to sum things up, B. burgdorferi appears to use different organic carbon sources to fulfill its energy needs depending on where it's living.  In the mouse host B. burgdorferi most likely breaks down glucose, a sugar rich with potential chemical energy.  Since glucose isn't available in the tick, the spirochete consumes glycerol and possibly chitobiose while living in the tick's midgut.

Reference

Pappas, C.J., Iyer, R., Petzke, M.M., Caimano, M.J., Radolf, J.D., & Schwartz, I. (2011). Borrelia burgdorferi requires glycerol for maximum fitness during the tick phase of the enzootic cycle PLoS Pathogens, 7 (7) DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002102

Image sources

Unless otherwise stated in the figure legends, the chemical reactions were taken from Biochemistry (5th Edition) by Berg, Tymoczko, and Stryer.

Harper ET and Harris RA (2005).  Glycolytic Pathway, from eLS.  DOI: 10.1038/npg.els.0003883


Related posts

Monday, July 4, 2011

Does Borrelia burgdorferi cause an inadequate antibody response by altering B cell activation in the lymph node?

One of the characteristic features of Lyme disease is lymphadenopathy or swollen lymph nodes.  It's not too surprising when a lymph node draining a site of infection swells.  However when investigators looked at the lymph node draining the inoculation site of Borrelia burgdorferi in mice, they found that the spirochete had somehow altered the course of activation of B cells producing the antibodies that targeted the spirochete.

Before discussing the findings in the paper, a review of how the antibody response evolves in the lymph node is in order.  An antibody response to microbial proteins is sparked when antigen from microbes breaching the skin layer flow into the draining lymph node or are carried to the lymph node by dendritic cells.  Lymph nodes are where naive B cells, upon recognition of antigen, differentiate into plasma cells, which secrete large amounts of antibody that target the invading microbe.  The antibodies which bind most tightly to protein antigens are made with T cell help in germinal centers, which emerge from the rare B cells in the lymph node that produce antibody capable of recognizing the antigen.  (I say "rare" here because each B cell in the lymph node produces antibodies with different antigenic specificities to ensure that any microbe that the host may possibly encounter will be recognized by antibodies displayed by at least a few B cells.)  Upon binding the antigen and reception of critical signals from T cells, the B cells migrate to areas in the lymph node containing fixed networks of follicular dendritic cells (FDCs), a type of immune cell with long branched processes that extend out from the body of the cell.  (FDCs differ from the dendritic cells that bring antigen to the lymph node.)  The B cells then start to proliferate wildly, doubling every 6 to 8 hours (faster than B. burgdorferi!).  As the B cell numbers surge, they form germinal centers, which can be identified easily by standard histological stains (see image below).  The lymph node may even swell, depending on how much the B cells proliferate.

Lymph node: (1) capsule; (2) subcapsular sinus; (3) germinal centers; (4) lymphoide nodule; (5) trabeculae.  Source

As the B cells multiply in the germinal center, a process called somatic hypermutation, which is promoted by signals received from T cells, causes a large number of mistakes to be made within the segment of DNA encoding the antigen binding portion of the antibody.  Consequently, the antibodies displayed by some germinal center B cells are no longer able to bind to the microbial antigen whereas those made by other B cells will bind better.  The FDC processes, whose surfaces are loaded with antigen, continuously probe the antibodies expressed by the newly arising B cells.  Since the new B cells are programmed to die unless they express antibody able to bind the antigen displayed by the FDCs, only B cells displaying antibody that bind most tightly to the antigen will survive.  This process by which B cells expressing the antibodies with the highest affinity for antigen are selected is called affinity maturation.  Somatic hypermutation and affinity maturation can only occur in germinal centers.  The B cells also undergo class switching, in which the class of antibody expressed by the B cells switches from IgM and IgD, which are expressed by naive B cells, to IgA, IgE, or one of the IgG subclasses.  The exact switch that occurs is governed by the cytokines that the B cells are exposed to.  Which cytokines are present depends on the nature of the infection.  Eventually the B cells expressing high-affinity antibodies of the appropriate class differentiate into antibody-secreting plasma cells, which are released from the lymph node to circulate throughout the body and fight the infection.

So what happens in the lymph nodes during a B. burgdorferi infection?  When the investigators inoculated B. burgdorferi into or underneath the skin of mice, the lymph node draining the site swelled considerably, enlarging by more than a factor of 10 by the tenth day of infection.

From Fig. 2 of Tunev et al., 2011.  Arrow points to lymph node draining the inoculation site.  Source

What the investigators saw when they looked at lymph node sections under the microscope was very different from the textbook description of T-cell dependent B cell activation that I gave above.  First of all, live B. burgdorferi was found in the lymph node draining the site of infection in mice.  This is unusual since phagocytes would normally greet and destroy any microbe that managed to find its way into the lymph node.

From Fig. 3 of Tunev et al., 2011.  Day 8 of infection.  The arrows point to intact extracellular B. burgdorferi in the subcapsular sinus of the lymph node, which was culture positive beginning on day 1 of infection.   Source

Second, massive proliferation of B cells accounted for lymph node swelling, but the expansion of B cell numbers wasn't occurring in well-defined germinal centers. The authors also noted that T cells were not increasing in number.  These observations suggested that T cells, which are required for germinal centers to form, were not fully participating in B-cell activation.  The lack of germinal centers suggested that somatic hypermutation and affinity maturation were not occurring.

