Lyme Cultured From Post-Treatment Sero-Neg Patients; Another Lyme Agent Potentially Identified

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,240
Likes
4,802
Isolation of live Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato spirochetes from patients with undefined disorders and symptoms not typical for Lyme borreliosis N. Rudenko, M. Golovchenko ,M. Vancova, K. Clark, L. Grubhoffer, J.H. Oliver Jr.
Clinical Microbiology and Infection, online first, December 7, 2015.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2015.11.009


Abstract

"Lyme borreliosis is a multisystem disorder with diverse spectrum of clinical manifestations, caused by spirochetes of the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex. It is an infectious disease that can be successfully cured by antibiotic therapy on early stages; however, the possibility of appearance of persistent signs and symptoms of disease following antibiotic treatment is recognized today.

It is known that Lyme borreliosis is mimicking multiple diseases that were never proven to have a spirochete etiology. Using complete modified Kelly-Pettenkofer medium we succeeded in cultivation of live B. burgdorferi sensu lato spirochetes from samples of humans who suffered from undefined disorders, had symptoms not typical for Lyme borreliosis, but undergone antibiotic treatment due to suspicion of having Lyme disease even though they were seronegative.

We report the first recovery of live Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto from residents of southeastern United States and first successful cultivation of live Borrelia bissettii-like strain from resident of North America. Our results support the fact that B. bissettii is responsible for human Lyme borreliosis worldwide along with B. burgdorferi s.s. Involvement of new spirochete species in Lyme borreliosis changes the understanding and recognition of clinical manifestations of this disease."
 

msf

Senior Member
Messages
3,650
Likes
5,101
Wow, this should be a game changer (I hate that expression, but I couldn´t think of an alternative), but I know what the IDSA´s response will be: ´Oh no, you didn´t!´

Do you have pantomime in America? I mean, the kind that isn´t sponsored by the IDSA and CDC?
 

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,240
Likes
4,802
I suspect K. Clark will be on the IDSA's Naughty list again over the Holidays. I would imagine by now he is used to it.
 

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Likes
4,966
Unfortunately, this study says the results were from contamination.

Would testing spinal fluid show if a person really has Lyme? It's such an invasive procedure, though. I recall reading something about this but can't find the article nor do I remember if this procedure was considered valid or reliable.

It's just too bad that there isn't a more definitive test. Contamination runs amuck. Again!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3957795/#!po=3.84615

Barb

ETA
It looks like testing spinal fluid is for neurological lyme and it's done by PCR. Isn't PCR similar to culturing so would run the same risks?

I keep reading this article but it's late and my head is spinning. Maybe others know the difference /similarities between the two.

http://www.mayomedicallaboratories.com/test-catalog/Clinical+and+Interpretive/83856
 
Last edited:

leela

Slow But Hopeful
Messages
3,279
Likes
7,329
Location
Couchland, USA
Unfortunately, this study says the results were from contamination.
Actually, no, the study you linked to simply concludes that contamination "cannot be ruled out" or was the "probable source".

Plus, the paper you linked to is from a year ago and refers to a study by Sapi et al, while the OP posted a paper from a new study,
published last week, with different researchers and it seems like a different medium.
 

Dufresne

almost there...
Messages
1,032
Likes
1,379
Location
Laurentians, Quebec
Unfortunately, this study says the results were from contamination.

Would testing spinal fluid show if a person really has Lyme? It's such an invasive procedure, though. I recall reading something about this but can't find the article nor do I remember if this procedure was considered valid or reliable.

It's just too bad that there isn't a more definitive test. Contamination runs amuck. Again!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3957795/#!po=3.84615
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3993691/
 

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Likes
4,966
I had come across the rebuttal.

Since this paper was just published it should be interesting to see reviews of it.

The article I cited was talking about a different study. However, when I get chance I want to compare the two.

Barb
 

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,240
Likes
4,802
@barbc56, as others have pointed out, the rebuttal paper from B Johnson et al you linked has nothing to do with the Kerry Clark paper.

Indeed, the Johnson paper was a rebuttal specific to the findings from a totally different group headed by E. Sapi, published a couple years ago. The Johnson paper itself is almost two years old; this K. Clark paper is new.

