Search

Medically important ixodid ticks often carry multiple pathogens, with individual ticks frequently coinfected and capable of transmitting multiple infections to hosts, including humans. Acquisition of multiple zoonotic pathogens by immature blacklegged ticks ( Ixodes scapularis ) is facilitated when they feed on small mammals, which are the most competent reservoir hosts for Anaplasma phagocytophilum (which causes anaplasmosis in humans), Babesia microti (babesiosis) and Borrelia burgdorferi (Lyme disease). Here, we used data from a large-scale, long-term experiment to ask whether patterns of single and multiple infections in questing nymphal I. scapularis ticks from residential neighbourhoods differed from those predicted by independent assortment of pathogens, and whether patterns of coinfection were affected by residential application of commercial acaricidal products. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction was used for pathogen detection in multiplex reactions. In control neighbourhoods and those treated with a fungus-based biopesticide deployed against host-seeking ticks (Met52), ticks having only single infections of either B. microti or B. burgdorferi were significantly less common than expected, whereas coinfections with these 2 pathogens were significantly more common. However, use of tick control system bait boxes, which kill ticks attempting to feed on small mammals, eliminated the bias towards coinfection. Although aimed at reducing the abundance of host-seeking ticks, control methods directed at ticks attached to small mammals may influence human exposure to coinfected ticks and the probability of exposure to multiple tick-borne infections.

Objective: People with neuropsychiatric symptoms often experience delay in accurate diagnosis. Although cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light (CSF NfL) shows promise in distinguishing neurodegenerative disorders (ND) from psychiatric disorders (PSY), its accuracy in a diagnostically challenging cohort longitudinally is unknown., Methods: We collected longitudinal diagnostic information (mean = 36 months) from patients assessed at a neuropsychiatry service, categorising diagnoses as ND/mild cognitive impairment/other neurological disorders (ND/MCI/other) and PSY. We pre-specified NfL > 582 pg/mL as indicative of ND/MCI/other., Results: Diagnostic category changed from initial to final diagnosis for 23% (49/212) of patients. NfL predicted the final diagnostic category for 92% (22/24) of these and predicted final diagnostic category overall (ND/MCI/other vs. PSY) in 88% (187/212), compared to 77% (163/212) with clinical assessment alone., Conclusions: CSF NfL improved diagnostic accuracy, with potential to have led to earlier, accurate diagnosis in a real-world setting using a pre-specified cut-off, adding weight to translation of NfL into clinical practice.

Objective: This study investigates the impact of primary care utilisation of a symptom-based head and neck cancer risk calculator (Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2) in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 period on the number of primary care referrals and cancer diagnoses., Methods: The number of referrals from April 2019 to August 2019 and from April 2020 to July 2020 (pre-calculator) was compared with the number from the period January 2021 to August 2022 (post-calculator) using the chi-square test. The patients' characteristics, referral urgency, triage outcome, Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2 score and cancer diagnosis were recorded., Results: In total, 1110 referrals from the pre-calculator period were compared with 1559 from the post-calculator period. Patient characteristics were comparable for both cohorts. More patients were referred on the cancer pathway in the post-calculator cohort (pre-calculator patients 51.1 per cent vs post-calculator 64.0 per cent). The cancer diagnosis rate increased from 2.7 per cent in the pre-calculator cohort to 3.3 per cent in the post-calculator cohort. A lower rate of cancer diagnosis in the non-cancer pathway occurred in the cohort managed using the Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2 (10 per cent vs 23 per cent, p = 0.10)., Conclusion: Head and Neck Cancer Risk Calculator version 2 demonstrated high sensitivity in cancer diagnosis. Further studies are required to improve the predictive strength of the calculator.