| Literature DB >> 35411829 |
Tian-Le Che1, Bao-Gui Jiang1, Qiang Xu1, Yu-Qi Zhang2,3, Chen-Long Lv1, Jin-Jin Chen1, Ying-Jie Tian3,4, Yang Yang5, Simon I Hay6,7, Wei Liu1, Li-Qun Fang1.
Abstract
Lyme borreliosis, recognized as one of the most important tick-borne diseases worldwide, has been increasing in incidence and spatial extent. Currently, there are few geographic studies about the distribution of Lyme borreliosis risk across China. Here we established a nationwide database that involved Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (B. burgdorferi) detected in humans, vectors, and animals in China. The eco-environmental factors that shaped the spatial pattern of B. burgdorferi were identified by using a two-stage boosted regression tree model and the model-predicted risks were mapped. During 1986-2020, a total of 2,584 human confirmed cases were reported in 25 provinces. Borrelia burgdorferi was detected from 35 tick species with the highest positive rates in Ixodes granulatus, Hyalomma asiaticum, Ixodes persulcatus, and Haemaphysalis concinna ranging 20.1%-24.0%. Thirteen factors including woodland, NDVI, rainfed cropland, and livestock density were determined as important drivers for the probability of B. burgdorferi occurrence based on the stage 1 model. The stage 2 model identified ten factors including temperature seasonality, NDVI, and grasslands that were the main determinants used to distinguish areas at high or low-medium risk of B. burgdorferi, interpreted as potential occurrence areas within the area projected by the stage 1 model. The projected high-risk areas were not only concentrated in high latitude areas, but also were distributed in middle and low latitude areas. These high-resolution evidence-based risk maps of B. burgdorferi was first created in China and can help as a guide to future surveillance and control and help inform disease burden and infection risk estimates.Entities:
Keywords: BRT; Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato; Lyme borreliosis; modelling; spatial risk
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35411829 PMCID: PMC9067995 DOI: 10.1080/22221751.2022.2065930
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Emerg Microbes Infect ISSN: 2222-1751 Impact factor: 19.568
Figure 1.Flow chart of literature review. *Other test assays included RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphism) and MLSA (multilocus sequence analysis).
Figure 2.Distribution of Lyme borreliosis cases and the positive rate of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato. The quartiles of each type of data were used to truncate the corresponding data. (A) Distribution of confirmed cases of Lyme borreliosis. (B) Distribution of infection rate of specific antibody for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in humans. (C) Distribution of detection rate for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in wild animals. (D) Distribution of infection rate of specific antibody for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in livestock. (E) Distribution of detection rate for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in ticks. (F) Genospecies distribution of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in China. Records reported at the province level were represented as a triangle, while records reported at the point, county, city-level were represented as a circle. *Positive rate was not calculated for the data with the number of samples tested less than 10. #Other test assays included serological method, isolation, RFLP, and MLSA. †Other test assays included PCR. ‡It has been isolated from patients.
Demographic characteristics and clinical manifestations of Lyme borreliosis cases, 1986–2020, China
| Characteristics | All | Northeast | North | Inner Mongolia-Xinjiang | Qinghai-Tibet | Southwest | Central | South |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 2,584 | 942 | 324 | 1,034 | 91 | 10 | 111 | 72 |
| Sex* | 1,653 | 751 | 136 | 645 | 74 | 3 | 6 | 38 |
| Male | 1,013 (61.3%) | 456 (60.7%) | 69 (50.7%) | 422 (65.4%) | 36 (48.6%) | 3 (100.0%) | 5 (83.3%) | 22 (57.9%) |
| Female | 640 (38.7%) | 295 (39.3%) | 67 (49.3%) | 223 (34.6%) | 38 (51.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (16.7%) | 16 (42.1%) |
