Lyme Disease Surveillance in New York State: an Assessment of Case Underreporting.

Despite the mandatory nature of Lyme disease (LD) reporting in New York State (NYS), it is believed that only a fraction of the LD cases diagnosed annually are reported to public health authorities. Lack of complete LD case reporting generally stems from (i) lack of report of provider-diagnosed cases where supportive laboratory testing is not ordered or results are negative (i.e. provider underreporting) and (ii) incomplete case information (clinical laboratory reporting only with no accompanying clinical information) such that cases are considered 'suspect' and not included in national and statewide case counts (i.e. case misclassification). In an attempt to better understand LD underreporting in NYS, a two-part study was conducted in 2011 using surveillance data from three counties. Case misclassification was assessed by obtaining medical records on suspect cases and reclassifying according to the surveillance case definition. To assess provider underreporting, lists of patients for whom ICD-9-CM code 088.81 (LD) had been used were reported to NYS Department of Health (NYSDOH). These lists were matched to the NYSDOH case reporting system, and medical records were requested on patients not previously reported; cases were then classified according to the case definition. When including both provider underreporting and case misclassification, approximately 20% (range 18.4-24.6%) more LD cases were identified in the three-county study area than were originally reported through standard surveillance. The additional cases represent a minimum percentage of unreported cases; the true percentage of unreported cases is likely higher. Unreported cases were more likely to have a history of erythema migrans (EM) rash and were more likely to be young paediatric cases. Results of the study support the assertion that LD cases are underreported in NYS. Initiatives to increase reporting should highlight the importance of reporting clinically diagnosed EM and be targeted to those providers most likely to diagnose LD, specifically providers treating paediatric patients.

Lyme Disease Surveillance Using Sampling Estimation: Evaluation of an Alternative Methodology in New York State.

In the 14-year period from 1993 to 2006, New York State (NYS) accounted for over one-quarter (27.1%) of all confirmed Lyme disease (LD) cases in the United States. During that time period, a nine-county area in south-east NYS accounted for 90.6% of the reported LD cases in the state. Based on concerns related to diminishing resources at both the state and local level and the increasing burden of traditional LD surveillance, the NYS Department of Health (DOH) sought to develop an alternative to traditional surveillance that would reduce the investigative workload while maintaining the ability to track LD trends by developing a system to estimate county-level LD cases based on a 20% random sample of positive laboratory reports. Estimates from this system were compared to observed cases from traditional surveillance for select counties in 2007-2009 and 2011. There were no significant differences between the two methodologies in six of nine evaluations conducted. In addition, in 93 of 98 (94.9%) demographic, symptom and other variable proportion comparisons made between the two methodologies in 2009 and 2011, there were no significant differences found. Overall, using sampling estimates was accurate and efficient in estimating LD cases at the county level. Use of case estimates for LD should be considered as a useful surveillance alternative by health policy makers for states with endemic LD.

Clinical significance of anti-Ro52 (TRIM21) antibodies non-associated with anti-SSA 60kDa antibodies: results of a multicentric study.

Ro52 antigen has recently been identified as TRIM21 protein, but the clinical significance of anti-Ro52/TRIM21 antibodies remains controversial. The aim of this multicentric study was to investigate the significance of anti-Ro52 antibodies without anti-SSA/Ro60 antibodies in various connective diseases. Sera were selected by each laboratory using its own method (ELISA, immunodot or Luminex technology), and then performed with ANA Screen BioPlex™ reagent (BIO-RAD). Among the 247 screened sera, 155/247 (63%) were confirmed as anti-Ro52 positive and anti-SSA/Ro60 negative. These sera were analyzed for the detection of other antibodies in relation with clinical settings. Isolated anti-Ro52 antibodies were detected in 89/155 (57%) sera. For the remaining sera (66/155), the main antibodies associations were Sm/SmRNP or Chromatin (n=38; 57%), Jo1 (n=17; 26%) and CenpB (n=9; 14%). Clinical data from the 155 patients showed high prevalence in autoimmune diseases (73%) including myositis or dermatomyositis (n=30), lupus (n=23); Sjögren and/or sicca syndrome (n=27); CREST or Systemic sclerosis (n=11) and autoimmune hepatitis (n=11). We found that pulmonary manifestations were often associated with the presence of anti-Ro52 antibodies (n=34, 22%), in addition with anti-tRNA synthetases, anti-SRP or anti-Ku antibodies (18/34) or isolated in half of cases (16/34). Separate detection of anti-Ro52 antibodies might be useful in related antisynthetase syndrome diagnosis. The presence of anti-Ro52 antibodies should probably precede development of autoimmune disease and must induce sequential follow-up of positive patients, particularly in interstitial lung disease progression.