Comparison of the Babesia duncani (WA1) IgG detection rates among clinical sera submitted to a reference laboratory for WA1 IgG testing and blood donor specimens from diverse geographic areas of the United States.
Prince HE, Lap�-Nixon M, Patel H, Yeh C.
Focus Diagnostics, 5785 Corporate Avenue, Cypress, CA 90630, USA. [email protected]
Abstract
All reported cases of WA1 babesiosis have occurred in the Pacific coast region of the United States, suggesting that WA1 is limited to this geographic area.
However, we detected WA1 IgG in 27% of clinical sera sent to our laboratory for WA1 IgG testing from across the United States over a 2-year period, suggesting that exposure to WA1 or a closely related organism occurs outside Pacific coast states.
We sought to determine if this high WA1 IgG detection rate among clinical specimens merely reflects WA1 seroprevalence outside the Pacific region.
WA1 IgG, as well as Babesia microti IgG, was measured in 900 blood donor specimens from 9 states. Overall seroprevalence was 2.0% for WA1 and 0.4% for B. microti; regional seroprevalences ranged from 0 to 4% and 0 to 2%, respectively.
Additional studies were performed to determine if WA1 IgG reactivity was attributable to polyclonal B-cell activation associated with acute Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection; 40 WA1 IgG-positive clinical sera and the 18 WA1 IgG-positive blood donor specimens were all negative for EBV capsid antigen (EBVCA) IgM (a marker of acute EBV infection), and 40 EBVCA IgM-positive sera were all negative for WA1 IgG.
These findings indicate that the high WA1 IgG detection rate among clinical specimens does not simply reflect the national WA1 seroprevalence among blood donors or nonspecific reactivity due to acute EBV infection.
Rather, the findings suggest that infection with WA1 or a related organism is more common than indicated by the literature and is not limited to Pacific coast states.
PMID: 20861326 [PubMed - in process]PMCID: PMC2976100 [Available on 2011/5/1]
Posted by seibertneurolyme (Member # 6416) on :
Seek,
This one is for you.
27% of samples sent to Focus Lab were positive for WA1.
And if I read it right of 900 blood samples from 9 states (assume these were asymptomatic patients??? -- how was sample population determined -- random blood donors???) -- only 2 % were positive for WA1.
If 2% of the general population actually has WA1 -- the implications are staggering.
Bea Seibert
Posted by seibertneurolyme (Member # 6416) on :
Amazing -- 2% of the blood donor samples were positive for WA1 but only .4% positive for B. microti.
Bea Seibert
Posted by seekhelp (Member # 15067) on :
Amazing Bea. Where did you dig this up? Do you have the full article. I want to show it to my ID doc. That is scary as can be if the prevalence truly is that high. Posted by seibertneurolyme (Member # 6416) on :
The abstract should come up. In the upper right corner is a link to the specific medical journal -- if you click on that it will tell you that 24 hours of access to the journal costs $20.
Right now I don't really want to spend the $20. I may possibly see if the hospital library can access this article for me -- have done that in the past. They usually just charge for copying costs or it could even be free. But it depends on if they subscribe to the journal as to whether they have access.
Bea Seibert
Posted by seekhelp (Member # 15067) on :
The problem in my eyes is does being positive on the lab test = symptomatic for this 4%? That's the million dollar question no one answered.
Posted by kitty9309 (Member # 19945) on :
It is likely that some positives are asymptomatic exposures.
(Muddies the water even more.)
Posted by seekhelp (Member # 15067) on :
If it was 99% asymptomatic vs. 1% symptomatic, that would make the story much harder to buy
![[Frown]](frown.gif)