| Age* | 796 | 487 | 82 | 106 | 74 | 3 | 7 | 37 |
| <20 | 139 (17.5%) | 81 (16.6%) | 28 (34.1%) | 20 (18.9%) | 4 (5.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 6 (16.2%) |
| 21–40 | 444 (55.8%) | 320 (65.7%) | 22 (26.8%) | 49 (46.2%) | 45 (60.8%) | 2 (66.7%) | 2 (28.6%) | 4 (10.8%) |
| 41–60 | 185 (23.2%) | 85 (17.5%) | 24 (29.3%) | 34 (32.1%) | 25 (33.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 4 (57.1%) | 13 (35.1%) |
| >60 | 28 (3.5%) | 1 (0.2%) | 8 (9.8%) | 3 (2.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (33.3%) | 1 (14.3%) | 14 (37.8%) |
| Occupation* | 768 | 571 | 82 | 68 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 40 |
| Forest worker | 305 (39.7%) | 215 (37.7%) | 29 (35.4%) | 23 (33.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 6 (100.0%) | 32 (80.0%) |
| Farmers and herdsmen | 143 (18.6%) | 95 (16.6%) | 32 (39.0%) | 13 (19.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (100.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (5.0%) |
| Others | 320 (41.7%) | 261 (45.7%) | 21 (25.6%) | 32 (47.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 6 (15.0%) |
| Manifestations* | 1,497 | 720 | 314 | 265 | 74 | 3 | 80 | 41 |
| Erythema migrans | 669 (44.7%) | 436 (60.6%) | 137 (43.6%) | 68 (25.7%) | 5 (6.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 19 (23.7%) | 4 (9.8%) |
| Arthritis | 366 (24.4%) | 122 (16.9%) | 55 (17.5%) | 86 (32.5%) | 42 (56.8%) | 1 (33.3%) | 32 (40.0%) | 28 (68.3%) |
| Neurologic manifestations | 336 (22.4%) | 100 (13.9%) | 100 (31.8%) | 97 (36.6%) | 8 (10.8%) | 2 (66.7%) | 20 (25.0%) | 9 (22.0%) |
| Cardiac manifestations | 79 (5.3%) | 42 (5.8%) | 9 (2.9%) | 7 (2.6%) | 5 (6.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 13 (16.2%) | 3 (7.3%) |
| Lymphadenopathy | 33 (2.2%) | 27 (3.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (0.8%) | 4 (5.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Ocular manifestations | 20 (1.3%) | 11 (1.5%) | 3 (1.0%) | 3 (1.1%) | 2 (2.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (2.4%) |
| ACA | 8 (0.5%) | 1 (0.1%) | 2 (0.6%) | 4 (1.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (1.2%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| Other symptoms | 174 (11.6%) | 92 (12.8%) | 29 (9.2%) | 39 (14.7%) | 9 (12.2%) | 1 (33.3%) | 2 (2.5%) | 2 (4.9%) |
| Year | 2,584 | 942 | 324 | 1,034 | 91 | 10 | 111 | 72 |
| 1986–1990 | 51 (2.0%) | 9 (1.0%) | 14 (4.3%) | 28 (2.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
| 1991–1995 | 381 (14.7%) | 123 (13.1%) | 94 (29.0%) | 100 (9.6%) | 53 (57.9%) | 1 (10.0%) | 6 (5.4%) | 4 (5.6%) |
| 1996–2000 | 776 (30.1%) | 251 (26.6%) | 111 (34.4%) | 328 (31.7%) | 30 (33.3%) | 0 (0.0%) | 54 (48.6%) | 2 (2.8%) |
| 2001–2005 | 892 (34.5%) | 355 (37.7%) | 20 (6.1%) | 467 (45.2%) | 5 (5.1%) | 5 (50.0%) | 39 (35.4%) | 1 (1.9%) |
| 2006–2010 | 228 (8.8%) | 82 (8.7%) | 17 (5.2%) | 110 (10.6%) | 3 (3.7%) | 3 (33.3%) | 12 (10.5%) | 1 (0.9%) |
| 2011–2015 | 211 (8.2%) | 122 (13.0%) | 49 (15.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (10.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 39 (54.2%) |
| 2016–2020 | 45 (1.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 19 (5.9%) | 1 (0.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 25 (34.7%) |
* Cases with incomplete characteristic information were excluded.
ACA: Acrodermatitis chronica atrophicans
The population of different regions are: Northeast (106 million); North (442 million); Inner Mongolia-Xinjiang (64 million); Qinghai-Tibet (13 million); Southwest (52 million); Central (550 million); South (148 million).
Figure 3.Distribution of the positive rate of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato detected in different tick species in China during 1986–2020. The quartiles of PCR positive rate in ticks were used to truncate the data. (A) Ixodes (I.). (B) Haemaphysalis (Ha.). (C) Dermacentor (D.). (D) Hyalomma (Hy.) and Rhipicephalus (R.). *The blue, red, and green asterisks represent I. crenulatus, I. kuntzi and Ha. nepalensis, respectively, and their positive rates were not calculated because the number of samples tested was less than 10.