I am eager to learn more about the Clark study. Remember- it seems to discuss two potentially seminal findings, not just one. Unfortunately, it is behind a paywall.
 
Last edited:

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
Likes
4,966
Perhaps you should point out that the rebuttal you are posting refers to another study (and possibly a different method), and not just wait for someone to point that out.
Well, yeah, if I had realized it was a different study. Oops! :D

It will be interesting to see any similarities/differences between the two.
Barb
 
Last edited:

msf

Senior Member
Messages
3,650
Likes
5,101
That rebuttal of the rebuttal of the other paper seemed pretty comprehensive. Was there a rebuttal to the rebuttal to the rebuttal?
 

Dufresne

almost there...
Messages
1,032
Likes
1,379
Location
Laurentians, Quebec
Eighty percent (41/51) of the reported patient-derived pyrG sequences were identical to one of the laboratory strains, and an additional 12% (6/51) differed by only a single nucleotide across a 603-bp region of the pyrG gene. Thus, false positivity due to laboratory contamination of patient samples cannot be ruled out, and further validation of the proposed novel culture method is required.
So that one is from Johnson et al.

Johnson et al. (1) allege specifically that there is DNA evidence of contamination of human blood isolates of borreliae (patient no. 1 to 20, 28 to 47, and 50 in Table 1 of reference 1). BLASTn interrogations using CDC interrogators KF170280.1, KF170281.1, and KF170282.1 show that only one of the Sapi et al. (2) human blood isolates (accession numbers beginning with “JX86”) matches a CDC interrogator 100% (i.e., 603/603 bases), and that blood isolate is Borrelia afzelii (accession number JX867398.1), which matches CDC interrogator KF170280.1. There is no DNA support for contamination of any other Sapi et al. (2) blood culture isolates based on supercomputer BLASTn searches with the CDC interrogators KF170281.1 and KF170282.1.
And this one is from MacDonald.

So who's telling the truth? Has anybody BLASTn(ed) these?
 

Dufresne

almost there...
Messages
1,032
Likes
1,379
Location
Laurentians, Quebec
@Dufresne , I think LHCTom did. He has a blog somewhere. It was brilliant. Sapi's paper took some hits, but so did Johnson's attack.
So who came out on top?

I read someone else's breakdown who stated many of the sequences were quite similar but not identical as Johnson states. And I don't know if very similar should be suspect.

I know a few science-minded Lymies who maintain the CDC torpedoed this study with BS.

It's funny, I came across posts last night suggesting LHCTom was Ed McSweegan's trolling name. McSweegan refutes this here: http://www.lymeneteurope.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5034

It's hard to make heads or tales of all the science without doing a whole lot of work, and even then it's usually still very ambiguous. I've a lot of respect for those that can tolerate the tediousness of it all and then still ask for more.
 

duncan

Senior Member
Messages
2,240
Likes
4,802
I have spoken on the phone with LHCTom several times, and I have ANI. I can tell you he is not McSweegan. I can also tell you he is brilliant, I'm pretty sure with a few patents to his name.

I haven't read the blog in a while. As I recall, LHCTom noted issues he uncovered, but he also found ridiculous problems with the rebuttal.
 

Dufresne

almost there...
Messages
1,032
Likes
1,379
Location
Laurentians, Quebec
I have spoken on the phone with LHCTom several times, and I have ANI. I can tell you he is not McSweegan. I can also tell you he is brilliant, I'm pretty sure with a few patents to his name.
I didn't actually think he was McSweegan. I just thought it was funny.

I remember LHCTom claiming to be Lyme positive, but I also remember him as very neutral and science-minded. I just went through his parsing of both sides and he writes mistakes were made on both parties. However he highlights the 27 cases of b. garinii in American patients as being very unlikely: two cases wouldn't raise such a flag, but 27? This of course assumes the study of American ticks and the strains they are carrying is accurate. If it is, it does seem very unlikely you'd have 27 hits for this, at best, rare strain.

But who knows? I don't put too much stock in that slow-moving dark spot originating in Lyme, Connecticut.