From their observations, the authors speculated that B. burgdorferi somehow subverted B cell activation in the lymph node so that the end result was a large number of plasma cells secreting antibodies of poor quality.  By poor "quality," I assume that the authors meant that the affinity of the antibody for B. burgdorferi proteins was low and that the "wrong" subclasses of IgG antibodies were expressed.  The most abundant IgG subclasses being produced in the draining lymph node at its most swollen state were IgG2b and IgG3.  Whether other IgG subclasses would be more effective at clearing B. burgdorferi from the host and whether the affinities of the antibodies for B. burgdorferi proteins were poor still need to be determined experimentally.  Perhaps a classic T-cell dependent B cell response involving the formation of germinal centers accompanied by somatic hypermutation, affinity maturation, and appropriate class switching would have led to production of "high" quality antibodies.  If the authors are correct, they have revealed yet another means by which B. burgdorferi could persist in the host.


Featured paper

Tunev SS, Hastey CJ, Hodzic E, Feng S, Barthold SW, and Baumgarth N (May 2011).  Lymphadenopathy during Lyme borreliosis is caused by spirochete migration-induced specific B cell activation.  PLoS Pathogens 7(5):e1002066.  DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002066

Saturday, January 1, 2011

Designing a Lyme disease vaccine to attack the tick vector

Conventional vaccines target the surface components or secreted toxins of pathogens.  Erol Fikrig's group at Yale University has been exploring an unconventional approach towards developing a vaccine for Lyme disease, which is caused by a tick-borne pathogen.  Their recent work, published in the November issue of PLoS Pathogens, demonstrated partial success in protecting laboratory mice by immunization with a protein found in the saliva of the Ixodes tick vector.

Ixodes ticks spend several days feeding on blood while attached to the victim's skin.  B. burgdorferi is carried into the victim's skin in the Ixodes tick's saliva starting 3-4 days (on average) after attachment.  Tick saliva contains a blend of biological substances that aid the tick in drinking blood from its victim.  These substances include cement proteins to keep the tick's feeding apparatus tightly bound to the skin, anti-coagulants to keep the blood flowing into the tick, and anti-inflammatory factors that ward off the local inflammatory response.  The activity of these substances also promote transmission of B. burgdorferi from the feeding tick to the victim.  Hence a vaccine that targets a saliva component may protect humans from Lyme disease.

A Lyme vaccine that targets the tick has a few advantages over one that targets the spirochete.  First, a tick-based Lyme disease vaccine is unlikely to interfere with laboratory diagnosis, which currently relies on detection of antibodies against the Lyme Borrelia spirochete.  Second, an effective vaccine that targets the tick may also prevent transmission of other pathogens carried by the Ixodes tick by interfering with tick feeding or with the tick's countermeasures against the host inflammatory response at the feeding site.

In their recent work, the investigators focused their efforts on a salivary protein called tick histamine release factor (tHRF).  Because tHRF levels in the salivary glands of feeding Ixodes ticks were higher when B. burgdorferi was present in the tick, they guessed that tHRF was doing something to help transmit B. burgdorferi from the tick to the victim.  The authors turned out to be correct.  Transmission of B. burgdorferi was impaired when they knocked down the tick's production of tHRF by RNAi.

The investigators went on to test the vaccine potential of tHRF in their mouse model.  They passively immunized mice with antiserum raised against tHRF or actively immunized the rodents with recombinant tHRF.  Actively immunized mice were also given booster injections with tHRF (the paper did not say how many).  Control mice were not immunized.  They then challenged the mice with ticks infected with B. burgdorferi.  One or three weeks later, tissues were removed from the mice, and the bacterial load of B. burgdorferi in skin, heart, and joints was measured by quantitative PCR.

Their data showed that immunization with tHRF was somewhat effective.  Depending on the experiment, B. burgdorferi DNA could not be detected in any of the three tissues in 20-33% of immunized mice, whereas the spirochete's DNA was detected in at least one tissue in all control mice.  Even in immunized mice with detectable B. burgdorferi DNA, the levels were often lower than the average level found in the control mice.  It would have been nice to know how much inflammation was present in the tissues of the immunized mice.  Unfortunately, the histopathology of the tissues was not presented in the paper.

Figure 4, panels E-G from Dai et al., 2010.  Bacterial burden in skin (day 7 after challenge) and joint and heart (day 21) was determined by quantitative PCR with flaB primers.  Horizonal lines represent the mean value ± SEM.  * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01.  Results were pooled from 3 independent experiments.

ResearchBlogging.orgtHRF is not the first Lyme vaccine candidate to target a protein found in tick saliva.  An earlier report from Fikrig's group demonstrated that active and passive immunization with Salp15, another tick salivary protein, was also somewhat effective in protecting mice from colonization with B. burgdorferi.  tHRF was superior to Salp15 in impairing feeding by ticks. Ticks feeding on Salp15-immunized mice were able to complete their blood meal.  In contrast, most of the ticks had a hard time feeding on mice immunized with tHRF and could not complete their blood meal, as assessed by tick weights following detachment from the mice.

Although immunization with tHRF and Salp15 prevented colonization in only some mice, Fikrig's work shows for the first time that it may be possible to design a Lyme disease vaccine that targets the tick vector.  Ultimately, the most effective vaccine may be a mixture that targets multiple components in both the tick and the spirochete.

References

Dai, J., Narasimhan, S., Zhang, L., Liu, L., Wang, P., & Fikrig, E. (2010). Tick histamine release factor is critical for Ixodes scapularis engorgement and transmission of the Lyme disease agent PLoS Pathogens, 6 (11) DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1001205

Dai, J., Wang, P., Adusumilli, S., Booth, C.J., Narasimhan, S., Anguita, J., & Fikrig, E. (2009). Antibodies against a tick protein, Salp15, protect mice from the Lyme disease agent. Cell Host & Microbe, 6 (5), 482-492 DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2009.10.006

Related post