Figure 4.Recorded and predicted risk distribution of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato presence in China. (A) Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato risk classification based on literature review. Background points sampled from the grid map based on distribution of positive records. The coordinates of polygon centroids were displayed for city-level or county-level evidence. (B) Predicted risk distribution of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato after averaged 100 bootstrapping BRT models. The thresholds of stage 1 and stage 2 model was determined by the cut-off values at which the Youden index of the test set was maximum. Black Doted Circles represent different high-risk hotspot areas. I = Northeast region, II = North China region, III = Inner Mongolia-Xinjiang region, IV = Qinghai-Tibet region, V = Southwest region, VI = Central China region, and VII = South China region.
The area and population size of the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato occurrence risk predicted by the BRT model.
| Region | BRT model predicted/Actual observed (Relative difference) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High risk area×103 km2 | Low-medium risk area×103 km2 | High risk population×103 persons | Low-medium risk population×103 persons | |
| Northeast | 394.0/4.1 (9,609.8%) | 121.9/4.2 (2,902.4%) | 29,899.4/345.4 (8,656.9%) | 31,370.1/759.7 (4,129.5%) |
| North | 86.8/0.8 (10,850.0%) | 158.9/3.9 (4,074.4%) | 19,589.6/221.9 (8,828.4%) | 73,875.2/1,396.7 (5,289.4%) |
| Inner Mongolia-Xinjiang | 177.1/2.0 (8,855.0%) | 71.7/2.4 (2,987.5%) | 5,157.9/46.5 (11,083.0%) | 8,879.7/280.8 (3,162.0%) |
| Qinghai-Tibet | 21.4/1.1 (1,945.5%) | 27.3/4.3 (634.9%) | 537.9/26.9 (1,997.0%) | 952.3/123.6 (770.3%) |
| Southwest | 11.3/0.3 (3,766.7%) | 56.3/1.8 (3,127.8%) | 1,363.8/37.9 (3,601.4%) | 6,566.5/194.8 (3,370.1%) |
| Central | 269.8/2.7 (9,992.6%) | 335.5/7.2 (4,659.7%) | 57,550.7/679.2 (8,473.4%) | 110,563.5/1,757.8 (6,290.0%) |
| South | 11.0/0.0 (-) | 48.5/1.3 (3,730.8%) | 2,501.6/0.0 (-) | 18,804.1/544.8 (3,451.3%) |
| All | 971.4/11.0 (8,830.9%) | 820.1/25.1 (3,267.3%) | 116,600.9/1,357.8 (8,587.4%) | 251,011.5/5,058.2 (4,962.4%) |
Note: The predicted risk was compared with the actual observed risk from literature review and the relative differences (%) are given in parentheses.
*In the observed data, unknown risk records were not included in the comparative analysis. For polygon data, the area and population were the average values of the grid it contains.
The relative contribution of environmental variables to predict the occurrence risk of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato based on BRT model.
| Stage 1 | Stage 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | Mean ± sd (%) | Effect | Variable | Mean ± sd (%) | Effect |
| Closed-canopy woodland | 12.51 ± 1.89 | Positive correlation | Temperature seasonality | 22.08 ± 4.49 | Positive correlation |
| Livestock | 10.97 ± 1.25 | Positive correlation | Isothermality | 11.66 ± 2.10 | Negative correlation |
| Temperature seasonality | 10.15 ± 1.19 | Nonlinear effects | High coverage grasslands | 11.35 ± 2.77 | Positive correlation |
| Annual mean temperature | 8.43 ± 1.03 | Negative correlation | Population density | 10.50 ± 3.13 | Nonlinear effects |
| Population density | 7.80 ± 1.22 | Positive correlation | NDVI | 9.19 ± 2.14 | Positive correlation |
| NDVI | 7.27 ± 1.66 | Positive correlation | Shrub | 8.37 ± 2.13 | Nonlinear effects |
| Other woodland | 7.13 ± 1.05 | Positive correlation | Mammalian richness | 7.96 ± 1.86 | Positive correlation |
| Total precipitation | 6.84 ± 0.99 | Negative correlation | Moderate coverage grasslands | 6.78 ± 1.80 | Positive correlation |
| Rainfed cropland | 6.09 ± 1.15 | Positive correlation | Sparse-canopy woodland | 6.33 ± 2.17 | Positive correlation |
| Elevation | 6.08 ± 1.07 | Nonlinear effects | Other woodland | 5.78 ± 1.84 | Nonlinear effects |
| Precipitation seasonality | 5.92 ± 0.82 | Nonlinear effects | – | – | – |
| Isothermality | 5.58 ± 0.93 | Negative correlation | – | – | – |
| Shrub | 5.23 ± 0.93 | Nonlinear effects | – | – | – |